What biomarkers and objective measures for results of your age management therapies do you have?
Who has before and after biomarker and/or objective measurement evidence
demonstrating the effectiveness of any aging intervention therapy in humans?
Measures might include:
Lab tests including inflammation, LevineCramer spreadsheet, complete blood count and metabolic panel (glucose, immune, markers of health for elements like liver and kidney)
- and –
Do you have evidence of adverse events, or no harm being done. Things like
Lab measures for issues like liver and kidney
Would we become dependent on it – would there be feedback inhibition as can happen with testosterone and other hormones if we’re not actually deficient?
Would it compete with another therapy for a clearance channel, resulting in a higher amount in the system? Example: Metformin drug advisory says not to take metformin with grapefruit juice. I believe metformin and some other drugs have the same effect.
Combining aging therapies can be complicated -- what about that.
Would it somehow result in replication senescence – example: a therapy that stimulates stem cell production and draws on the capacity to produce later
Today I’m particularly interested in the varieties of NAD, and NAD precursors and boosters – infusions, patches, buccal (NADPlus), supplements etc.
I did the LE Male Elite panel before starting anything, then started senolytics, NAD, Metformin and hormone supplementation. A year later I'm about to do a second panel to see if there are any differences.
Otherwise there's been no indication of negatives, and many positives. First is a improvement in dietary restrictions. With the Metformin I'm able to eat more normally, which means ability to eat foods like white bread and sugary stuff (chocolate) without it tanking my energy. Previously I was much more sensitive to calories.
The hormones have been life changing. It was typical age related decline, but somewhat on the low end of that. I think what happened was the stress of the hormones, plus usual midlife stuff, raised my cortisol levels which lowered hormones, and thus became a vicious circle. Regardless, even supposing that supplementing aging hormones was potentially cancer or heart disease inducing I'd do it regardless. I don't think it is - quite the opposite in fact, but just supposing it is, the quality of life improvement is so great it's worth it. This is a sentiment I've heard from others. You don't know how bad it is until you get there, and it's deceptive because we're all 'boiling frogs' (speaking of men here, for women it's more sudden which is why HRT is much more acceptable and available). For younger men, less than 50, replacing hormones is generally a bad idea in my estimation, but the opposite for older me.
Anyhow I'll post results after I do the panel. Oh I also did a DNA methylation test that I'll be redoing too.