I think in general this can just be summed up as ‘never take health tips from n=1’

8 Likes

“Those that say it can not be done take a back seat to the people who are doing it.”

1 Like

though even as a prior scientist i’ve been guilty of being tempted to generalize observations of my own bodily responses to others’. i think it’s a primordial instinct to want our views adopted by others, like religion. what works for me, whether a religion or a diet or a habit, should work for you too!

7 Likes

for @AnUser

One might expect that someone leading such a massive conglomerate since 1970 would adhere to a healthy diet to maintain his vitality.

Surprisingly, many would consider Buffett’s eating habits quite the opposite.

“I eat like a six-year-old,” the CEO famously told Fortune in 2015, describing his love for “Utz” potato sticks and daily intake of five 12-ounce Coca Cola’s. “If I eat 2,700 calories a day, a quarter of that is Coca-Cola. I do it every day.”

In a 2017 HBO documentary called Becoming Warren Buffett , the billionaire revealed he stops at McDonald’s every day for a $3.17 breakfast made up of one of three items: two sausage patties, a sausage, egg and cheese, or a bacon, egg and cheese. Which he, of course, enjoys with a Coke.

3 Likes

Was that a quote from a lottery winner?

I usually question something said that includes words like never, ever, always.

Do you really want to know who said that or are you just being a WA?

We{those of us who are actively spending $ for health benefits] are all in a “lottery” hoping for the Meg Prize - “A Long Life Extension”

In this context though the quote was highly irrelevant. Centenarians didn’t get to their age by spending $ on their health, they mostly got there through luck and genetics.

Articles like this just make people eat more and more like crap

Instead of trying to make people eat healthier, invent oral GLP1 antagonists and feed them to people along with empagliflozin.

1 Like

I think you put too much emphasis on this, although certainly luck and genetics are part of it. Others on the forum put the major emphasis on pharmaceuticals, clearly expressed in this post:
https://mmabrasil.localizer.co/t/top-5-which-currently-available-longevity-interventions-do-you-think-are-the-best/15891/74?u=ng0rge

I think it’s stupid to say “never” take tips from centenarians. Some tips are stupid like smoking or drinking or fast food. But if you look at what they’re really saying, whether it’s Warren Buffet or Maria, the 117 year old the lead article is about, it’s a valuable tip - enjoy life! Do what makes you happy, usually involving friends, family, social contacts. The article (Fortune Well) on Buffet is mostly about what makes him happy, keeps his mind sharp and good sleep - fast food is just one of the little things that make him happy. The same might be said of people that mention a drink or occasional cigar (George Burns). It’s part of what makes life enjoyable. Socializing in the blue zones is often based around getting together around happy hour for a glass of wine or a beer. So the minor negative impact of a little alcohol is more than compensated for by the larger benefit of social interaction (and, no, you don’t have to drink).
So enjoyment of life is what motivates us to work on living longer, and that may be more important than luck or genetics - and I’m not sure even pharmaceuticals will save a lonely, depressed pessimist. Of course everything in moderation…do hedonists die young? I still think Maria’s health advice - “order, tranquility, good connection with family and friends, contact with nature, emotional stability, no worries, no regrets, lots of positivity and staying away from toxic people” - is a tip worth taking.
…I forgot to include the word “stress” but in today’s world avoiding stress is key…
When you get up around 85, the formula starts to matter - how much effort do I have to put in - and - how much enjoyment do I get back. Once that ratio starts to tip…and you can count on it taking more effort the older you get…your body is going to start giving up…and physical activity will probably be the first domino to fall.
…" JOIE DE VIVRE "…

How to spark joy in your life

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wellness/2024/09/01/joy-depression-mental-health-strategies/

The N=1 - “Warren Buffet Diet” I do not think will assist the majority of people in extending their life span.

Shorting there life span is what it most likely do.

1 Like

Me being arrested while visiting a blackmarket McDonald’s after Bryan Johnson is elected president, year 2143:

“I did not bite!” “I did not inhale!”

4 Likes

Gotta love the Aussies…you looked kinda like William Shatner in the old days…but you shoulda said “Get your hand off my johnson!”

2 Likes

I disagree, in part.

Consider the advice “Look before crossing the road”. That’s great advice. No one wants to get run over. Furthermore, following this advice will increase your life expectancy. Trivially, since being run over is incompatible with extended survival.

Unfortunately many folks who should know better start shifting words. “Increase life expectancy” becomes “prolong life expectancy” (what does it mean to prolong an average?). “Prolong life expectancy” becomes “prolong life”, equivalently “delay death”, and finally “delay aging”. Which is absurd, of course. Looking both ways doesn’t make you age slower. It makes you less likely to get run over. Similarly not drinking, extreme exercise, wearing sunscreen, or whatever you’re advising would surely help to avoid various ailments that might well kill you, but might not make you age differently at all.

I’m interested specifically in aging. I recognize that might not be the focus of all here.

Now, let’s pretend we’re one of these people making claims of delaying aging. Let’s claim, for arguments sake, that avoiding metalcore music (or whatever metalcore was in 1930) slows aging by 10% average over the lifetime. That’s 11 years for a 110 year old. Women that age have a >50% chance of dying per year, so 11 extra years gives you >2000 times advantage. A metalcore listener reaching 115 would thus be extremely unlikely in comparison to a non-listener. If we observe one or more such person then we should strongly consider abandoning the claim that music choice has any effect on aging.

Let’s assume Warren Buffet lives to 115. What we will never know is if he could have lived to 140 if he hadn’t eaten such a crap diet.

Same with Charlie Munger who never exercised - maybe if he had done some exercise he could have lived another 25 years.

Any 80 year old identical twins on here who would be willing to experiment?..…one exercising with a good diet and the other sedentary and eating only junk.

2 Likes

If WB reaches 115, we can be quite certain that he was lucky about that his genes and what he did were coincidentally in harmony, and that he therefore would have very likely bitten the dust earlier on any other “more healthy” diet, not later.

Why ask for experiments, when we already know the results. Based on studies in twins. Exercise doesn’t pass the test. Intense exercise perhaps shortens life though - possibly, maybe. The positive effects of exercise on health and longevity is mostly down to reverse causality - those who are already genetically predisposed or healthy enough to exercise, do go ahead and exercise so we see exercising people as healthy whereas people who are unhealthy are incapable of exercising at which point we illogically blame their poor health on the lack of exercise. But twin studies reveal it all. Fully adjusted models show no benefits to exercise, though intense exercise possibly looks to be detrimental.

The associations of long-term physical activity in adulthood with later biological ageing and all-cause mortality – a prospective twin study

“Results: We identified four classes of long-term LTPA: sedentary, moderately active, active and highly active. Although biological ageing was accelerated in sedentary and highly active classes, after adjusting for other lifestyle-related factors, the associations mainly attenuated. Physically active classes had a maximum 7% lower risk of total mortality over the sedentary class, but this association was consistent only in the short term. After accounting for familial factors and excluding participants reporting prevalent cardiovascular diseases, LTPA exhibited less favourable associations with mortality. Conclusion: The association between LTPA and lower all-cause mortality may be largely due to genetic confounding and reverse causality.”

Bottom line, Charlie Munger and the 110 year old Vincent Dransfield who never exercised or ate “right” were correct. It doesn’t matter, what matters is genes - and Vincent Dransfield had better genes because he also smoked for 20 years but was still in better shape than Charlie all along.

And when we don’t have twins, we often have the next best thing: a sibling of the same sex. Jack Lalanne, was a fitness exercise and clean veggie diet pioneer, who exercised extensively and ate right all his life. He died at 96 (younger than either Charlie or Vincent). He also had an older brother, Norman Lalanne, who didn’t bother with exercise or diet - he died at 97… so lived a year longer than Jack.

Again, if you like exercising, do it. But don’t count on exercise overriding your genetically driven expiration date. Not having a non-exercising twin (or sibling) however has the advantage of allowing you to maintain the illusion that all that exercising is doing your longevity any good.

What trips people up is the distinction between early mortality and lifespan extension. You might affect the former by lifestyle interventions, but not the latter. For the latter, you need a more powerful intervention - drugs, or (one day) genetic engineering. Exercise is not it.

2 Likes

I like how this study clearly separates the short term and long term mortality, which is somewhat counterintuitive because one has to survive short term in order to get to the long term at all, of course. It beautifully agrees with what I claimed in my post on many here over-exercising and deluding themselves that this will be good long term rather than aging them early. The right way, at any age and the more so the older, is to exercise rather carefully, putting on new muscle only very slowly, in order to be healthy now and less likely to succumb in the next few years.

The paper writes it somewhere in the middle, that the exercise is to be maintained, or else of little use.

“Being highly active was associated with reduced mortality only in the short term and thus may not have long-term mortality benefits unless activity is maintained continuously.”

Over exercisers at some point cannot maintain and rapidly decay.