In this episode, we discuss: 0:00:00 - Intro 0:00:08 - Challenges with understanding the effects of nutrition and studying interventions for aging 0:05:26 - How Peter’s and Matt’s convictions on nutrition and thoughts optimal health have evolved 0:14:48 - Calorie restriction for improving lifespan in animal models 0:21:05 - Utility of epigenetic clocks and possibility of epigenetic reprogramming 0:32:09 - Mutations and changes to the epigenome with aging 0:36:21 - Epigenetic reprogramming: potential benefits and downsides and whether it can work in every organ/tissue 0:44:43 - First potential applications of anti-aging therapies and tips for for aging well 0:49:40 - Impact of calorie restriction on the immune system, muscle mass, and strength 0:59:34 - Insights from famous calorie restriction studies in rhesus macaques 1:09:18 - An evolutionary perspective of the human diet 1:19:10 - Antiaging diets: Separating fact from fiction-Matt’s 2021 review in Science 1:27:39 - Mouse models of time-restricted feeding in the context of calorie restriction 1:36:38 - Nutritional interventions that consistently impact lifespan in mice, and concerns around efficacy in humans 1:41:46 - Differing impact of calorie restriction when started later in life 1:49:02 - Lifespan extension with rapamycin in older mice 1:55:38 - Relationship between protein intake and aging, and mouse studies showing protein restriction can extend lifespan 2:04:07 - Impact of protein intake on mTOR, and why inhibition of mTOR doesn’t cause muscle loss 2:09:37 - Low-protein vs. high-protein diets and their effects on muscle mass, mortality, and more 2:22:16 - The impact of IGF-1 signaling and growth hormone on lifespan 2:37:23 - Parting thoughts on the contribution of nutrition to healthspan and lifespan
Fav quote: "We just have to acknowledge that Eating a carrot 🥕 is inherently less risky than eating a protein bar with 14 ingredients in it." 🤣🙋🙏 -- around 1:18:30
1:00:44 False. CR animals were fed 25% (actually 30%) LESS than the control monkeys. You said that the CR monkeys were fed 25% OF the control group's caloric intake. The CR group did not reduce their daily caloric intake 75% lower than the control group. Only 25% (actually 30%).
One of the things I never hear any health and longevity experts quantify is how much a person can save by burning body fat instead of buying food. Is the a formula that is floating around out there that says that for each 10 pounds of body fat a person can save $500 or $1000 in groceries?
Carrot is indeed less risky than a protein bar, and i agree that you guys did not settle on anything. In the protein and muscle discussion with Don Layman, there were easy take aways and you guys pretty much concluded that protein is the most important component of our food. This discussion was very open ended and it made it clear that this is pretty complicated stuff, and that for every dietary recommendation there are 10 other counter recommendation. I like the conclusion though, that we should focus on the 80% which is pretty simple and straightforward - eat well, excercise.
I agree with you, but what does eating well mean? That is the question where we are having many different opinions and recommendations and just to point out two extremes: plant based vs carnivore, both are working for specific groups of people and for some both can be detrimental.
@@attilawerner9366 for all that I've learned, protein is the most important component of a meal. I'm an Indian (raised as a Hindu where Vegetarianism is a virtue), but now subscribe to a 80% carnivore diet (egg, chicken, fish), why? Chicken has 30gm protein/100gm, egg has 12gm protein/100gm. Chicken has 5 calories/1gm of protein (165 calories/100gm), egg has 12 calories/1gm of protein (144 calories/100gms ie 2 eggs) whereas rice has 2.3gms protein/100gms with 130 calories, one can do this calculation for all food types, carnivore becomes a natural choice for high protein diet - there is nothing that comes close to it. Ia high protein diet important? Muscle is the source of longevity and good quality of life, protein+ exercise are the two important component to have good muscle mass - this is true for all ages. Focus on muscle mass, which will mean to focus on High protein diet (and obviously low calories as excess calories make you fat) and exercise.- these two things will serve you well for life across all age groups
@@attilawerner9366 I think people are different, and we don’t have technology to determine which diet is best for which human, so we have to experiment as individuals and listen to our bodies. For some, a veggie diet will suffice, for others, a carnivore diet. Either way, getting all your amino acids seems to be important always.
Our natural intelligence is not only deficient but also lazy in understanding a complex system such as our body. Let’s see what Artificial Intelligence could do. I’m very hopeful that with AI’s multi-correlational ability, it ought to be able to sift through this complicated system and come up with facts and advices that are not only scientific but also individually applied.
@@austinheymanI agree with you. For somebody with diabetes in the family, low carb might be good, for somebody else with hypothyroidism not a good idea. We all have to do some n-of-one experiments and find out 🤷♀️
its very hard not to love Peter, his ability to admit he was wrong and move on with the most up to date science is fantastic and has the persona to make him interesting enough that I have just been listening to these podcasts whilst doing my clients nutrition and lifestyle programs one after the next hours on end for the last week.
Love love love this episode!! The way you two broke down all these “studies” and the context of them is the most empowering kind of knowledge we can use in this complex conversation. Love this❤
I admire this guest's epistemological skepticism in regard to the potential benefits of diets or in regard to the potential interpretation of studies. There is a blight of people conflating claims. Thanks
When I think of centenarians I think of routine life , walk in park or gardening , drinking coffee, light breakfast, family and social connections . A person I've always though of growing up was noam Chomsky. Nothing too crazy in terms of fitness or nutrition.
@@rodolpheaugustin5288 he is purposely hiding specific info, because he is typical big pharma MD drug dealer deep inside. His love of exercise is just incidental spill from his younger years, when he was exercising over 6 hours per day. That is one of the few areas where he makes at least some sense.
Many things to like about this episode. I think Matt and Peter are awesome. However, they mostly talk about the amount and timing of feeding. I felt the conversation implied that people can eat whatever they want as long as they have the right body weight. Meaning all calories are the same. That message can be dangerous. A diet of cereals, bacon cheese burgers, and sweets will certainly affect healthspan.
In one of the research they mentioned that if you have really bad diet calorie restriction helps but if you have good one. ad libido was as good. This implies that good diet is better.
That is not at all what they said. They said the macro ratios are probably less important than other things like amount of exercise and total calories.
This is how a true scientist sounds like. Not overinterpreting data, distinguishing between mice and human data, mechanistic vs outcome data. A stark contrast to Sinclair.
How important is Protein? Please show the studies for necessary levels and Types of protein to fight cancer? To live longer? I think Matt’s caution is beneficial!!
Peter, this is one of the best podcasts you did, as a biologist I could not agree more about the complexity of the dna - rna- protein expression/regulation. I finished my studies 25 years ago, I was completely into the topic of longevity, but in those years you could not find anything, then because I was always practicing martial arts I began to learn about Taoism, because is not a a religion of belief and they always emphasized longevity. This was an amazing discover, longevity connected with reproduction, life style including mastering the emotional reactions through meditation, sleep, contact with the nature etc, if inflamation could be the determinant factor to produce better functional proteins, the Taoist mastered how to reduce it, even deeper, they already were meditating in re-programing or inducing the youth in a damage system. As we know during the sleep, in some phases we are really effective and efficient in cleaning up our zombie cells 😉 etc, if you analize the sleep in terms of brain waves, you can see causation and correlation, as deep meditation states can reproduce those brain patterns being awake, could this also influence such processes? I'm not talking about 8 weeks mindfulness training obviously, I'm talking about people who really know what they do and they are able to reproduce such states in any moment and in few seconds. This is my passion as scientist.
I've seen healthy centenarians on all kinds of diets and lifestyles(sedentary). Most of them never had supplements or "superfoods". Some of them also had alot of inflammation or even cancer in the past. Nothing beats good longevity genes. However, that being said. I do believe most people will thrive on a more mediterranean style diet. High in glycine, low in methionine. Again, diet is just a small piece of the longevity puzzle.
For example... my mother 83 yrs old 3 types of breast cancer. Smoked since I was a baby , alcoholic, consumed very little food ( she preferred to drink beer). She is still fairly sharp, very thin, now uses a wheel chair. Not able to drink but still Smokes. All of her sisters led very active lifestyles and drank moderately, but she has outlived each of them.
Um but they have the genes, we can trigger similar pathway through diets and exogenous molecueles. I eat pretty medeterrinian. Lots of brocolli, spinach, Kale, Tomatoes, beets,Sweeto potatoes, with Quinoa and Wild Alaskan salmon/or Chicken brest 365 days a year.....
Excellent & thought provoking & answered a million questions I had in my mind - having heard other takes on the same data it was put into proper context with limitations & exactly which evidence was or wasn’t provided. The time flew by and sad it ended! Thank you Matt & Peter in equal measure. Outstanding conversation. :)
agree a stark contrast to when i hear other experts like valter longo and david sinclair who have way too much confidence in their conclusions about diet that the data doesn't substantiate. especially, obviously, the epidemiological data.
Exactly! I loved the attention for detail and nuances. For example considering that mice's main cause of death is cancer and not atherosclerosis, how can we at all think that what is good for mice would be good for us! Yet some scientists just state it as a fact that CR is the best way to go even though all data there is comes from non human models 🤷♀️
It’s pretty crazy to me that during this whole 2 hour discussion about nutrition there’s hardly any mention of the nutrient density of food or the study of adequate/optimal levels of vitamins/nutrients in humans. I was hoping to hear some studies on comparing those with optimal micronutrient levels vs those with micronutrient deficiencies and health outcomes. Do those studies not exist?
Agreed. Muscles are indeed like sinks for sugar. Need to make sure muscle mass is maintained in the long run for optimal longevity along with other interventions. Great discussion on this topic! Really strikes some of the curiosities out.
Agree. 💯 Muscle mass correlates with a decrease in all-cause mortality. Simply put, the more muscle mass you have, the lesser the risk of dying from a chronic disease than some of your peers.
Acromegaly has an increased rate of cancer most specifically colorectal and also other common cancer. Considering the shortened longevity of metabolic/ CV disease
Yet another amazing and informative episode. Thank you Peter so much for sharing this! It answered some of the nagging questions I've had about CR, DR, mTor and Rapamycin. Can't wait until the next episode!
So the take home message is 2:42:30 "You can get most of the benefits without worrying a lot about all of that". Nonetheless, it was an interesting episode.
Great discussion - on the Valter Long study - the mortality rates using the regression model or so called "Cox Proportional Hazard Model" is distortionary of the risks as Attia identifies - the absolute proportion or % of deaths below age 65 are not disclosed but instead the relative risk of dying from is. So you could say the model shows you are x times more likely to die from cancer on a high protein diet before age 65... but leave out the fact that only small percentage of people of several thousand studied died from that cause. Over 65, the absolute proportions of people who die from any cause skyrockets so it is much more important to focus on diminishing that risk. Valter needs to disclose the numbers more transparently.
Good point. V. Longo is vegan quack, so - he will not properly disclose anything. yet he was unable to deny that high red meat diet post 65 delivers huge benefit over his vegan junk overpriced powder that he sells under the name "fasting mimicking diet"
Attia's Rule asserts the primacy of exercise. Matt mentioned that the CR mice were far more active than the ad lib mice. It seems to me that Attia's Rule would indicate that the increased longevity of the CR mice was the direct result of exercise and not CR. It would be easy to set up an experiment to confirm that.
If this were true, then why does exercise frequently fail to extend maximal longevity, at least in mice? Not saying exercise isn't good for healthspan obviously - but if it's so effective, why is it weaker at promoting longevity than putative gerotherapeutics like rapamycin?
@@Geroscientist I agree my aunt lifetime smoker ballroom dancedin 40s and 50s zero weight training has outlived all her friends she is 98 sharp as a tack still drives lives in her own home. She is doing excersize classes eats what ever she feels like. My mom her sister is 94 also eats what she wants drives gets around just fine started exercising about a decade ago. I am beginning to think it's all about your genes
@@betsywestbrook7169 Definitely some genetics at play here - check out Dr. Nir Barzilai's work in centenarians. Number of his lectures are on youtube too!
One size fits all does not always work, but i think this is less about being different genetically, and more about how each of our dietary experiences, and current fitness and size. Most general advice can work for all, maybe not straight away, but once you are on the road to metabolic health the differences in advice are reduced. For example "calorie restriction" if you are fat leads to lower metabolism, tiredness and severe hunger. For the lean and fit it just means trimming up. Fasting is more effective for fat people as this tends to avoid many negative effects.
Genetics plays a big role. From the amount of various orexigenic/anorexigenic peptides to your thyroid function or your hormone status... As well why do you think caloric restriction is easier for lean people?!! You know how hard it is to lose just a little bit of weight and how much of a suffering and hunger we go through for a few pounds (+ proportionally higher loss of lean body mass)! The body totally doesn't want to give up that fat if you don't have loads of it!
I remember watching a video where Don Layman explained this very well, that basically, with mice in a lab, caloric restriction is indeed not really a restriction but a eucaloric regimen ... it's a restriction compared to the default eating 24/7 ad libitum that happens with mice in captivity that have food always available ...so it's actually eucaloric vs hypercaloric
I am surprised that when comparing the Wisconsin and Bethesda research results; as mentioned was the difference in “quality” of diet - Not discussed was that the poor diet of the Wisconsin test had such high levels of sugar and restriction of calories would have reduced sugar intake. This alone could have impacted metabolic health and made the difference in longevity.
👍 Great Conversation!Big Picture:Optimizing any complex system eventually runs up against 'optimizing' the system to a fragile state where messy evolutionary randomness and variation have been restricted. Not suggesting we throw up our hands in despair but some of Tim Ferris' 80/20 mentality is in order as you both pointed out.
I appreciate the humility and cautiousness displayed. Between the lines perhaps to be found some criticism of David Sinclair? Going back some 15 year he presented his whole rapamycin thing ...roundly. If not, then at least the Aubrey de Grey crowd?
Certainly has indirectly criticized how much Sinclair has pushed the NMN narrative as well as how much Sinclair extrapolates mouse studies in general onto humans. Also 0% chance Sinclair can do 10 push-ups lol
@@stevediben7900 wait until Walter Longo comes in. Maybe it makes sense, Longo tries to minimize risks of all kinds of diseases, and loss of muscle mass becomes a problem much later in life, honestly if someone arrives at 70 + without any advanced chronic conditions, heart disease and cancer, it is already an achievement :) Maybe we will worry about sarcopenia when we are in our 80s and healthy. its never too late to start eating extra protein. I am just playing the devil's advocate. i dont like de longo's dietary approach, but i quit often ponder on it what if he is right?
@@stevediben7900 Idk, Sinclair also seems to take strength training seriously, but clearly not as much as these guys. Just look at how much of a unit Kaeberlein is.
@@audunystgaard Sinclair has repeatedly said that he "works out" once a week and the only time I noticed him talk in more detail about it, it was this vague mix of cardio and weights within the same workout. But yeah, it was cool seeing that Kaeberlein and Attia are both middle-aged and fit, muscular looking dudes.
I don’t see how the epigenome wouldn’t be a major aspect that influences aging, considering it’s entirely responsible for which genes continue to turn on and off.
Indeed, when whole food diet is appropriate to the Monkey, then Monkeys do not get longevity benefits from caloric restriction. And I believe any study report/paper should be put aside (or in the trash bin) if the control diet/lifestyle is not the optimal/correct one. So, to start with, if the control diet is the SAD (or an emulation of it) the study becomes rubbish by definition: anything is better than SAD. But the same effect is true if the diet is not really the best one for the organism. Has it really been established that rat chow is the best food for lab rats? In my opinion there is sort of evidence that rat chow tends to damage metabolism of the rats and make the diabetic/pre-diabetic, reason why many anti-diabetic drugs have shown longevity benefits in the ITP. I know this may sound controversial, but yes, maybe the ITP reports need to be but aside until it is proven that rat chow is the best diet for rats. And same goes for the Dog Aging Project and the TRIAD, who has proven that dog chow is the best food for dogs? Would it be better whole foods for them? Who with a bit of intuition would think that giving industrial food to dogs would be the best possible diet for them? Then maybe, the results form Dog Aging Project and TRIAD should be put aside as the control group may be receiving a sickening diet to start with.
Peter it feels like you’re doing everything in your power including interrupting, to get Matt to say that high protein is the right nutrition strategy.
I am most of the way through the episode and it's fascinating. One quick questions is how do you balance the benefits of calorie restriction against the calorie requirements of vigorous sport? I cycle (at a 'sporting' pace) about 10hrs a week all through the year. I do some weight training beyond that, have an active job and a very active life. I'm 203cm and 103kg and typically eat 6000kcal a day. If calorie restricted, I'd lose weight and be unable to train. It's a conundrum! 😮
I have a similar problem - if I eat just a bit less, I am unable to maintain the amount of training I would like to do. Maybe I just don't have the will power, but I really love enjoying my training 🤷♀️
Keep up the good work. A separate podcast on protein-muscle-lifespan-healthspan would be great. I never quite believed the the BS that "you must pick one- high protein for muscle and quicker aging low protein for better aging but weaker muscles. I am a lean athlete/scientist that had an approximately 40:30:30 carb:protein:fat split whether i am on maintenance or a mini-cut and very happy with it.
I think that we have to take in consideration that one of the main causes of premature death in older age is a fall related to insufficient muscle mass. So I go for as much muscle as I can naturally get (as a woman) because I am not a mouse living in a padded cage 😂
I eat three meals per day and I consume protein only two times per day, at 230 pm and around 630. I am referring to animal protein, I am 50 and I am muscular, body fat around 11 percent or less. The fact that I only consume protein twice per day, but I don't work out almost everyday
I am sorry, I meat I work out almost every day. I can hang with one hand for about 45 sec, dead lift double my body weight. I weight 160 lbs and 5'10 I do eat a lot vegetables three times per day
I have a lot respect for you, the unbelievable great deal of knowledge. But according to Mat, lower protein increase longevity, or keeping mtor inactive, I understand it needs to be off and on
Has Peter provided a video of his ideas on how to avoid functional / pathological downsides of frequent deadlifts yet? He mentioned doing this explanation a couple of months bacK, but I don't know if it's on a different upload platform or his website etc.. or if he hasn't got round to it yet. I think it's based on avoiding or reversing imbalances from doing deadlifts by his ideas on correcting technique in a nuanced way.
Regarding the epidemiologic study of protein consumption, isn't it likely that those who consume less protein tend to consume more fruits and vegetables and that is where they get their benefit. It is just that at age 50+, the downstream negative effects of having a low protein diet just overcomes the benefits of having more fruits and vegetables.
Thanks for bringing Matt so many times, and I hope for a lot more in the future to to keep hearing from his research and knowledge. But, what about Valter Longo? He has so much to add and fill gaps of this podcast and still he has not been in the show. I really wonder why? Longo is such a big figure in the topic, that I have always been puzzled about your decision of keeping him out of the conversation. For me it is almost like letting down your audience and subscribers. Why? Why such a strange decision? At least I think your audience and subscribers need an explanation on why Longo has not yet been in your show. Could you explain? Or better, invite him soon? Thanks a lot for your amazing podcast!
@@stevediben7900 It is clearer as time passes, but still all in between the lines. I would prefer a clear statement and explanation than us deducting his reasoning. Maybe Longo has not made his 15 pull-ups yet! 😁 (I guess Attia is the only Guru in the world that thinks that most centenarians did 15 pull-ups and dead lifted twice their body weight at some point in their youth)
That wasn’t his point. At all. He said that you shouldn’t be allowed to debate little details about diet until you can do those things... to reinforce how important exercise is relative to X unprocessed food diet vs Y unprocessed food diet
i have heard on another podcast by Dr Gabrielle Leon, that Longo's research while implacable "in vitro" fails real human studies. mice studies are great research on humans is lacking. but. I agree it would be interesting to see the two at the table discussin this isses.
I wish I could focus on these sort of optimizations, but I'm stuck with 90% carnivore because it's the only thing that eliminates my chronic joint pain and periodic gout :(
@@y.g.1313 Where's the proof that red meat is better than white meat? Obviously it's known in the literature that red meat is more inflammatory than white meat and a fully nutritious diet? So why stick to red meat instead of both? Fanatical dogma?
health and sustainability always related with microbiome diversity.. microbiome make important nutrient for human health .. most modern society missing microbiome diversity... because lack of food diversity, lack of fiber in food .. most modern diseases such as autoimmune and cancer retaled to missing microbiome ..
Im in my 20's and have put on a LOT of muscle eating max 50g protein per day. It could very well be that high protein intake is what causes the huge decrease in quality of life at 75 that you talk about. Unless you are finding it very hard to put on muscle, need to put on a lot of muscle in a short time frame or are actively losing muscle, it would be my recommendation to eat low protein and do resistance training - and I think this approach is supported best by the data.
What about recovery? I found that, no matter my caloric surplus, if my protein is below 1.5g/kg and I train hard I cannot recovery. My muscles are just constantly fried and performance suffers, even if I am able to maintain weight. Protein is not just to build muscle, if someone is young and beginner and in caloric surplus it does not matter that much. Where importance of protein comes, at least in my experience, is in recovery.
@@Tom-mb9ht Then you can keep doing so and you will be likely fine and dont have to adjust anything until you feel like you need to. But biceps is really not taxing on recovery at all. When we get to things like squatting and intense sessions that is when protein plays significant role - you wont do much damage to muscles when you hammer small muscle groups like biceps but when you do intense high volume deadlifts and squats etc. or long duration exercise then you stand no chance to survive on low protein diet for long, muscles just wont be able to cope with that volume and intensity. So my rule of thumb is simple, eat as little protein as necessary and once your muscles cannot recover well despite maintaining caloric surplus then keep increasing your protein intake until it suffices. And ofc at some point more protein wont help, so if you get over 2g/kg of high quality protein and you still cannot recover you are just overdoing it.
@@Tom-mb9ht First of all, what is a LOT? That could be so different man to man. If you never did strength training before, you would react much better. Also, protein intake depends on the nutrition needs, aka lean body mass. If you were under weight with very low or no muscle, 50gr of protein could be a lot. Second, what did you mean with hard biceps training? If you did only one exercise with 3 sets, RPE of 5 you could possibly train 2 or 3 times in a day, without overtraining. On that note, I am 183cm 6 foot, 95kg 225lbs, fat mass ~12-14%. My protein intake is around 250gr.. Not saying that is optimal, but if i train more than 7-8 sets for the same body part every 4 days (like 2 times every body part a week), I overtrain, CNS particularly.
You gained a lot of muscle on 50 grams of protein per day, eh??????Please stop your exaggerations!!!!!! You must be an alien from another planet. I was not aware that you can build muscle with fat and carbs. Unbelievable!!!!!
I think these guys are far too quick to dismiss the theory that the optimal diet mimics that of our ancient ancestors. It's not that I think it is the optimal diet, because who knows? My issue is that they seem not to understand the theory. Peter lazily and somewhat obtusely dismisses the diet by slow-pitching himself the silly idea that caveman were sitting around pontificating their diet, which is an absurd straw-man of the actual theory; the theory being not that a "Paleo" diet is optimized for us, but rather the reverse of that, that over millions of years of evolution, we have been optimized to a Paleo diet, because that is what our body evolved to consume. In other words, they are looking at this backwards. Almost as if they were to say "we don't know if oxygen is the optimal respiratory gas for humans, because caveman didn't sit around pontificating about breathing." But oxygen is essential to us, not because it's tailored to us, but because we are tailored to it. Oxygen is what is around, and so we evolved to utilize it. That is the theory for the Paleo diet. We evolved to eat what was around. Our system is tailored to those foods. Again, who knows if that theory is valid or true? It just bugs me that they dismiss the possibility, seemingly without bothering to understand the theory behind it.
MET-hours/week (not MET/week). "Above 55 MET-hours/week, which is approximates to 10 hours of vigorous exercise/week, the risk of developing AF begins to exceed that of the sedentary cohort, displaying a J-curve relationship."
I'm confused on two points if anyone would chime in to answer, please? . What is meant by "over nourished?" . Has a low protein diet shown to increase longevity in older people (they went back& forth on whether this was she 50 or 60)?
You guys seem to be discussing aging with the likelyhood od health into our "80s".. I'm 91 and have interest in the health benefit's of fasting. how might I find more information on old guys and fasting.
1 MET*hour (One metabolic equivalent) is the amount of energy you burn during the rest in one hour. For running, your METs are roughly equal to your speed in km/h. So, if Peter is talking about 100 MET/week - this is equivalent to 10 hours running at 6 miles per hour. Or 85 minutes running every day.
Caloric restriction can reduce your metabolic rate and lead to negative health consequences, as demonstrated by the Minnesota Starvation Experiment, which included loss of muscle and organ mass
Can you both guys easily manipulate the DNA-Methilation clock to achieve speed of aging of 0.62? Siim Land just got this value and, so far, he has the world record. Brian Johnson is in fifth place with 0.71. I understand you do not like the clocks. And you both claim you can easily manipulate them. Ok. Fair enough. Can make public your base value measured with this clock. Then compare it against Land and Johnson. It would be really interesting where is our base value in comparison to them. Furthermore, can you then lower your own values (with that easy manipulation) to the order of Johnson or Land? And explain how you manipulated them, and therefore demonstrate your point about the uselessness of the clocks. By the way, it would be great to have Land and Johnson in the show. Thanks.
Ancestral diet.. you had to be flexible only when there was little choice. Large and very large animals were preferred as they provided more than just food. There are no indications that we had long periods without these animals except as of roughly 12000 years ago so yes a diet of primarily meat and fat is likely the optimal diet for health
@@RogueCylon never said they weren’t. And as for the vegan brainwashing, perhaps you should read some studies (and what virtually every health organization in the word agrees on) instead of getting your info from RU-vid.
I’ll stick with my ad lib animal based diet with random periods of fasting and plenty of exercise. My whole life is Risk Management centric and I’m sure hedging with drugs is worth it and could actually cause more harm then good.
An “animal based diet” is antithetical to healthspan and lifespan. I’m not saying that you need to take all animal products out of your diet, but you can’t ignore the literature on saturated fats, carcinogens, amino acids profiles in animal proteins, pathogenic gut microbiota, iron intake, etc. It’s unscientific.
Other than good genes, the biggest factors for extend life span and good health are sanitation and good nutrition. Once industrial societies these primary components, average lifespan drastically increased due to huge decrease in childhood mortality. This major advancement was achieved and the so called “infectious" diseases were all practically eliminated before modern medicine or vaccines. Read Suzanne Humphries MD “Dissolving Illusions."
I didn't get clearly from the podcast.. is Peter still doing intermittent fasting or is he eating regular 3 meals a day in 12 hour window? Anyone got that? Thanks.
I think we have to beware that experimental animals aren't suffering for our curiosity in the trivia of non essentials. The value, quality and appreciation of life is not just based on how effective we are at optimising our longevity and physical performance.
We talk a lot about mice laboratorio experiments. What about people in Japan that live longer than another country and they have less cancer and illnesses. I think we should study these people and the eating habits .why spending time and money in mice that we are not sure if really apply to human being body 🤔
I would love to find out what in“ bucket” I am. I just turned 60 and I keep a good amount of muscle( I lift every other day and I run 3timesa week) but I think that I’m over nourished. Do you take new patients Doc?
Good morning! I forgot to mention that I’m 60 and have a VOMax of 48, exercise around 12 or 13 hours a week. I have a rotator cuff injury and that prevents me to do the pull ups( I used to do around 8 in my good times) and no I can’t dead lift 230 pounds 😞 but I can hang 1 minute, do the wall sits for 2 + mins and do the farmers walks and more :) People say that I look/act 15 years younger☺️
@@y.g.1313 Those are incredibly ambitious targets that the great majority of people will never even approach -- even with consistent training over years. I personally trained on Romanian deadlift (like stiff-leg) for years and was never able to single at more than 255 lbs at bodyweight of ~230. I might have been able to single with 300 doing a regular DL, but that would be the absolute max, I'm sure. And pullups -- forget it! I can't get THREE, even after years and years of training hard on pull-downs and assisted chins. Fifteen is a distant dream.
@@alan2102X Yeh, that's the thing about P.Attia -:he is ambitious. He inflects other people to pursue ambitious targets. At the same time he is incredibly dumb by failing to explicitly articulate how those targets are specifically affected by age progression (we get weaker with each year, duh). And in your case - specific injury that limits your performance. The key is to achieve your personal best, and from that point to allow as little weakening as possible.
@@y.g.1313 Agreed, except I did not mention a "specific injury" that limits my performance. I had no such injury. Healthy normal middle-aged man. Attia's targets are for healthy normal low-BMI low percent bodyfat young male ATHLETES. Those are the only people who might be able to get 15 pullups.
I want to agree, I think Peter might... but it seems more and more that total caloric intake is king. After all, the folks living longest do not seem to be endurance athletes (competitive cyclist over here🤚) but instead very slight people eating v little with moderate exercise.
@@whatsuphonkycat Wrong. You don't know Peter...he makes the same claim I did. & A good bmi implies you are very slim, therefore most likely not insulin resistant and eating appropriately.🤣 Peter's Vo2 max is 50. You don't have to be a pro athlete.🤣💯🙋🙏
@@mikevaldez7684 you miss read my response, or perhaps i was not clear... I said: peter would agree with you... and I would like to... however, the longest living people are not people with high Vo2s... and BMI is a result not a cause... I stand by total caloric intake being the primary factor in length of life.
@@whatsuphonkycat Wrong, you said Peter "might"; that's not accurate, nor correct...he does agree and states explicitly that Vo2max will give you the greatest longevity, along with some other factors. But he never stated the oldest people in the world had a high Vo2 max, you fool. Learn to read idiot💯🙋🙏😆
This really needs to stipulate the definition of caloric restriction. Compared to what baseline? You can't restrict to zero so what is the optimum? Obviously you don't want CR from the optimum so you can't make the statement that CR is always good.
