[HN Gopher] Scientists may have found mechanism behind cognitive...
___________________________________________________________________
Scientists may have found mechanism behind cognitive decline in
aging
Author : mdp2021
Score : 321 points
Date : 2023-07-30 08:28 UTC (14 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (news.cuanschutz.edu)
(TXT) w3m dump (news.cuanschutz.edu)
| Mistletoe wrote:
| >Normal aging reduces the amount of nitric oxide in the body.
| That in turn reduces nitrosylation which decreases memory and
| learning ability, the study said.
|
| Has viagra shown affects at reducing normal aging in the brain?
| It seems to do so in the heart.
|
| https://news.vcu.edu/article/Nitric_Oxide_release_triggered_...
| cheald wrote:
| Cialis has been linked to mitigation of cognitive decline:
|
| https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6705107/
|
| https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-53136-y
|
| And Viagra has been identified as a potential tool against
| Alzhimers:
|
| https://www.nature.com/articles/s43587-021-00138-z
|
| https://content.iospress.com/articles/journal-of-alzheimers-...
|
| Ideally, we'd identify the key mechanisms at play and be able
| to develop lifestyle modifications that would support them, but
| it's pretty cool that these drugs have benefits beyond just
| better bedroom performance.
| justdep wrote:
| I've been seeing this headline for 20 years
| jdthedisciple wrote:
| The thing about its wording is: It was true every single time.
| mensetmanusman wrote:
| Here's to solving aging and room temperature superconductivity in
| the same year.
| coldtea wrote:
| Those kind of articles (and papers) would be far more impactful
| if they were used only when they actually referred to some major
| real breakthrough.
|
| As opposed for us to read 1000s of them in the span of 10 years,
| and nothing ever coming out of them - except 200 more articles
| like that from other teams, on other competing mechanisms.
|
| What about a more real title: "Scientists found a potential
| mechanism behind cognitive decline in aging, but it's more likely
| that they have not, the area of study is very complex and ill-
| understood still, and it will take decades at best to discover
| and verify any definitive mechanisms. More likely this study also
| has methodological errors or these guys are even padding their
| numbers to get a paper published and secure more grants".
|
| Yes, it's a mouthful.
|
| How about "Researchers find a way to induce cognititive decline
| in lab animals. Don't hold your breath for human relevance".
| astrange wrote:
| Isn't the mechanism behind anything in aging "entropy"?
| LoganDark wrote:
| Honestly, this is basically it. The organisms that supposedly
| don't suffer from aging, are probably just better at accounting
| for entropy.
| CyberDildonics wrote:
| What does that mean?
| [deleted]
| nemo44x wrote:
| Over time things break down and don't work as well. Some
| organs cope with this better than others. This is how I
| read it.
| Teever wrote:
| How would you turn this theory of aging into some sort of
| action?
|
| This theory means nothing if it can't be tested, if we can't
| act on it in some way.
| astrange wrote:
| Second law of thermodynamics?
| danduma wrote:
| IN MICE
| submeta wrote:
| [flagged]
| mensetmanusman wrote:
| Nitric acid is formed during sun exposure.
|
| Reminds me that the healthiest activity during the pandemic was
| being at the beach and losing weight. Unfortunately that wasn't
| stressed enough.
| loopdoend wrote:
| Look up Bhramari Pranayama. Humming directly increases nitric
| oxide levels.
| mdp2021 wrote:
| Do you have a reference? (About the relation.)
| slv77 wrote:
| Humming increasing nitric oxide production is well
| documented. Here is one journal article but there are
| others:
|
| https://erj.ersjournals.com/content/22/2/323
|
| Nitric Oxide dilates the nasal passages and is also a
| vasodilator as well. A simple n=1 test is to do nasal
| humming and test blood pressure before and after. I can
| typically get a (temporary) 10 point drop.
|
| Nitric Oxide is also anti-bacterial and humming may help
| clear sinus infections.
| OliverJones wrote:
| One wonders about gut biome and whether any microorganisms
| there have any effect on this.
|
| One also wonders how humanity can adapt to dramatically
| extended lifetimes without obliterating our planet.
| Metacelsus wrote:
| > _Nitrate-Rich Diet:_ Consuming foods high in nitrates, such
| as beetroot, leafy greens, and other vegetables, might promote
| the production of nitric oxide.
|
| I don't think maximizing dietary nitrate is a good idea, since
| the nitrite that's an intermediate in this pathway is
| definitely carcinogenic (forming nitrosamines).
| 6510 wrote:
| But if your diet lacks kale, arugula, Swiss Chard, spinach,
| beets, cabbage, cauliflower, carrots and broccoli one might
| do something about it.
| highwaylights wrote:
| If someone tells me kale is carcinogenic imma lose it
| because it _does not_ taste good. I'm not eating this for
| fun you know.
| bluepod4 wrote:
| Have you only tried it raw? There are ways to cook it
| without losing too much nutrients. Cooked kale still has
| noticeable health benefits according to some studies I
| found.
| wernercd wrote:
| Raw or cooked... the only way kale tastes good is when
| it's the garnish on a steak that gets thrown away at the
| end of a meal.
| bluepod4 wrote:
| You should try it southern or soul food style similar to
| how collard greens are cooked. It's cooked along with
| meat and a bunch of seasonings. Definitely a different
| flavor. But also less healthful.
| wernercd wrote:
| Just as a personal opinion: I hate the way kale tastes. I
| also hate coffee. I love broccoli and tons of other
| greens. I love tea.
|
| The only way I enjoy kale is having it as garnish that
| gets tossed away.
|
| my better half loves steamed kale. no amount of salts and
| seasonings has changed my mind. cheese and salt/pepper
| took me from a broccoli hater into a broccoli lover lol.
|
| but I digress.
| txtxtatmos wrote:
| Biohacking The Oral Microbiome
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5DPQPvJ3m4
| codethief wrote:
| I'd like to add(0, *) another item to your list:
|
| 0. Stop mouth breathing and do nasal breathing whenever
| possible because only the latter produces nitric oxide, see
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_functions_of_nitr...
| Aerroon wrote:
| The older I get the more ways I find out that mouthbreathing
| is harmful. I wish someone had tried to do something when I
| was a kid.
| treprinum wrote:
| Mouth taping is not very popular outside some kinky circles.
| codethief wrote:
| No one said you'd need to tape your mouth to do nasal
| breathing.
| treprinum wrote:
| Most of the problems with NO production happen during the
| night when people tend to breathe through the mouth,
| making them tired during the day. Moreover, their CO2
| levels tank as well for a double negative effect from
| what was supposed to be a refreshing sleep.
| copperx wrote:
| We can all prompt ChatGPT.
|
| Littering the web with its output is against good netizenship.
| I understand it's inevitable and a matter of time, but it's
| still aggravating.
| Beefin wrote:
| who cares how it was produced as long as it's useful...
| mdp2021 wrote:
| Maybe do not sign it under your name, if it is a quote.
|
| And if it is a quote from an unreliable source, the more
| important to note it.
| mpalmer wrote:
| Because it's not useful, it's an invitation to go fact
| check everything in the list.
| [deleted]
| malauxyeux wrote:
| > We can all prompt ChatGPT.
|
| I'm largely blind to this. If they're not wordy and overly
| polite, pasted ChatGPT answers just don't appear on my radar.
|
| Can someone help me out? What points to this answer in
| particular being from ChatGPT?
| [deleted]
| nannal wrote:
| Chatgpt loves lists like this, then length and "tone" can
| be the most obvious indicators. You can modify those
| attributes through prompting but that should help find
| unmodified output
| mpalmer wrote:
| Brief summarization that seems redundant to the topic
| because it's the model priming itself to generate a
| response in the requested form, which is usually a:
|
| 3-10 item list which mentions certain phrases related to
| the prompt every time ("nitric oxide" here).
|
| Disclaimer about accuracy/expertise.
| JPLeRouzic wrote:
| So actually, it's a well formed answer?
| mpalmer wrote:
| It very likely bears a close resemblance to a member of
| the theoretical set of all well-formed answers.
|
| Problem is all the other sets it belongs to, including
| the set of all answers containing unverified factual
| statements, not to mention the set of answers that
| resemble the output of a large language model.
| scrollaway wrote:
| Some tell-tale signs (I work with GPT a lot as I mentioned
| in a sibling comment):
|
| - It's a list, it's numbered, it's got pretty consistent
| markdown formatting. This is especially present with
| ChatGPT
|
| - Title Casing In Each List Item
|
| - Strong usage of the passive voice
|
| - Strong CYA tone. "might promote", "studies suggest", "has
| been associated", "can convert", "possibly lowering",
| "thought to increase"
|
| The general structure is very consistent with GPT too. Once
| you've seen a lot of sessions it's just... plain obvious.
| Especially if you step back and think: "Would people
| actually.. write like this?"
| mdp2021 wrote:
| Sure, but hints are not proof. In fact,
|
| > _Would people actually[] write like this?_
|
| : some people do. What you call <<CYA tone>> can overlap
| with what for others is "precision".
|
| It is the quality of the text, then, that hints further
| to actual intelligence or "artificial struggle".
| scrollaway wrote:
| GPT4 can generate some extraordinarily high quality text
| if you know how to prompt it. But this ain't it - it's
| some of the most boring way to prompt. The OP's response
| is what happens when you prompt with some article summary
| and a "What are some possible ways we could increase the
| production of nitric oxide in the body".
|
| And no, that trashy CYA tone is not "precision", if
| anything, it's vagueness. It's weasel words.
| mdp2021 wrote:
| > _no, that trashy CYA tone is not "precision", if
| anything, it's vagueness. It's weasel words_
|
| That is not what I said. / _That_ / <<trashy CYA tone is
| not "precision">>. But some use similar expressions to
| those you noted in order to be factual.
|
| Some texts give a strong impression of fakery; some texts
| _could_ give a wrong impression upon brutal use of raw
| Bayesian indicators. Signs orient, do not decide. Hints
| are not proof.
|
| Some patterns in LLM output can be caricatures of proper
| efforts (factuality for precision, when relevant, is one
| of them).
|
| So, people may write similarly to that. (Only, hopefully,
| _well_ beyond veneer.)
| addisonl wrote:
| Well, considering it was trained from content created
| from how people actually write, yes?
| [deleted]
| scrollaway wrote:
| Ah yes, just like how I know most of my american friends
| have exactly 0.78 kids.
| jasfi wrote:
| I took beetroot as a supplement, it worked well. Ginkgo Biloba
| also increases nitric oxide.
|
| I've had negative effects from strong antioxidant supplements
| before. I think there could be a lot of reasons why.
| treprinum wrote:
| Combined flushing niacin with beetroot did wonders for me.
| copperx wrote:
| What kind of negative effects? Cognitive ones?
| jasfi wrote:
| It felt like I had had too much sugar (inflammation).
| anonymous_sorry wrote:
| > I took beetroot as a supplement, it worked well.
|
| By what measure?
| jasfi wrote:
| I was comparing various ways of boosting my nitric oxide at
| the time. I could see it visibly (increased red complexion)
| and my cognition also improved. Subjective, yes, but that
| was good enough.
| treprinum wrote:
| Daily viagra for anyone over 60? Or one raw garlic a day? Those
| increase NO levels rapidly as well.
| 1_over_n wrote:
| +1 on L-citrulline, caution on supplement quality - many
| manufacturers sell 2:1 citrulline malate to reduce costs which
| means you effectively need to double the dose to actually
| consume a given target dose.
| jeffybefffy519 wrote:
| I really want to know, why don't we all supplement with
| L-arginine long term? Time-release capsules are available and I
| have taken for numerous issues like RSI to great success. Whats
| the downside to long term usage?
| treprinum wrote:
| Arginine has good short-term endothelial effects but bad long
| term effects. Most studies last <1 month observing the good
| effects but not monitoring future bad effects:
|
| https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4069264/
| jeffybefffy519 wrote:
| I am skeptical of this because as far as I understand,
| Arginine is naturally occurring in many foods.
| salad-tycoon wrote:
| Side bar : L citrulline is thought to be more effective than
| arginine.
|
| One downside that I don't see discussed much, as I've watched
| multiple recalls over recent years for supposed contamination
| of things like tmao and other toxins in either the
| manufacturing process or packaging process, I wonder how many
| supplements are contaminated. I have never seen an analysis
| even from the vendors who do pretty hefty chemical
| composition analysis.
| esperent wrote:
| > I wonder how many supplements are contaminated. I have
| never seen an analysis even from the vendors who do pretty
| hefty chemical composition analysis.
|
| Why do you think food supplements would be more
| contaminated than other processed foods? Or even things
| like toothpaste or shampoo, those are also made from highly
| processes ingredients.
| fao_ wrote:
| There's a large amount of precedence, that's why. Rather
| than asking the room, one would think the first step
| would be to obtain information and inform yourself.
|
| https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5753965/
|
| https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34022259/
|
| https://theconversation.com/natural-supplements-can-be-
| dange...
| esperent wrote:
| Why so defensive? I'm asking the room because it's a
| smart room, usually, and often there's someone who'll be
| far better informed than I could be with a quick search.
| That's literally why I spend time here.
|
| Regarding your links, I'm sure I could find similar
| studies about nearly any kind of food. I have a friend
| who won't eat peanuts because he's afraid of aflotoxins,
| which are real, genuinely dangerous, and if you think
| that peanut products are tested well enough to 100%
| guarantee the aflotoxins are always below safe levels in
| all peanut products you'll ever eat... Well, I'll
| disagree.
|
| https://inspection.canada.ca/food-safety-for-
| industry/food-c...
|
| So again, why do you think supplements are worse than
| other food products? I don't agree that your links answer
| this question.
|
| They do show that there's often contaminants in
| supplements. They _don't_ show that supplements are
| unusual in this regard when compared to other food
| products.
|
| Your third link focuses on heavy metals in supplements.
| Here's a similar study showing they are also in baby
| food:
|
| https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/heavy-metals-in-baby-
| foo...
|
| So is it just supplements and baby food? Unlikely. More
| likely it's that supplements and baby food are both
| things that make people worry about contamination, so
| they test them more. Meanwhile your ketchup might be
| loaded with all kinds of contaminants but you'd never
| think of testing it.
| fao_ wrote:
| One would think the first step would be to look it up.
|
| > Most healthy people do not need to supplement with arginine
| because it is a component of all protein-containing foods[15]
| and can be synthesized in the body from glutamine via
| citrulline.
|
| I do not understand how someone can wish to know something,
| but refuse to expend effort to obtain the information they
| wish to seek? I hope it would be ok for you to explain this
| behaviour, please?
| chownie wrote:
| This seems unfairly aggressive. GP asked what the downside
| is to preventatively taking l-arganine as a supplement,
| your quote addresses only whether it's required.
|
| In short, you can't test your own blood so you don't know
| when your levels may be low. If there were no downsides to
| constantly supplementing then what reasons may there be to
| not do this?
|
| That is I think the actual question.
| xwowsersx wrote:
| It is unfairly aggressive and they did this twice just in
| this thread. The other was here:
|
| > There's a large amount of precedence, that's why.
| Rather than asking the room, one would think the first
| step would be to obtain information and inform yourself.
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36930036
|
| I don't know why this person feels the need to roam
| around the conversation policing how people are engaging
| in it. It's incredibly obnoxious. Especially frustrating
| given that they do seem to have some information to
| share, which they could do and just omit the completely
| gratuitous and unwarranted hostility.
| fao_ wrote:
| I clearly made a point of inquiring why the behaviour was
| performed, it was an honest inquiry, I am genuinely
| curious.
|
| For what it is worth, my context is that I have seen the
| behavior of asking the room, or even just throwing out
| conjecture to the room, without properly doing research
| beforehand, to be a common flaw within computer
| scientists and within "tech workers" as a demographic. I
| had to put up for a whole year with one person making up
| what was complete and absolute nonsense through first
| principle reasoning, rather than just reading a 101
| Sociology book, which would have answered all his
| questions effectively and with some basis in research. It
| is also something I see commonly within the Hacker News
| comments -- someone will ask a generic question to people
| in Hacker News, rather than doing even a cursory form of
| searching first. I do not understand the idea implied
| through this behaviour, that a random tech worker will
| know more than people whose job is to study the questions
| that are being asked, and so I resolved to ask this
| person, _taking care to be polite_ , why they choose to
| engage in this behaviour.
| mynameisvlad wrote:
| > taking care to be polite
|
| If what you consider "polite", several people call out as
| aggressive, then maybe you should re-evaluate your
| definition of the word.
|
| Your comment does not read polite. At best, passive
| aggressive.
|
| Asking questions fosters discussion. For a site centered
| around discussion, that seems warranted. Telling people
| to just look it up is pretty much the antithesis of
| discussion.
| fao_ wrote:
| My quote answers the question of "why don't we all
| supplement with L-arginine long term" with "it's in
| basically all protein containing-foods, so it is not
| necessary".
|
| While you are right there may be individual variation,
| the rule of medical advice is that we cannot assume what
| we do not know, and preventative ingesting of a substance
| that is not too well understood may have unintended side-
| effects. Especially in the case of molecules that have
| been synthesized.
|
| As my other comment within this thread states, there is a
| high precedence for contamination of health supplements
| as a whole, so in this instance preventative dosing would
| seem to put someone at more risk than e.g. just eating
| more protein.
|
| In addition, the supplements may contain vastly higher
| quantities than are safe to absorb. For example, there
| was a recent pubmed paper describing an incident where
| +500mg doses of Vitamin C (which is 1/6th of the EFSA and
| NIH's estimates of "safe upper limit") taken daily over a
| long time caused kidney stone formation. This required
| expensive surgery to correct.
|
| For what it is worth, as someone with a damaged and
| resectioned gastrointestinal tract -- the dieticians I
| work with prefer to solve deficiencies with eating foods
| that contain the given micronutrients rather than
| supplementing with them. One doctor told me I had a
| copper deficiency, he told me that taking copper
| supplements tends to cause gastrointestinal distress and
| would have been too high a correctional dose, and so his
| solution was to increase my consumption of dust (which is
| how we naturally get copper) through obeying the five
| second rule. This wasn't especially out of the norm.
| Selenium deficiencies were solved by eating tinned tuna,
| likewise vitamin B12 deficiencies were solved by
| ingesting liver occasionally, etc.
|
| If you suspect that you are deficient in a given
| micronutrient, it is always better to explore that
| possibility with your doctor than to take high quantities
| of unreliably tested substances.
| nonethewiser wrote:
| That doesn't necessarily answer his question though and
| doesn't even seem like a well reasoned point. Just because
| your body can produce something doesn't mean it can't
| benefit from more.
| fao_ wrote:
| Likewise just because your body requires something
| doesn't mean that large doses of it are beneficial. See
| my followups, which address that and were written 30
| minutes before your post :/
| manmal wrote:
| Betaine is another thing to look at. One of the cheapest
| supplements, no (or very low) toxicity, and seems to regulate
| NO metabolism, among other things.
| traceroute66 wrote:
| > _Cautious Mouthwash Use:_
|
| My dental hygienist explicitly advises against mouthwash use.
|
| IIRC the argument given to me was that the bacteria in the
| mouth eventually build up a resistance to the mouthwash, i.e.
| similar concept to antibiotic misuse.
|
| Good diet, correct brushing twice a day, and correct flossing
| once a day is all that is required. Along with an annual visit
| to the dentist.
| scrollaway wrote:
| > _I want to stress that I 'm no expert_
|
| No kidding. (Sorry, but I work with GPT more than enough every
| day to recognize its style)
|
| Not to diminish the value of the comment itself, but please
| don't mislead people.
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| _the_inflator wrote:
| What you listed here is essentially an evidence based diet and
| one of its most prominent proponents is Dr. Michael Greger with
| his works around "How not to die".
|
| He for example features his Daily Dozen:
| https://nutritionfacts.org/daily-dozen-challenge/
|
| Put in reverse: no meat, eggs, diary.
|
| I might add that there are neuroprotective foods as well, just
| for reference: https://www.mdpi.com/1420-3049/15/5/3517
| andy_ppp wrote:
| > _Cautious Mouthwash Use:_
|
| I was under the impression that poor dental hygiene is
| _associated_ with Alzheimer 's disease and dementia?
| galenko wrote:
| There's poor dental hygiene and then there is nuking all the
| bacteria in your mouth with mouthwash.
|
| You can have perfect dental hygiene and never use mouth wash
| in your life.
|
| Just cause companies like selling you a product, doesn't mean
| it's good for you.
| cmrx64 wrote:
| You don't need to cause extinction events in your mouth twice
| a day to avoid poor dental hygiene.
| jacquesm wrote:
| It's better to think of your body as a walking city of
| interlinked organisms of different species than a single
| organism. They need you as much as you need them. Killing off
| some of those symbionts can have negative effects for the
| other party (you).
|
| Mouthwash is indiscriminate in that it kills of a huge amount
| of bacteria, but some of those are actually useful.
| txtxtatmos wrote:
| > It's better to think of your body as a walking city of
| interlinked organisms of different species than a single
| organism. They need you as much as you need them. Killing
| off some of those symbionts can have negative effects for
| the other party (you).
|
| > Mouthwash is indiscriminate in that it kills of a huge
| amount of bacteria, but some of those are actually useful.
|
| > It's better to think of your body as a walking city of
| interlinked organisms of different species than a single
| organism. They need you as much as you need them. Killing
| off some of those symbionts can have negative effects for
| the other party (you).
|
| > Mouthwash is indiscriminate in that it kills of a huge
| amount of bacteria, but some of those are actually useful.
|
| Not true https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35946140/
|
| Also some of those are quite harmful
| https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34666923/
| smallerfish wrote:
| Floss once or twice a day, maintain gum health, and watch
| your diet. You don't need mouthwash. (Anecdata - at my most
| recent visit, my dentist told me to come back in 18 months.)
| bluepod4 wrote:
| That's strange for your dentist to give up money like that
| lol.
|
| But also, at dental cleanings they do things like polish
| your teeth. Do you also not require that?
| dazc wrote:
| As it was explained to me, flouride will work in
| repairing microscopic areas of decay so long as the
| surfaces of your teeth are ultra clean.
|
| My dentist insists that I see the hygienist every 3
| months for descaling, cleaning and basic checks.
|
| For the cynics, the cost of this is negligible and I have
| not needed a filling or any other costly procedure for
| over a decade.
| foobiekr wrote:
| Fluoride won't but hydroxyapatite will.
| bluepod4 wrote:
| Ohhh, I misinterpreted your comment. I think other people
| did too.
|
| It seemed as if you were saying that your dentist told
| you not to step foot in the _dentist office_ at all for
| 18 months. But you just meant, the literal dentist
| doesn't need to see you. Got it. I feel like this isn't
| out of the ordinary now.
|
| I always hear every 6 months for a cleaning. This new
| "3-month" information takes a _bit_ away from your
| original statement since you are doing a _bit_ more than
| what you suggested is required for maintaining healthy
| oral health.
|
| Leading back to my original joke, maybe your dentist
| insisting that you need to get your teeth cleaned every 3
| months is how they make their money lol!
| DANmode wrote:
| You're replying to a different person, now =]
| bluepod4 wrote:
| Thank you! I assumed that only the person that I asked a
| question to would respond to me lol.
| dazc wrote:
| 'Leading back to my original joke, maybe your dentist
| insisting that you need to get your teeth cleaned every 3
| months is how they make their money lol!'
|
| They make their money from implants and advanced
| treatments costing multiple thousands, not the PS100
| hygienist fees.
|
| A hygenist, plus a nurse, seeing a maximum of 8 patients
| a day at PS100 a time isn't a business I would want to be
| investing in.
| smallkitten wrote:
| Mouthwash is not really a dental hygiene thing.
|
| If you need to use mouthwash to prevent bad breath even when
| you brush your teeth and clean your mouth properly, you need
| to look into what might be causing that problem in the first
| place. Mouthwash is like a duct-tape workaround and probably
| not very healthy for you either.
|
| Btw - interdental toothbrushes. If you're not using them
| already, you may want to start. Very helpful. Much better
| than flossing which has some problems associated with it.
| traceroute66 wrote:
| > interdental toothbrushes. If you're not using them
| already, you may want to start. Very helpful. Much better
| than flossing
|
| Interdental brushes are _IN ADDITION_ to, not instead of
| flossing.
|
| Interdental brushes, by definition, cannot get down to the
| gumline gap between tooth and gum. Something which _ONLY_
| correct flossing can do.
|
| Ask your hygienist next time you see them.
| PeterStuer wrote:
| Unfortunately CaMKII also promotes cancer cell propagation.
| Typical evolutionary tradeoff it seems.
| BSEdlMMldESB wrote:
| once they solve 'aging' they can proceed to solve 'childhood'
|
| then we can stay adults forever, thereby ceasing to exist
| DyslexicAtheist wrote:
| Scientists may have found mechanism behind cognitive decline in
| aging, but there shall, in that time, be _rumors_ of things going
| astray, and there shall be a great confusion as to where things
| really are, and nobody will really know where lieth those little
| things with the sort of raffia work base that has an attachment
| that one may confuse with clickbait.
| jdthedisciple wrote:
| Literally every science headline these days.
|
| But tbf who said science was easy? You can't force definitive
| results, shit's just complex.
| coldtea wrote:
| Alternative medicine salesmen touting BS loosely based on the
| research: Behold the gourd!
| digitcatphd wrote:
| Thanks for the TL;DR
| Chinjut wrote:
| I'm having a very hard time understanding this comment. Perhaps
| my cognitive decline has begun.
|
| Update: I see I should rewatch "Life of Brian".
| krn1p4n1c wrote:
| At this time, a friend shall lose his friend's hammer and the
| young shall not know where lieth the things possessed by their
| fathers that their fathers put there only just the night before
| around eight o'clock.
| zug_zug wrote:
| No offense to everybody upvoting this type of thing, but claims
| like this seem to outweigh any actual tangible result by 100 or
| 1000 to 1.
|
| I think it's a better use of everybody time to say "Well, let's
| just wait until it's replicated in humans until we share
| articles"
| mmcnl wrote:
| I'm more interested to hear what discoveries have lead to
| meaningful results. There are a lot of news articles on
| potential medical breakthroughs but I have no idea how medicine
| is actually advancing.
| hotdogscout wrote:
| I've been reading gesture recognition papers that claim to be
| real time and I've yet to see one I can reproduce in real
| time or reproduce at all.
|
| The necessary hoops to jump when writing a scientific study
| seem to be very different from the hoops to advance a field.
| hollerith wrote:
| Agree.
|
| Also, cognitive decline has been studied intensively enough
| that if there were a single mechanism responsible for most
| human instances of it, the science around that single mechanism
| would've been settled by now. Instead what we seems to have is
| a disease where toxins, chronic infections by bacteria, viruses
| and fungi, cardiovascular health, genetic variability (e.g.,
| apoE4) and metabolic-lifestyle factors like insulin resistance
| and lack of sufficient exercise are all important.
|
| But HN likes to upvote these announcements written by PR
| departments at universities.
| Zetice wrote:
| There is no world in which HN is not a "waste" of time.
|
| This notion that HN must only be for "serious" conversations
| about serious submissions is a wholesale misunderstanding of
| what HN is.
| Jeff_Brown wrote:
| It's possible people vote up articles like these because they
| want skeptical readers to analyze them.
|
| (I don't do that, and I don't know anyone else's HN voting
| habits, but it seems at least plausible.)
| macintosh-hd wrote:
| Nah, surely we found a room temperature super conductor and
| solved one of the most major aspects of aging all in 1 week!
| freediver wrote:
| Anyone else finding news headlines with the word 'may' in them
| obnoxious?
| [deleted]
| smallerdemon wrote:
| Fingers crossed that it can actually be replicated in future
| studies and research. We definitely don't want another nearly 20
| years of false path ass busting research based on falsified
| documentation like we ended up with on Alzheimer studies.
| koheripbal wrote:
| I thought the fraud did not invalidate the results and that
| plaque was still considered the primary cause.
|
| In fact, wasn't there a drug recently released that
| demonstrated that?
| DANmode wrote:
| Did it demonstrate plaque as _cause_ , or effect (that gets
| cleaned up with meds)?
| roflc0ptic wrote:
| No. There was a drug released that targeted that pathway, but
| the approval in and of itself was a scandal - I spoke with a
| pharmacist last night who said people at her hospital were
| disgusted by the FDA's decision. It was removed from the
| market two weeks later. There was basically no evidence of
| efficacy.
| 93po wrote:
| FDA approves stuff all the time that has no efficacy
| roflc0ptic wrote:
| Not in the face of such overwhelming evidence; it's
| literally their job to make sure things are effective. It
| turns out medical studies are weaker evidence than anyone
| would like, but here there was quite compelling evidence
| that it was useless!
| naasking wrote:
| > that plaque was still considered the primary cause.
|
| Plaque has never been proven to be the primary cause of
| decline, it's just associated with it.
| Teever wrote:
| Is that actually what happened with Alzheimer research?
| Tycho wrote:
| I'm not sure what the proper name is for this idea, but I
| consider ageing to be a trade-off between cell-regeneration,
| which maintains youthfulness, and mutation-limitation, which
| reduces the chances of cancer. That is to say, if you "aged
| less", you would get cancer more/sooner. Everything else, like
| the balance of chemicals in the body, I assume would be
| downstream of that.
| dillydogg wrote:
| I don't think we can say that's true. There is some evidence
| that there is no association between body mass and age on
| cancer development in mammals.
|
| https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-04224-5
| [deleted]
| herval wrote:
| I'm not a biologist, but I believe what you're talking about is
| telomerase?
| dillydogg wrote:
| Telomeres are just repeats at the end of chromosomes to allow
| for replication. They aren't directly involved in replication
| fidelity beyond allowing for replication to proceed. I guess
| protecting genes near chromosome termini but that's different
| than the mutations you would expect in cancer.
| herval wrote:
| my understanding is cancer gets more prevalent when the
| telomeres get old (short?), since it leads to more
| mutations/botched replication?
| swalsh wrote:
| I've noticed a cognitive decline in myself the past couple years.
| I'm in my mid 30's though so I assume it's more related to long
| covid. One of the biggest side effects of long covid for me was
| horrible insomnia, which was killer. The insomnia is mostly gone,
| but I'm still not my previous cognitive self. It's terrifying to
| be honest.
| dsego wrote:
| Some supplements that seem to improve my cognition (based on my
| subjective experience) are vitamin B complex, lecitone jeune,
| omega 3 & mct oil.
| matwood wrote:
| > I've noticed a cognitive decline in myself the past couple
| years.
|
| How have you measured? I know people do decline cognitively in
| old age, but 30s is still young. I wonder if people only think
| they were sharper when younger. I knew much less in my 20s and
| made tons of mistakes. The mind has a peculiar way of
| highlighting good memories and downplaying the bad. The person
| I was in my 20s would not be able to do my current job.
| ccleve wrote:
| How do you measure?
| jwells89 wrote:
| My 30s self also runs circles around my 20s self when it
| comes to work (writing code), but I'm confident that's thanks
| to the knowledge, experience, and wisdom that's accumulated
| in that time.
|
| If it were somehow possible to grant my 20s self these
| advantages, he'd run circles around me. Not just because he's
| cognitively faster, but because he's able to work for longer
| periods without feeling fatigued and can focus more deeply
| thanks to having fewer mental background tasks constantly
| running and not yet feeling the various time-related
| pressures that come with age.
|
| Giving my teenage self current knowledge would also be
| interesting. Even though people aren't cognitively complete
| yet at that point, at that age I had the ability to get lost
| in a project on a dime which was was amazing.
| hgsgm wrote:
| It is an extraordinary claim to say that people think as fast
| in their 30s as 30s. Billions of people have direct
| experience over thousands of years.
|
| Yes, accumulated knowledge and wisdom can make you more
| successful with age. It doesn't mean your fluid intelligence
| and ability to learn new things is keeping up.
| bluepod4 wrote:
| In what ways have you noticed the cognitive decline? Just
| curious. Don't feel the need to share if too personal.
| xkbarkar wrote:
| How did this go to the top vote? Brings nothing about the
| article just dubious personal long covid claims.
|
| HN please stop upvoting this nonsense. Already the second and
| third answers are HN quality.
|
| This is r/covid commentary. Does not belong here.
| CodeSgt wrote:
| What makes you the arbiter of discussion? The article is
| about cognitive decline, this is an anecdote about personal
| cognitive decline that they believe happened to be caused by
| covid.
|
| If you think every comment with a personal anecdote
| tangentially related to the article is "nonsense" and "r/x"
| material then you must be constantly frustrated by nearly
| every HN comments section of sufficient length.
| simonjgreen wrote:
| And yet the volume of replies, advice, and questions, against
| this suggests it's brought enjoyable conversation. On-topic
| is shades of grey.
| koheripbal wrote:
| Popularity is not a proxy for quality.
|
| ...and just like Reddit, chasing popular posts and comments
| is a race to the bottom as it attracts an ever-more
| juvenile crowd of participants.
|
| Nuanced opinions and expert commentary are more boring but
| attract a more intellectually curious crowd - and that is
| what sets HN apart from reddit.
| williamtrask wrote:
| True in the limit yet democracy and free markets both
| imply popularity has something to it.
| criddell wrote:
| You might want to research Nicotinamide Riboside. I started
| taking it to see if it would help with painful inflammation in
| my hands, wrists, and knees and noticed that when I take it,
| not only is inflammation improved, but my sleep improved (I
| track with an Oura ring) and I can concentrate for longer
| periods of time.
|
| Might all be placebo effect, but I'm okay with that. My doctor
| seems to think that's probably the case.
|
| FWIW, I'm 20 years older than you.
| copperx wrote:
| It is a shame that NR is quite an expensive placebo, though.
| I've found similar results, but I have zero faith in it being
| some sort of anti aging agent in humans.
| criddell wrote:
| I think it is costing me less than $2 / day. In the world
| of supplements, it's not that much.
| codethief wrote:
| Have you noticed a change in your breathing due to covid?
| agloe_dreams wrote:
| Also, get checked up for Sleep Apnea. It is a truly life-
| ruining condition whose primary side effect is lost memory and
| cognitive function.
| deprecative wrote:
| This is one of the most frustrating things about the US. This
| shit is expensive. Sure, for a lot of us making bank in the
| software field we tend to lose sight of that. I got laid off
| (yay hyper-capitalist bonus chasing management). I'm reading
| this thread and seeing plenty of things that would be great
| from a health perspective but let's be real. They're all out
| of reach for me. Fortunately, that's temporary for myself.
| I'm sure I'll be back to making bank within a year or two.
| Most folks however? This advice will permanently be out of
| reach.
| jpcfl wrote:
| Holy shit this. I went years undiagnosed. Saw a dozen
| doctors. Couldn't get an clear explanation for why I was
| always tired, brain fog, vision problems, joint pain, memory
| issues. The list goes on.
|
| Then my _dentist_ of all people ordered a Watch-PAT take-home
| sleep test (took a lab sleep test, but it was useless) which
| finally revealed I was having more than 10 events per hour.
| The dentist made me a Herbst appliance to hold my airways
| open during sleep. My life is 100x better now.
| DANmode wrote:
| What region is this?
|
| Excellent catch.
| phkahler wrote:
| I've found that going to the gym and lifting weights will clear
| my head. That wasn't necessary pre-covid though.
| CodeSgt wrote:
| Agreed! Similarly, ice baths/cold plunges are a great way for
| me to mentally "reset" and clear up a little brain fog.
| Minimizing carbs has, for me, also helped. Not eliminating
| them mind you, but reeling my consumption of them in to a
| healthy level and focusing on proteins, fruits, veggies, etc
| for most of my caloric intake.
| pja wrote:
| Quality of sleep makes a huge difference to your mental
| faculties. If you could bottle it, the effect would be a multi,
| multi $billion drug.
| CodeSgt wrote:
| I'm prescribed trazadone for insomnia, and it's magnificent.
| Virtually zero grogginess the next morning like I'd get from
| an anti-histamine, no compromise on sleep quality as the drug
| actually improves length and quality of REM sleep rather than
| negatively impacting it as many other sleep-aids do.
| nottorp wrote:
| Exercise tends to help.
| morelisp wrote:
| Unless you also got PEM with your long COVID, then exercise
| makes it a lot worse. Bro science is dangerous.
| nottorp wrote:
| Don't think the sleep quality pill comment was aimed at
| long covid specifically.
|
| Just because some people have conditions that prevent
| them from exercising it doesn't mean it isn't the healthy
| choice overall.
| CodeSgt wrote:
| "Exercise is healthy" is very, very far from "Bro
| science".
| [deleted]
| morelisp wrote:
| "Exercise helps post-COVID cognitive decline and
| insomnia" is absolutely bro science, and _especially_
| since it can make the whole situation much, much worse.
| CodeSgt wrote:
| That was never the claim. The claim was that it helps
| with brain fog and mental clarity in general, not
| specifically that caused by long-COVID, which had been
| proven to be true.
|
| And a cursory look at the literature for PEM[1] will show
| you that the recommended path to recovery isn't "avoid
| physical exertion at all costs", but to do what you're
| capable of and slowly ramp up the intensity, in which
| case small amounts of exercise could play a vital role.
|
| [1] http://www.phsa.ca/health-info-
| site/Documents/post_covid-19_...
| swalsh wrote:
| My kids have started taking swim lessons at the Y, so i've
| been sneaking up stairs to run a mile during their lesson.
| I've thought about strength training etc, but I have no
| idea what i'm doing on those machines.
|
| Can't say I feel any different, but it is enjoyable.
| alistairSH wrote:
| Running is a good start. Keep the distance increases
| reasonable to avoid injury. Enjoying it is important - no
| need to add anything else until/unless the running gets
| boring. (Yeah, weights can help, but like you said, can
| be overwhelming for somebody new to fitness)
| Incipient wrote:
| I find the rowing machine is a great cardio+strength
| combo that you can make as comfortable as you like, and
| is very low impact (just keep good posture).
| nradov wrote:
| Rowing is great, but you also need some frequent _impact_
| for bone health.
| ajkjk wrote:
| Pretty much anything that makes your muscles feel sore
| and doesn't cause injury is worth doing.
|
| IMO: most of what makes fit people fit is becoming aware
| of their body in detail: how to use muscles, how they
| work, what they feel like, what they should feel like
| when they're working together -- all of this builds a
| foundation where, if they lost their fitness, they would
| just get it back again.
|
| So if you don't know what you're doing: just learn by
| doing. Pick something that it seems like your body should
| be able to do easily, but can't, and fix it. Repeat x100
| and you'll be fit as hell.
| naasking wrote:
| > doesn't cause injury is worth doing.
|
| Not causing injuries is the hardest part.
|
| You can start with bodyweight though. Pushups, pull-ups,
| etc. I recommend the YouTube channel FitnessFAQs or
| Calisthenicmovement for a good start there. No nonsense,
| direct guides with discussion of technique and injury
| avoidance.
| bcoughlan wrote:
| Strength training is so good for desk jobbers! I
| recommend joining some small group circuit training or
| CrossFit groups, where the trainers will show you how to
| lift correctly and safely.
| stevesimmons wrote:
| > I have no idea what i'm doing on those machines.
|
| Book some regular sessions with a personal trainer.
| He/she will give you a balanced basic routine and teach
| you good form.
|
| I was fortunate to have an excellent PT when I first
| ventured into the gym age 19, a skinny, awkward, scared
| teenager. The structure of that gym program is still the
| basis of what I do 30 years later. Different exercises
| get incorporated, depending on my goals at the time, and
| variations in # of reps and sets. But still the same
| general approach.
| bendbro wrote:
| Just try some pushups, dips, pull ups, and sit ups. Just
| do a set of a few types each day until your strength is
| depleted and you will see strength gains.
| JimiofEden wrote:
| For me, I started with a very simple routine with
| dumbbells:
|
| https://web.archive.org/web/20230609011808/https://old.re
| ddi...
|
| It's not perfect, but it was great for getting into the
| habit 3 times a week. Now I often make up my own sets as
| I go, taking note of what's sore on me and what I feel
| could use some work. Doing that gave me the time to do
| research and get a bit more familiar with how to engage
| certain muscles, and what machines will do what for me.
| bendbro wrote:
| After my startup failed and I broke up with my girlfriend, my
| cognition massively changed: I was less creative, less quick,
| and I could see it reduce my ability to code. Otherwise, I lost
| libido, had paranoia in social interaction, and alcohol or
| marijuana would cause me paranoia. When I would ride my
| motorcycle on curvy roads, or when I would play a racing game
| or read a book, I couldn't get into a flow anymore. Thinking
| about activities would stress me to the point that I would
| avoid doing anything.
|
| After a number of years I feel normal, and I think it was due
| primarily to finding and sticking to a routine. The routine
| involves little things like watering plants and making coffee,
| and I just do them every day without thinking. Otherwise it
| includes exercise, sleep, chores, work, and procrastination.
| painted-now wrote:
| I had to finish up my PhD while already working at a FAANG.
| My professor would keep stacking more stuff that he wanted to
| have in my thesis. It was a horrible time and I think I was
| very close to a burnout.
|
| One thing that I later noticed was that I e.g. couldn't enjoy
| any music anymore. I always used to be able to be absolutely
| amazed by some tracks and dance to it at home - but during
| that time there was just nothing.
| Tycho wrote:
| That sounds like textbook depression (although you didn't
| mention feeling down explicitly).
|
| During that time, is there any chance you weren't eating
| enough? Did you lose weight?
| bendbro wrote:
| Yeah, I found too I wasn't eating enough. I estimates I was
| eating around 1500-2000 calories regularly and I never
| really felt hungry. Once I started forcing myself to eat
| larger meals I felt a lot better and started feeling hunger
| again.
| grumblehound wrote:
| I recently quit my dev job because it was too stressful and I
| was burning out. I seemed to almost instantly get better at
| thrashing my motorbike in the twisties... I'm not sure why
| exactly but it feels like a weight was lifted and it just
| allowed me to focus and enjoy being in the moment a bit more.
| inconceivable wrote:
| fyi, this can happen in a successful startup/business also.
| this happened to me when i was stressed out of my mind and
| stuck doing work i hate for customers i didn't want after 10
| years of running a biz.
|
| it took a breakup, a sale of the business, and nearly 2 years
| of doing nothing until i recovered.
|
| fwiw, the biggest takeaways the whole thing taught me are 1.
| be careful of what you wish for and 2. both attractive women
| and customers want outcomes, they don't give a shit about
| your problems and 3. never forego vacations/holidays for
| work.
|
| as for me, well - you know how the saying goes - it's always
| darkest before the dawn, and life is good now. for the time
| being. but i know that if i wake up one day and i'm feeling
| like a fucking pack mule for people who don't appreciate me,
| it's time for a massive rapid change, without the period of
| suffering this time.
| bendbro wrote:
| > it's time for a massive rapid change, without the period
| of suffering this time
|
| I massively agree, though I will make the mistake of
| staying for money again. Whenever I see I can work 3 years
| at A for every 1 year at B, I can't stomach the loss.
| ilteris wrote:
| This is a refreshing comment to see here. Thank you.
| [deleted]
| rapsey wrote:
| Are you taking vitamin d? If not you absolutely should.
| Magnesium at the same time as D3 and then glycine and another
| dose of magnesium before bed. This is the magic formula for me.
| swalsh wrote:
| I've tried a variety of supplements, the only thing i've
| tried with any noticable effect is ashwagandha.
| amelius wrote:
| If you take a lot of vitamin d, make sure you also take
| vitamin k.
|
| Just a random source here because I'm too lazy:
|
| https://www.balancedwellbeinghealthcare.com/are-you-
| taking-v...
|
| > Because vitamin D is so good at improving calcium levels,
| by taking it alone you could be working to increase the
| calcification of your arteries instead of strengthening your
| bones so make sure to include K2 in your vitamin D supplement
| regimen!
| Aerroon wrote:
| Make sure it's vitamin K2 and not K1.
|
| Vitamin K2 is what essentially takes calcium out of your
| blood and puts it in your bones (and teeth). It's something
| that's rather lacking in western diets and could be a big
| reason why people in western countries suffer so many bones
| injuries in old age (and why our teeth suck).
| darkclouds wrote:
| K1 or K2-mk4. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/P
| MC7928036/table/t...
|
| https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7928036
| prox wrote:
| Please note that _overtaking_ vitamin D is unhealthy as
| well. It's a hormone and I believe taking too much is
| damaging to the liver. But supplemental and when having a
| lack of Sun is probably a good balance.
|
| But if you can be in the sun your skin can make vitamin D.
| LoganDark wrote:
| Note that windows typically block the majority of the
| radiation that allows you to make vitamin D, so even if
| the sun hits you every day through your window, it's
| still not a good substitute for a sunny walk every once
| in a while. My doctor told me to go out at noon every
| day, but anything is better than nothing.
| darkclouds wrote:
| Nearly all Glass and Plastics block UV-B which is needed
| to make Vit D. UV-A found in tanning salons oxidises the
| melanin pigment aka the sun tan and melanin converts
| 99.9% of UV radiation and converts it into heat, so the
| suntan regulates how much pre-vitD can be made by the
| skin.
|
| There is a corrugated plastic sheet (2mx1m) which allows
| UV-B through, but it needs replacing every few years as
| it breaks down and its expensive!
| prox wrote:
| Yes, walking is super healthy, my lunch breaks are always
| a walk outside.
| Broken_Hippo wrote:
| Walking doesn't help me for 8 months of the year: There
| simply isn't strong enough sun to help. December days are
| only 4-5 hours long anyway. So, I was told to take a
| supplement from September to May.
|
| My doctor told me to get 15 minutes a day from May
| through the end of August - and these should be walks
| with at least the arms exposed (Am in Norway, so this
| isn't always possible for me, the immigrant). Walking
| alone isn't always enough.
| darkclouds wrote:
| I bought a load of UV-B flo tubes with a desert profile
| and rigged them up over my bed which would go upto the
| ceiling and then they would come down in order to bask
| under for hours. I could control how far away from me the
| lights were so I could move have them closer to me for a
| quick 30mins or have them further away for spending
| 2-3hrs underneath them.
|
| I'd go to sleep under them, just dont have them too close
| to you though otherwise you will burn but never tan.
|
| https://www.reptilecentre.com/collections/t5-uvb-
| fluorescent...
|
| I'd also read this website entirely, its got loads of
| useful info.
| http://www.uvguide.co.uk/lightingsurveyintro.htm
| Aerroon wrote:
| You have to go _really_ overboard with vitamin D3 to take
| too much of it. The daily recommendations so far are
| underestimating it. 4000 IU should be fine for adults.
| There are people that take 6000-10000 IU, but it 's hard
| to say whether they might be suffering from some long
| term effects due to this.
|
| You should take vitamin K2 with D3 though.
|
| > _But if you can be in the sun your skin can make
| vitamin D._
|
| This is harder than people say. You need UVB light to hit
| your uncovered skin (glass blocks it entirely). The sun
| needs to be above 35-50 degrees in the sky. If it's below
| that (like in winter or evenings) then you won't get
| vitamin D from it.
| copperx wrote:
| Exposing your skin to the sun also creates nitric oxide.
| Hypothetically, that could also help mitigate cognitive
| decline (?)
| prox wrote:
| Aren't there like hundreds of physiological reactions to
| the sun? I think it helps on many levels.
| CommanderData wrote:
| Vitamin D3 also promotes osteoclastgenesis which can
| weaken the bones and release calcium into the blood
| stream.
|
| Needs to be balanced with calcium. I wouldn't recommend
| supplements until you have blood work done.
| ilteris wrote:
| Do you have any recommendations for K2? A generic brand
| would be okay? Thanks
| Sargos wrote:
| I just get D3 and K2 together and seems to work pretty
| well
|
| https://www.amazon.com/Sports-Research-Plant-Based-
| Verified-...
| pmorici wrote:
| I doubt it is much to do with COVID. Mid 30's is about the time
| when you have to start paying closer attention to things like
| sleep and exercise or everything starts to go to shit.
| MrYellowP wrote:
| I'm in my early 40s, and do nothing specifically for my
| physical health. I don't have cognitive decline, I don't
| suffer from little issues _at all_ , (someone once said
| that'll happen once past 40), some days I skip sleep
| entirely.
|
| I also learn new stuff and program on projects, which are
| cognitively demanding, almost every single day. I don't
| regularly watch TV shows. On occasion I binge-watch
| something, only to stop it again for many months. I don't
| drink alcohol at all, but I consume small amounts of THC.
|
| Your "mid 30s" claim might be true for people who are doing
| it wrong, which probably/likely is the vast majority, but
| there's absolutely no fair and objective way of putting an
| age on the beginning of cognitive or physical decline as if
| it was outside of ones personality responsibility/abilities
| to prevent it from happening until a much, much later age.
|
| But ... to be the exception that agrees with the rule: If I
| lived how most people around seem to be living, I'd likely
| suffer from decline as well.
| pmorici wrote:
| Obviously it's different for everyone. Count yourself lucky
| I guess!
| datavirtue wrote:
| I think a lot of problems are related to people thinking their
| sleep is good when it is not.
| herval wrote:
| I had the same after COVID. Took me many months to start
| feeling functional again. Any time I tried to think about
| something, it'd just... noise out? First 2-3 months were just
| awful
|
| I went to a neurologist who said there's tons of people coming
| in with the same complaint after COVID, and since there's no
| literature on that yet, he couldn't really do anything.
|
| It gets better.
| AnthonBerg wrote:
| I assure you that there is literature on it. Here's an almost
| random sample of papers.
|
| https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2022.10.006
|
| https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs10238-022-00871-8
|
| https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nerep.2022.100154
|
| https://doi.org/10.1042/BCJ20220016
|
| I would like to point to this kind of statement that doctors
| often make, that there is "no literature" or that "nothing is
| known". This is very often flat out wrong. Consider the size
| of the statement: _Nothing is known and there exists no
| literature_. The domain of knowledge required for the
| statement is omniscience. Having read _all papers_. It's not
| an acceptable statement for anyone to make.
| koheripbal wrote:
| I wonder how many people just fell into alcohol, isolation
| induced depression, sedentary lifestyle, weight gain, etc...
| and that their health decline had nothing to do with COVID.
|
| That's the issue with these anecdotes
| herval wrote:
| there wasn't really much of a lockdown where I live, so I
| sincerely doubt that. Also I got COVID after the entire
| lockdown was over everywhere (2021), sooo no
| AnthonBerg wrote:
| Please forgive me for turning your words back on you: The
| issue with these statements such as yours is that they
| assume the non-existence of evidence that confirms that
| people's experience is real.
|
| https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2022.10.006
|
| SARS-CoV-2 is _known_ to cause brain damage, endocrine
| problems, and circulatory issues which impede oxygenation.
| Of the brain.
| thisguyfox wrote:
| When the pandemic hit I went the opposite. Focused on a
| healthy mind and body, was able to study a bunch and
| finally broken through a few mental plateaus.
|
| But then I _got_ COVID and I can tell you COVID brain is
| real. Even after I had recovered physically there were a
| few weeks of obvious cognitive degradation. One of my first
| days testing negative I was trying to implement some pretty
| basic pagination logic but when it came time to writing the
| algos for it, it was like my body flipped a switch and I
| would get impossibly drowsy and have to go lie down.
|
| I've had covid twice since then without the same problem
| but it is very real and wild.
| herval wrote:
| exactly! The slighted mental effort made me want to go to
| sleep too :(
| swalsh wrote:
| For me personally, I've been working from home for years.
| While the world around me changed, my life stayed the same.
| dd36 wrote:
| OP did not claim their comment wasn't an anecdote...
| Teever wrote:
| Long COVID is real.
| PrimeMcFly wrote:
| > I'm in my mid 30's though so I assume it's more related to
| long covid.
|
| Much more likely to just be aging. You're not too old for it.
| decremental wrote:
| [dead]
| retSava wrote:
| Have a blood work checkup. Ensure you'll check vitamin and
| mineral levels, perhaps most notably vit D and iron. Also check
| ferritin and transferrin saturation (aids in pinpointing
| hemochromatosis ie iron overload, which for many leads to brain
| fog and fatigue and often shows up your age). Exercise
| regularly.
| naasking wrote:
| Poor sleep causes significant cognitive impairments in memory,
| processing speed, etc. Restoring good sleep usually restores
| most cognitive function, depending on the extent of the sleep
| deficit. Get a sleep watch or device to track both duration and
| depth of sleep.
| RobotToaster wrote:
| So, how do we stop it?
| jdthedisciple wrote:
| Golden rule with anything health-related:
|
| 1. Fix sleep
|
| 2. Drink water
|
| 3. Have Magnesium, Zinc, Vitamin D, and natural proteines
|
| 4. Move your behind
| vasco wrote:
| If you die early enough you should be able to prevent any
| cognitive decline, or at least experience it all at once and
| very fast.
| RobotToaster wrote:
| Hmm, anything with fewer side effects?
| LoganDark wrote:
| I wonder if one could even guarantee a quick and early death
| without suicide. I assume if you join the military or
| something, if you get shot on the battlefield you could end
| up surviving with extreme pain, or bleeding out over a long
| period of time, neither of which are particularly desirable.
| There are various ways to go to sleep and never wake up, but
| I'd assume anything you did intentionally would be suicide.
|
| Some people aren't against committing suicide, but assuming
| you were someone who's afraid of death (so can't just commit
| suicide) but still doesn't want to live into their later
| years, what could you even do? I assume just increase the
| chance of accidents, but what kind of accident would result
| in death with minimal suffering?
| DANmode wrote:
| Exotic extreme sports, to answer your question.
|
| But, most people I've come across that are outward with
| this attitude say they smoke tobacco to help, and have a
| suicide method all planned out and ready to go as a
| guarantee.
| LoganDark wrote:
| > Exotic extreme sports, to answer your question.
|
| Ah, so that's where the saying "do you have a death
| wish?!" came from :)
|
| > But, most people I've come across that are outward with
| this attitude say they smoke tobacco to help, and have a
| suicide method all planned out and ready to go as a
| guarantee.
|
| Having a plan and having the guts to carry it out are two
| different things. I've attempted suicide twice but
| chickened out both times. Honestly glad I didn't go
| through with it.
| ThinkBeat wrote:
| The brain is an extremely complicated
|
| I think they may have found one mechanism or one part behind the
| cognitive decline in aging.
|
| I am certain there are several different processes that
| contribute to it and finding all of them and then mitigating
| those may have side effects in other parts of the brain.
|
| I have an extremely speculative and not based on science that the
| brain simply is not meant to function forever.
|
| We extend life in various ways, and we get better at it. Perhaps
| in a couple of decades people will live (be kept alive) for 100
| years on average. (well those who live in a country where such
| medication and treatment is available and at some level
| affordable)
|
| But human evolution has not caught up with the prolonged life
| span since living that long has been an exception for 300.000
| years and looking farther back in evolution probably millions of
| years
| avereveard wrote:
| > May
|
| article like these come out dozen per year, and it's all putative
| unless they can make a pill out of that knowledge
| MagicMoonlight wrote:
| Eventually we will reach a point where humans are immortal.
| They'll still die if they're shot or clog their arteries etc but
| they won't die purely based on running down a clock.
|
| There's no inherent reason we have to die. It's an evolved
| strategy to allow newer models to replace us. Turn that off and
| you'd stay around until physical damage and irreparable decay
| takes you out.
|
| It will be interesting from a societal standpoint. You'll have
| the real scum people wanting free immortality and people arguing
| they should get it even though they're horrible. You'll have the
| rich people who want to keep it to themselves because the poor
| don't deserve it. Things like prison sentences and the general
| value of time would all be messed up.
| jbotz wrote:
| > [death is] an evolved strategy to allow newer models to
| replace us
|
| I don't think that's true and it's pretty difficult to argue
| that it is given how close to universal death is among living
| things... if it were true evolution would also have explored
| the adjacent possible of near immortality more often. After all
| living longer also means potentially producing more offspring,
| so it's not an impediment to natural selection. Probably more
| accurate to say that between the complexity required to keep
| repairing the accumulated damage in an individual organism over
| time and simply replacing the organism with a new model every
| so often, evolution prudently chose the later. Evolution is
| economical... making highly complex systems that are eternally
| resilient and repairable is not.
|
| I don't doubt we'll soon be able to extend lifespan (and
| healthspan) by quite a bit but not indefinitely unless we can
| transfer the mind to a new body. And frankly I doubt _that_
| makes a lot of sense because I don 't think 200-year-old me
| will feel much identity with 20-year-old me anyway. The
| Buddhists probably have it right that the sense of a continuous
| self is largely an illusion.
| acters wrote:
| Who is to say we are not reaching the levels of irreparable
| decay or physical damage to render death more likely? Instead
| of death, how about the years or months before the eventuality
| where we are losing our capabilities in a variety of methods? I
| say we are reaching this type of milestone you have spoken
| about in your comment. Even the tidbit about rich people
| hogging resources because they are doing exactly that right
| now!
|
| I say this because I do believe that a lot of research into
| aging is just finding a lot of strange oddities in our genes,
| and biological mechanisms. There was never any long term
| biological process such as natural selection, darwinism and
| survivorship bias to remove or refine them into something that
| works better or works for indefinite lengths of time. It is
| only recently that more humans are able to live 60+ years and
| that there is billions of humans compared to the numbers of
| live humans in previous centuries.
| kyriakos wrote:
| Immortality raises a lot of ethical and philosophical questions
| that we will need to tackle if it ever becomes real. For
| example, if you live 200 years, how much would you remember of
| your first 30 years of life? Will that 200 year old person
| still technically be the same as the one that was born if he
| hardly remembers anything?
| throw__away7391 wrote:
| No it doesn't.
|
| I'm a good bit younger than 200 and barely remember large
| portions of my earlier life already. What's so special about
| 200 that makes it any different?
| acters wrote:
| In another comment I spoke about how many more people are
| able to reach 60+ years of age, and that the amount of
| people living longer have exponentially grown. Our world
| population reaching another billions milestone at faster
| timeframes. Scarily, life expectancy was always at around
| 20-30 years for a large portion of history for humans.(most
| who reached 15 years of age were capable of living to 50
| years albeit they were considered to be outliers) Around
| neolithic times, we had moved towards increasing population
| density and promoting growths. This time period was odd as
| it lowered the overall life expectancy because there were
| more humans that died from other methods as lifestyles
| changed from hunter-gatherer to more sedentary lifestyles.
| Hunter-gatherer lifestyles required loads of land for a
| single human to survive, which the neolithic era had been
| able to fix with the introduction of farming. Due to
| density, more people started attacking one another for
| variety of reasons and heavily relied on farm crops to
| sustain increased human populations. Societal growth of
| centers such as towns and cities then countries continued.
| Excluding many outliers, life expectancy only started to
| rise in the 1950s and has kept further increasing past 50+
| years and 60+ years.
|
| So yes there is something special about reaching 200 years
| of age. As it will singal a milestone no other human has
| ever reached from all of history. On the other hand, life
| expectancy growing at an alarming rate is putting a lot of
| strain on resources and land availability.
| throw__away7391 wrote:
| So by your logic we should be trying to reduce human life
| expectancy?!
|
| But honestly I really don't think these arguments are
| motivated by/a consequence of real belief in them, it's
| more a kind of cope with the current situation that we've
| become acclimated to, something in the vein of "if god
| intended men to fly they'd have wings".
| acters wrote:
| It is ignorant to not plan on methods of habilitating
| more people. There is an unsolved problem of space
| constraints and transportation costs of essentials and
| optional resources. Reducing life expectancy and
| population will not solve these fundamental issues. If
| these two constraints are able to be solved sufficiently
| enough, then people will be able to live in larger swaths
| of land or in outer/near orbit space or within the
| oceans. It all depends on how we progress from here.
| Right now we are having the same issues that plagued the
| neolithic era. Our increase in population and life
| expectancy will end up hurting us because of the unsolved
| logistical issues.
| danielskogly wrote:
| Link to paper:
| https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/scisignal.ade5892
| getarofilter wrote:
| [dead]
| Ensorceled wrote:
| Apparently we should add "in mice", "single study", "small study"
| and about 14 other disclaimers to every HN title about science.
|
| If you care desperately about "in mice" find a less "general
| interest" news source.
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| > Apparently we should add "in mice", "single study", "small
| study" and about 14 other disclaimers to every HN title about
| science.
|
| That would be nice, yes. Otherwise there's an endless stream of
| "revolutionary" discoveries that turn out to be nothing.
| Zetice wrote:
| And what a tragedy that would be. Positively unrecoverable,
| we might end up remembering we're not experts, this is not a
| scientific website, and fun/excitement/entertainment is a
| good thing.
| YurgenJurgensen wrote:
| "Room temperature superconductivity discovered in mice." would
| be an interesting turn of events at least.
| mellosouls wrote:
| Its not about caring desperately about "in mice", it's about
| respecting HN as a feed of articles that represent their
| titles.
|
| The underlying study that this PR hype piece is advertising
| does not, and correctly includes "in mice".
| UhUhUhUh wrote:
| Research now more or less always proceeds bottom-up so that it's
| never possible to determine causality from results. Everyone
| looks for causality, researchers look for positive results and
| the wheel keeps on turning. When top-down thinking disappears,
| science enters a cognitive decline of its own. This one is
| contagious.
| freehorse wrote:
| > Researchers using mouse models found that altering the CaMKII
| brain protein caused similar cognitive effects as those that
| happen through normal aging.
|
| This should be the title of the article. Honestly these
| supposedly dissemination articles do not offer much more than
| reading the abstract or skimming a bit through the article
| itself.
|
| https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/scisignal.ade5892
| onurcel wrote:
| Realistically, with the title you suggest nobody would have
| read the post.
|
| A title is not "the most informative and complete sentence
| summarizing the article", it also has the goal to stimulate
| curiosity. I understand that we don't want misleading titles
| but this obsession on titles is not very helpful. I am
| participating in this useless conversation but I couldn't help
| myself. Now every single HN post has a comment on how the title
| is wrong..
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| > A title is not "the most informative and complete sentence
| summarizing the article", it also has the goal to stimulate
| curiosity.
|
| Are you _advocating_ clickbait?
| Zetice wrote:
| Why did you italicize a word? Why speak with any emotion
| ever? Why not focus exclusively on the optimal method of
| transferring information from one being to another?
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| In this case, I believe that using italics to convey
| emphasis and a bit of emotion _is_ the optimal method of
| transferring information (here, expressing surprise and
| questioning someone apparently favoring a practice that
| is generally correctly viewed as a pure negative).
| spdif899 wrote:
| Why say lot word when few do trick?
| coldtea wrote:
| > _A title is not "the most informative and complete sentence
| summarizing the article", it also has the goal to stimulate
| curiosity._
|
| It shouldn't have to do the latter. That's clickbait. People
| are either organically curious about what actually happened
| or they are not. If they are not, they shouldn't be
| "stimulated" with BS. That "media/advetising" attitude is the
| cause behind many issues with science in society today.
| sillysaurusx wrote:
| Ehh. We've been here long enough to both know that there's
| a balance. $10 says the mods won't change the title to the
| suggested one, precisely because of this balance.
|
| It's not about clickbaiting. The whole reason the research
| is getting funded in the first place is to try to find the
| link.
| kshacker wrote:
| We really need "saved you a click" version of hacker
| news. Same UI just title recommended by users
| spdif899 wrote:
| The Artifact news reader app on iOS uses this premise to
| provide one of the truly useful implementations of LLMs
| I've seen in the wild so far. You can mark a title as
| clickbait, and the app will use AI to generate a new
| title, usually one that is more usefully descriptive.
|
| It's not perfect, sometimes the generated title is still
| totally clickbait and I've seen a couple instances of it
| being completely wrong or hallucinating a detail. But
| generally it's pretty neat.
|
| The app also uses the same tech to summarize articles
| into a few bullets which I don't use as often but is also
| neat.
| coldtea wrote:
| > _It's not about clickbaiting. The whole reason the
| research is getting funded in the first place is to try
| to find the link._
|
| Tieing grants to mass media popularity of research papers
| is an even bigger problem.
| stjohnswarts wrote:
| It could be slightly dumbed down for non-bio people such as
| myself but kept the "flavor" of the article title
| isaacfrond wrote:
| doesn't quite fit in HN's 80 character limit though
| koheripbal wrote:
| Because the authors only read the abstracts.
| mdp2021 wrote:
| The title of the study is "Decreased nitrosylation of CaMKII
| causes aging-associated impairments in memory and synaptic
| plasticity in mice" - that would have been the base of the
| shortened title, if the study had been submitted.
|
| The dissemination article was chosen for submission because it
| was the one from the source University. (There are more
| around.)
|
| Further from using clear, synthetic expressions, it contains
| more information than just the (available abstract of the)
| research article - it is where an author of the latter states
| that next steps are pharmacological and involving humans.
| nvy wrote:
| From the HN commenting guidelines:
|
| >Please don't complain about tangential annoyances--e.g.
| article or website formats, name collisions, or back-button
| breakage. They're too common to be interesting.
|
| You're complaining that the title of TFA is not what you
| expect. This is certainly a tangential annoyance, and certainly
| not an interesting comment on the article. If you don't like
| the submission just flag it and move on. Do better.
| Roark66 wrote:
| In mice! Seriously, is it so difficult to add those two words in
| the title?
| mdp2021 wrote:
| That would change the title into your reading. The title is
| literal. Pharmacological treatments are proposed - for humans.
| CyberDildonics wrote:
| _That would change the title into your reading._
|
| What does that mean?
|
| _The title is literal._
|
| It is literally incomplete and the missing context changes
| the entire meaning.
|
| _Pharmacological treatments are proposed - for humans._
|
| This isn't what the title says or implies.
| mdp2021 wrote:
| > _What does that mean?_
|
| If one added that specification, it would change the
| meaning that David Kelly seems to have intended. (It would
| change it to what the poster understood.) Kelly does not
| seem to restrict the matter to mice, as Uli Bayer does not
| seem to.
|
| > _This isn 't what the title says or implies_
|
| It is what the submitted divulgational article from the
| University writes, and the title follows.
| welder wrote:
| https://www.jax.org/why-the-mouse/excellent-models
| Madmallard wrote:
| same mechanism for decline in the rest of the body???? Surely
| oxidation and dna mutations accumulating affects the brains
| similarly to how it affects everything else.
| HeWhoLurksLate wrote:
| I mean I'm sure that eventually entropy will claim all of us,
| but it'd be really cool to be able to help people maybe not
| extend their life times but be less miserable during them
|
| I think I would hate losing my cognitive function if I realized
| it was slipping away a lot more than needing to use a
| wheelchair
| withinboredom wrote:
| IIRC, brain cells don't divide, so "random DNA changes" don't
| apply, at least not in the way it would in the rest of the
| body. I could be totally wrong, I'm not a brain scientist.
| hollerith wrote:
| A cell still needs its DNA (to make proteins among other
| things) even when it is not dividing.
| withinboredom wrote:
| They asked about "compared to the rest of the body" and I
| was explaining (to the best of my knowledge) why it doesn't
| work the same.
| hollerith wrote:
| I know
| fnordpiglet wrote:
| The article suggests that decline in nitric oxide availability as
| you age under pins the effect studied. Citrulline has been found
| to be an effective route for improving nitric oxide levels by
| synthesizing into arginine, which is destroyed in the gut while
| citrulline is not and readily converts into arginine.
|
| https://bpspubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1...
|
| ... in humans
| [deleted]
| Etheryte wrote:
| ...in mice.
| Aaargh20318 wrote:
| Due to the way medication is developed, we basically only end
| up with medicine that works on humans + at least one other
| species.
|
| I wonder how many medications we have missed out on that would
| have worked on humans but never got to the human trial stage
| because it doesn't work in any of the animal models we use.
| haldujai wrote:
| This isn't a medication it's a mechanism study.
|
| I would expect not many and certainly far less than the
| number of medications that worked in animals but did not work
| or harmed humans.
| ekianjo wrote:
| Aspirin is famous for having teratogenic effects on rabbits
| and would never have been approved for humans if it were to
| be tested nowadays
| haldujai wrote:
| Why? Plenty of teratogenic drugs are approved and in
| routine use in non-pregnant patients.
| ekianjo wrote:
| Any recent example?
| haldujai wrote:
| Not really sure what you're getting at, teratogenicity
| only matters if a person is pregnant and lack of
| teratogenicity is in no way a requirement for FDA
| approval.
|
| There are many commonly used drugs with teratogenic risks
| that we discontinue in pregnancy or counsel the patient
| on, picking randomly from a list of medications that were
| approved in 2023: sparsentan
|
| I'm not sure if I'm missing something but why are you
| thinking teratogenicity matters when the vast majority of
| patients are not pregnant at a given moment?
| PaulKeeble wrote:
| And a condition we can induce in another animal. If we can't
| cause it in another animal then we can't test a drug against
| it. There are a lot of diseases that can make no progress
| under this model which we can not induce in animals or
| humans.
| patapong wrote:
| Fascinating! Reminds me how machine learning as a field is
| often focused on tasks that can be quantitatively evaluated
| using large datasets. There are a lot of tasks that do not
| fit this model, especially interactive tasks.
| MattGaiser wrote:
| Is there any mechanism for a potential medication that has not
| been discovered first in mice?
| mdp2021 wrote:
| > _Bayer said that aging in mice_ and humans both _decrease a
| process known as S-nitrosylation, the modification of a
| specific brain proteins including CaMKII_
| Etheryte wrote:
| While this is true, the same protein, even the same gene,
| often serve different purposes in different species. So even
| if we figure a problem out in mice down to the gene level it
| might not yield any results in humans. That's also the reason
| why the majority of drugs that have a positive outcome when
| trialed on mice don't yield positive results in human trials.
| mellosouls wrote:
| I saw this report the other day and didn't submit it here
| because of "...in mice". I mean I agree with your comment btw.
|
| We probably need a standard bracket suffix like (in mice) for
| these sorts of things, as we do for year.
| jdthedisciple wrote:
| > ...in mice.
|
| Should be by default attached to any medical news headline,
| just to be correct more often than not.
| belter wrote:
| Maybe if mice did Math, they could avoid this cognitive decline
| people talk about..
|
| https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/1059235/great-contr...
| LoganDark wrote:
| I misread your comment as "meth" the first time and I was
| like... well I guess that could theoretically help. You know,
| aside from the neurotoxicity of meth.
|
| I take dextroamphetamine for ADHD, and even though it's a lot
| less toxic than meth is, I still have to take frequent
| magnesium supplements or else my magnesium levels totally
| dive (confirmed by blood tests).
| carrolldunham wrote:
| People just jump to say this like it's a game now. The headline
| says 'may have found the mechanism'. It's not claiming anything
| that needs this
| DyslexicAtheist wrote:
| so _" scientists baffled and confused"_ would have been more
| accurate :)
|
| edit: I'm overthinking this, but the word "scientists" does a
| lot of heavy lifting in the headline. The number of things
| the human race in general and scientists especially are
| unsure about is vast. Putting a person in a white overcoat,
| spectacles, and pen in their pockets to lead the sentence
| with authority doesn't give them a chance of not looking
| dumb. Scientists in media language are 100% of the time more
| clownish than even politicians or any other profession.
|
| Even the content in itself is garbage, in which case the
| headline does justice, or there was in fact something news-
| worthy but the meta-analysis by this article has missed it.
| sfn42 wrote:
| If your headline includes the word "may" in this fashion, it's
| not a headline. Come back when you have real news.
| mdp2021 wrote:
| Why, that research is not interesting enough to you? That would
| be you - it is not universal.
|
| There are positive findings, and new research and practical
| openings.
|
| "<<May>>" there means: "we have positively found leads". It is
| not "random".
| Swenrekcah wrote:
| I prefer this to the two alternatives of either not letting
| anyone know what you may have found or confidently exaggerating
| the results.
| [deleted]
| xchip wrote:
| Everything goes when you use the word "may"
| jdthedisciple wrote:
| I may have upvoted your comment.
| Animats wrote:
| > He pointed out that this would only work in normal age-related
| cognitive decline, not the decline seen in Alzheimer's disease
| and dementia.
|
| That's an important distinction. Alzheimer's disease is a
| specific problem, separate from long-term cognitive decline. That
| the mechanisms of both have been identified is real progress. One
| way medicine progresses is by differentiating causes of the same
| symptoms. Then specific treatments can be worked on.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-07-30 23:01 UTC)