Anti-Aging Technology Hype and Reality

Many newly formed companies and ventures are in a race to find and develop anti-aging technologies, for whoever figures out how to substantially extend human lifespan can make a fortune. But it appears that most of them are chasing dreams, when solid anti-aging interventions are already here, and they’re cheap. The fact that making money is a leading motivator has blinded them to what’s here now. Perhaps they’re hoping that the rest of us won’t take notice and give them our cash. Here’s the anti-aging technology hype and reality.

Anti-aging companies and technologies

Investors and scientists have formed a number of companies with the aim of developing anti-aging interventions. Among them are:

CalicoGoogle formed this company “whose mission is to harness advanced technologies to increase our understanding of the biology that controls lifespan.” Among its scientists is Cynthia Kenyon, one of the most noted scientists in the field of aging; she’s responsible for the discovery that insulin signaling controls lifespan.

Mount Tam Biotechnologies: This company is located on the campus of the Buck Institute for Research on Aging, and develops drugs, notably rapalogs, which are drugs that are similar to rapamycin. Note the nexus here between scientific research and making money.

Elysium Health: This company has developed a supplement that contains nicotinamide riboside and pterostilbene, which retails for $50 for one month’s supply. Noted scientist in aging Leonard Guarente is “Chief Scientist”.

Ambrosia: This company has jumped on the “young blood” phenomenon and is currently offering transfusions of plasma taken from young people, reportedly at a cost of $8,000 for a course.

Alkahest: Similar to Ambrosia, founded by noted scientist Tony Wyss-Coray.

The products and services that these companies offer range from unproven to possibly workable, and from relatively cheap to very expensive. The striking thing (to me) is the rush for riches by top scientists, which may be a good or bad thing depending on how you look at it. I’ll just note that many or most of their discoveries were made using public grant money.

It’s already known, for example, that old blood transfused into younger animals causes more harm than young blood transfused into old animals causes benefit.

So far, other than rapamycin, none of these interventions have been shown to extend the lives of lab animals, much less humans.

Cheap anti-aging methods are already here

Metformin is the most-prescribed anti-diabetes drug, and is currently the subject of a clinical trial with the aim of fighting aging. Nir Barzilai, a prominent Israeli scientist in this field, takes metformin and is behind the push to test metformin clinically and to get it to be taken seriously as an anti-aging drug.

Metformin has been shown to extend the lives of lab animals, and in humans, diabetics who take metformin appear to have longer lifespans than non-diabetics who don’t. (I’ve previously detailed some of my objections to anti-aging studies, but let’s set that aside for now.)

Metformin’s proven life-extension effects stand in contrast to the unproven interventions of the new high-tech startups.

Perhaps most notably in the context of high-tech companies searching for a cure for aging, metformin costs as little as 5 cents a pill, and thus a typical daily course runs about 10 cents.

Barzilai started taking metformin when he was diagnosed with prediabetes; however, nothing in the linked article states whether he’s cut back on carbohydrates and sugar, and he appears a bit on the pudgy side. Nothing is stated about whether he exercises.

Rapamycin, angiotensin blockers, aspirin, PDE5 inhibitors (Viagra and similar): all are available now, and all are inexpensive. The most expensive, rapamycin, can be had with a prescription from Canadian pharmacies for a few dollars a pill, and taken once weekly would cost perhaps $50 a month.

You can even put together your own cheap anti-aging supplements.

How to practice life extension now

In sum, there’s no need to wait for these high-tech companies to develop expensive and unproven life-extension technologies.

The biggest obstacle that I see in using these already available drugs is getting a doctor to prescribe them. But there’s at least one in the country willing to prescribe the lot, so you could always go see him, and he charges only $350 for an initial consultation.

Some of the substances don’t require prescriptions, notably aspirin and berberine (the latter acts similarly to metformin).

There are also things you can do on your own. Besides the drugs mentioned above, the following are what I’d be looking at to slow aging:

While the high-tech anti-aging companies may well make some breakthroughs, for now, much of it is pie in the sky, and of course relentlessly hyped because of the money angle. But anyone with the drive to do so doesn’t have to wait to practice anti-aging and life extension.

PS: Supplements that fight aging are discussed in my new book, Best Supplements for Men.

PPS: Check out my Supplements Buying Guide for Men.

Leave a Comment:

29 comments
Bill says July 3, 2017

Well written PD. Anti-aging has become yet another get rich quick path for some folks, including scientists. Your web site and referenced articles and printed books shows there is no need to spend mega bucks. And for that you have my hearty thanks.

By the way, I have been taking chondroitin sulfate now for 20 days as per the protocol outlined by Dr. Lester Morrison in his 1973 research paper. I have noticed 2 effects so far :
1 A minor low level intermittent chest pain present the past 5 months has disappeared.
2 : A much better sex life.

I think both of these are a consequence of the repair & restoration of arterial function that CS promotes, as noted by Morrison in his 1973 paper.
Other articles on CS ( eg. Bill Sardi ) state that hair grows better and regains it’s color as a result of CS. But I have not noticed this so far. It would be nice if it happened.

Reply
Abelard Lindsey says July 3, 2017

Research by the SENS Foundation is finally resulting in start-up companies:

https://www.fightaging.org/archives/2017/06/progress-in-sens-rejuvenation-research-over-the-past-15-years/

I bought your book and am reducing Iron (among other things I am doing) and am getting good results. I view your techniques as short to medium term actions that will increase my chances of making it to the time that the SENS therapies are available (2030, 2040, ???), which will then be the long-term actions to take for radical life extension.

Reply
    P. D. Mangan says July 4, 2017

    Thanks, AL. Please spread the word about my book to your longevity-minded friends!

    Reply
      Abelard Lindsey says July 4, 2017

      BTW, I think your blog is really good on this subject.

      Reply
        P. D. Mangan says July 4, 2017

        Thanks very much. I’m noticing, however, that many people are hostile to many of the ideas I present here. They think that the use of drugs or supplements to fight aging is either not necessary or somehow wrong. The attitude is especially prevalent in the low-carb community, who seem to think that low-carb will solve everyone’s problems and make everyone live forever.

        Reply
      peter connor says July 7, 2017

      Hey P.D., your book is terrific!….I have been chelating iron for nearly a year now, and actually feel healthier in general, while maintaining the same exercise program. Very good stuff!

      Reply
        P. D. Mangan says July 7, 2017

        Thanks, Peter!

        Reply
Stuart Mather says July 3, 2017

PD. Every criticism of carbohydrate consumption I’ve ever seen (including yours – I note that you are aware it’s not the carbs that are the problem, but the high blood sugar. Not all carbs cause high blood sugar, and even the ones that do don’t even budge blood sugar if their consumption is spaced regularly through the day and in small amounts/hr.
The role of carbs in keeping the layer of mucus on the walls of your colon healthy and the intestinal junctions therein healthy seems to be the elephant in the room that most anti aging research is completely overlooking so far. Very few adults in the modern world get the 135g/d of fermentable fiber (polysaccharides and oiggosaccharides ) every human infant STILL receives (adjusted for bodyweight of course) in breast milk.

It’s also interesting that fossilized paleolithic coprolites reveal a similar consumption of prebiotics.

I think ALL current antiaging research is missing the point a bit. Worry about gut health first (fermentable fiber -135g/d) and then fiddle about with rapalogs and such.

It’s worth noting that the food available to modern humans bears little fermentable fiber resemblance to the food our colons evolved on, so don’t expect to be able to consume enough in food . You will need to take
fermentable fiber (fermentable – more than enough non fermentable fiber is readily available in food) supplements eg acacia gum, inulin.

Reply
    P. D. Mangan says July 4, 2017

    Hi Stuart – I’m not aware of any research that shows fermentable fiber being related to lifespan, nor any that shows that it helps tight junctions in the gut – though I wouldn’t be surprised at the latter. If fermentable fiber increased lifespan, that would be remarkable.

    Reply
      Stuart Mather says July 4, 2017

      PD. We have this huge bag of bacteria at the end of our alimentary tract that is purpose built to thrive on fermentable fiber and ‘get by’ on far less than the amount it needs to thrive – about 135 g/d
      We are only just beginning to flesh out scientifically how integral to both physical, emotional , and particularly BEHAVIORAL health (impulsive self destructive habits
      etc. thriving gut bacteria are.
      And if a human has spent it’s entire post weaning life chronically underfeeding our 100 trillion or so fellow travellers, is it really that surprising that we probably are not even aware of what normal maximum lifespan is.
      I think humans generally look (and hope) for magic bullets – rapalogs etc. when we’re seriously neglecting absolute basics like well fed gut bacteria.
      If the commensal (good) bacteria aren’t well fed, they simply can’t be expected to keep the pathogenic ones in check. And don’t forget, we NEED the pathogenic ones too. They’re like weight training for the good guys.
      But you wouldn’t even attempt a workout if you were starving, so why do humans routinely starve their colonic microbiota of fermentable fiber?

      Even the ‘recommended’ 40g of FERMENTABLE fiber is catastrophically less than the amount any infant (to this day) or paleolithic human would normally consume.

      I’m not suggesting rapalogs etc. don’t prolong life as well. It just seems like we’re putting the cart before the horse.

      it wouldn’t be cost effective to take life ‘extending’ measures and spend your entire life , say sleep deprived Depriving your gut bacteria of their preferred food seems similarly ill judged.

      It seems to me pretty well any known human disease AND diseases of aging are less likely to be a problem if your gut bacteria, through the various myriad signaling pathways (exosomes, hormones etc. not to mention all the ones we as yet are not even aware of – and may not be for millenia) they use to communicate with and modulate EVERY other part of the body (including of course, the brain) are well fed (fermentable fiber)
      I’m not suggesting rapalogs etc aren’t a really interesting line of enquiry.
      But start eating a LOT more fermentable fiber right now.

      And if you get the various side effects from fermentable fiber people seem to report.
      It’s a sure sign that you are on the right path. Just spread out the daily consumption more evenly and ramp it up more slowly/start from a lesser amount.

      Bloating is a giveaway that you have some degree of SIBO. The best way to cure SIBO is to get more fermentable fiber into your colon. Once your colonic bacteria are well fed, the body has its own mechanisms for controlling the numbers of bacteria north of your ileocecal valve. But it will take years. Modern humans starve their colonic bacteria from the time they are weaned. It’s probably the reason for the ‘terrible twos’ child rearing experience.
      So a few years of discomfort after a lifetime of neglect seems a small price to pay.

      Reply
        Ole says July 5, 2017

        Stuart, you are in the wrong forum. I completely agree with you about fermentable fibers, but animal protein eaters aren’t listening or even paying attention, unfortunately

        Reply
          P. D. Mangan says July 5, 2017

          You’re a vegan?

          Reply
          Nick says July 7, 2017

          Well, *this* animal-protein-eater is listening. Making heads or tails of it all is a bit more of a challenge than it might otherwise be — as Dennis says below, Stuart has said an awful lot here, and these replies seem a bit…scattered to me, A. Layman.

          I personally would like to know more about this and would welcome a post on the topic.

          Fermentable fiber…broccoli? Bell peppers? Cabbage? Nuts (proper nuts, not including peanuts & cashews)? If it comes down to veg & nuts, isn’t this just common sense for those trying to eat properly?

          I’ve always thought that humans are naturally optimally omniverous, though the invasion of starches sidetracked us 10 – 15,000 years ago.

          Reply
        P. D. Mangan says July 5, 2017

        Stuart, you’ve said a lot there, and I should probably write a post on it. For now, I’ll just say that as far as I know, what you say goes far beyond the evidence. Is there evidence that people who don’t get much fermentable fiber have worse health? Any evidence that fermentable fiber increases only the good bacteria and not the bad? As for bloating, nah, think I’ll skip it. My gut is doing fine.

        Reply
          Stuart Mather says July 6, 2017

          PD.
          I’m pretty sure they haven’t even looked. The compelling evidence, for me, is that coprolites from the paleolithic show that our precursors routinely consumed about 135 g/d fermentable fiber. The Hadza of eastern Tanzania – one of the few hunter gatherers left – consume (from the time of weaning) considerably more than 135 g/d.
          We know already that commensal colonic microbiota prefer fermentable fiber to all other foods.
          What always amazes me is that such a huge part of who we are (our immune system, our moods, our behaviour and ”I think our longevity too) depends on all those little critters getting lots of their favourite food.
          There’s also the pesky little detail that all human infants (whether breast or formula fed ) get that amount of fermentable fiber every single day of their lives.
          The bacteria don’t suddenly prefer other food when you are weaned. So why start to starve them?
          Also, I for one love meat.. Humans evolved to eat and thrive on all three macronutrients in combination. There are spritual reasons not to eat meat of course. And it’s not that hard to get plenty of protein without eating meat if it rocks your ethical boat I suppose.
          But top to tail consumption of animals is a very nutrient dense way of satisfying micronutrient as well as fat and protein needs.

          Babies (without exception) and coprolites point clearly to fermentable fiber being a fundamental factor in maintaining optimum health. Because if our commensal microbiota aren’t happy, it’s going to increase the likelihood of it all ending badly.

          What more compelling evidence is required? Are you seriously suggesting a ‘study’ is needed to confirm something that is self evident? Arguments that rely on ‘studies’ are unwinnable anyway.

          Why wouldn’t starving your microbiota post weaning adversely affect both your quality of life and its length?

          It’s worth emphasizing that your colonic microbiome (all your microbiomes in fact – oral, skin etc) are like any other organ. it behoves us to look after them. Your skin microbiota for example -stop abusing your skin with surfactants.
          P.D, your ‘nah, my gut is fine’ is a bit like saying that you don’t need to look after your liver isn’t it?
          We already know how to look after our colonic microbiota – fermentable fiber. ‘nah’ is just not an option if you want your body to functtion at its best for as long as possible.

          Although rapalogs etc. certainly might help mask any long term damage you are doing by not feeding the little darlings the food they prefer I suppose.

          Every day that passes reveals new detail about how integral our microbiome is to everything we are. So it seems like a good idea to lavish it with its preferred food.

          I’m not suggesting that rapalogs etc. won’t extend maximum human life even further. But it”s probably a good idea to get the basics right don’t you think?
          It’s such a big bag of bacteria after all, and so integral to our health moods sleep, behavior………..
          Lastly I have to mention the very human weakness of finding it difficult to think of commensal bacteria (don’t forget there are far more – by a factor of about 10 – colonic bacteria than all the other cells in the human body) as not AT LEAST as important as any other organ – brain, heart etc.
          So I fully admit. Your ‘nah’ comment is remarkably …… human.

          Reply
          P. D. Mangan says July 7, 2017

          Stuart , you write “Im pretty sure they haven’t looked”. So, there isn’t any evidence for the fermentable fiber in aging. Furthermore, it is impossible to “starve” the microbes in your gut. Everyone’s gut is loaded with microbes, regardless of what they eat, the difference being in number of different genuses and species. While it’s been shown that the microbiome changes in different health states, how much is correlation vs causation remains to be determined. To say that we should just throw a lot of fermentable starch at our gut and hope for the best, goes well beyond any evidence. No evidence that fermentable fiber is the “preferred food” of gut microbes; even if there was, which ones?

          Babies also get plenty of sugar in their milk (lactose), and I don’t think we should be ingesting tons of that.

          No, I don’t specifically take care of my liver, nor my kidneys, or pancreas. What I do is practice healthy habits and let them take care of themselves.

          While I’m not against fermentable fiber, neither am I for it. You write like you have this all figured out, but no one does. In fact, frankly, you sound fanatical on this issue.

          BTW, I have a degree in microbiology. That doesn’t make me an expert on gut microbes, but I’m well aware of the gut, oral, and skin microbiome and I’ve written several articles on them for this site.

          Reply
          Stuart Mather says July 7, 2017

          Well infants don’t consume any starch whatsoever. So the amount of carbohydrate they consume is not particularly high compared to even moderate carb consumption by adults. Also lactose is considerably lower G..I. than any other sugar or starch source of carbohydrate.
          It’s always struck me as one of the more perfect carbohydrates. Which is probably why milk evolved to contain it.. But if don’t have European heritage you may not produce enough lactase to cope with it in adullhood.
          Also you suggest that I am being ‘fanatical’ fpr pointing out that our commensal colonic microbiota prefer fermentable fiber above any other food. This has been well understood for at least 70 years. It is about as fanatical as believing in gravity. I’m really not trying to offend you P.D, , but it is simply a fact. The amount of fermentable fiber in breast milk is simply beyond conjecture, as is the content of it in paleolithic coprolites, and, as I mentioned , the diets of extant hunter gatherer communities.
          Of course it is a personal choice what you eat. But you’re trying to maximize your lifespan aren’t you.
          And as you pointed out, if you don’t give your commensal colonic microbiota the food they need to keep all the other parts of your body working properly, how can your body be expected to – to quote you- ‘look after itself’ ?
          I have to ask P.D. , are you sure it’s me being the fanatic??
          Look, it’s your blog, and I have no wish to ruffle your feathers, but for Pete’s sake, you’ve got a microbiology degree, so you must be aware that fermentable fiber is the preferred food of commensal colonic microbiota. If not, why not ?
          There’s a hell of a lot of pathogenic ones too, which the commensals need to keep in check.
          If you don’t feed them enough fermentable fiber, they simply can’t do the work evolution selected them for – to keep us as well as we can be for as long as possible.
          Anyway, this is definitely my last comment about the integral role fermentable fiber plays in optimum health – and by extension – maximum lifespan.
          I’ve never suggested it can EXTEND maximum human lifespan.All I’m pointing out is you’re less likely to even reach currently achievable maximum human lifespan if you don’t consume enough fermentable fiber to keep the commensal (the ones you WANT) colonic bacteria thriving.
          What on earth is the point of EXTENDING maximum human lifespan (with rapalogs etc.) if you aren’t allowing yourself the chance to reach that currently achievable maximum human lifespan?

          Reply
          Bill says July 7, 2017

          Hey Stuart, you are doing long repetitive sermons criticising PD here without knowing whether he eats fibre or not. And you are not poviding anything about what you do.

          It’s all too negative and controlling mate. Loosen up ! .

          Reply
          Stuart Mather says July 7, 2017

          No worries Bill . Are you Australian? You spelled fibre correctly. But I think you might have missed the point completely, even though as you say I did repeat it often enough.
          It’s not about just any fibre. It has be fermentable. You could eat cellulose containing foods till you exploded and it wouldn’t help your microbiota one iota. In fact almost everyone who professes to eat a ‘high fibre diet gets hardly any fermentable fibre.
          Common enough error I’ll admit. Most people haven’t got a clue what fermentable fibre even is let alone how essential it is.to optimum health.
          And I’m curious, why is it relevant what I do ? Who cares? Suffice to say it would seem more than a little perverse if I didn’t practice what I preach.
          It’s not that difficult, and the benefits are extraordinary – for compelling evolutionary reasons.
          Although as I mentioned in an earlier comment, it ain’t no quick fix.

          Reply
          Bill says July 8, 2017

          Stuart, yes I am an Aussie.
          And I spell ‘fibre’ the Aussie way.
          And i know about ‘fermentable fibre too. Occasionally I eat slices of coloured potatoes, that I’ve soaked in apple cider vinegar or my own saurkraut., as suggested by the Wheat Belly man Bill Davis. Good tasty tucker !

          But there is NO one formula. We are each and every one of us different : genetically, psychologically, culturally, ethnicly, with our own diet history.

          So there is no point in your ‘demand’. You can with courtesy, say what works for you and recommend it. That’s all.

          Reply
          Stuart Mather says July 8, 2017

          Hey Bill,
          Well the point is, every human body has certain design features in common. We all have colons chockers with bacterial The ones we want, the commensals, determine whether we sleep, think age , behave, fight both degenerative AND infectious disease, and interpret sensory stimuli as well as our common design allows.
          You can certainly put diesel fuel in a petrol car, or not lubricate any car, if you choose. It’s your car after all.A bit daft though.
          We all have a colon whose preferred fuel is fermentable fibre. That’s not me ‘demanding’ anything. it’s just a fact.

          Please don’t be offended Bill, this is not an opinion any more than gravity is.

          You do seem to be suggesting that I can only claim that fermentable fibre works ‘for me’.
          That’s the point Bill, ALL humans, without exception (the ones with colons at any rate) are simply designed to function best with a LOT of fermentable fibre.

          And plenty of people couldn’t care less about their health. I do recognize that. But the majority of people who read PD’s blog are interested in maximizing their lifespan aren’t they.
          Btw.eating even 10kg of currently available tubers won’t provide much fermentable fibre. Better than nothing ? No doubt about it. I thought the idea was to do better than that.
          Please understand that as irritating as you, or anyone else may find it, none of us who wan’t to maximize our health (Unless they get their colons surgically removed I suppose) gets to choose how much fermentable fibre we should consume for optimum health.
          Evolution worked that out millennia ago.

          Reply
    Drifter says July 4, 2017

    Stuart,
    Paul Jaminet has written extensively about the carbs/mucus/immune system connection (somewhat speculative in specific amounts but still on topic) and to your point, he argues that very low carb is likely more of a problem than many recognize, however he makes a strong case that relatively few carbs (70 – 200 grams per day depending on health status, activity type, etc) are needed to correct any issue and that the bulk of energy should still come from fat. Also, chronically elevated insulin which can be created and/or aggravated by constant carb consumption is likely a bigger problem than elevated blood sugar. (Dr. Fung has covered the studies and theory of this extensively.) And there are other problems for many people with high carb consumption, such as irrational hunger signaling and a shift away from fat-burning at the cellular level. So, while some people appear to do “ok” on high carb, you may want to broaden your reading on the topic…

    Reply
      Stuart Mather says July 4, 2017

      Drifter,
      Doesn’t dietary protein also elevate insulin?
      Humans eat too much. Too much protein (in the West anyway) too much fat, and too much carbohydrate.
      Chronically elevated insulin is only one of the problems of overeating protein or carbohydrate. anyway.

      I actually think modern food is just too delicious. People in developed countries haven’t got a chance really have they?
      If people were used to waiting till they were properly hungry before eating, even otherwise boring (but nevertheless nutrient dense) would be delicious.
      Try it.
      I think we all are made slaves to our tastebuds by culinary prowess.
      People talk about ‘slow’ food. I think we might need more’boring’ (nutrient dense) food.
      Modern fruit, for example is just a fructose high.
      Fructose (from fruit) may not give you diabetes. but it seems to stuff your body up in so many other ways.

      Reply
      Stuart Mather says July 4, 2017

      Also Drifter,
      To your point about ‘chronically elevated ‘ insulin. Do you think that higher than baseline insulin is ‘elevated’ (bad thing)? . Most people eat at least once a day and if they consume any protein or carbohydrate whatsoever their insulin level will come out of the blocks. So if at least once a day, your insulin levels are elevated is that necessarily a bad thing?
      If you eat enough carbohydrate to keep your alimentary tract a mucus highway I agree 200g is probably ideal, But just as importantly if the carbs are high G.I. spacing their consumption over time seems important.
      Just for the hell of it, I swallowed two gummy bears (glucose and gelatin) without sucking on them (to protect my teeth) every half hour all day, That’s more than 100g of pure glucose. My blood sugar never shifted once. I’m sure there was SOME INSULIN secreted to deal with it. But I’d probably have had more elevated insulin if I ate a steak.
      In short, I think intermittently very high insulin – as you will get after a high protein meal – is probably more ‘harmful; than far lower levels of insulin more constantly.
      I think my pancreas would agree.

      I’m certainly not suggesting that higher than energy requirement consumption of carbohydrate is a good idea. Humans just eat too much Eating too much fat causes pancreatitis. I shortened a much loved dog’s life once by just feeding it a high fat diet
      I really don’t think carbs are a problem in and of themselves.
      Eat both fat and carbohydrate to cover your energy requirements. If you haven’t done so and have ended up a diabetic, all bets are off.
      Delicious modern food + lack of self control always ends badly. Perhaps one day there will be a pill?
      It’s an existential problem isn’t it?. If food is delicious and readily available, humans will apparently inevitably consume far too much of it.
      Then pound the pavement or the gym to try and ‘work off’ the consequences.
      I’ve just found it’s so much easier to eat nutrient dense boring food. Food ceases to be an issue.Life seems to have so much more to offer than you find down the rabbit hole of taste.

      And it just doesn’t seem to be a solution to develop self control over delicious food. Unfortunately, you’ll always get hunger pangs sooner if you are anticipating a delicious meal. Which once succumbed to ALWAYS results in eating more than you would if the food was boring (nutrient dense of course.)

      Reply
Allan Folz says July 5, 2017

Wait, are you saying Rx Metformin costs less than OTC Berberine? Ahh, the irony.

Economies of scale? In every instance I’ve ever heard of, Rx versions of OTC products cost many times more on account of price-insensitivity of consumers with insurance coverage… and all the perverse incentives that that allows within the healthcare industry.

Reply
    P. D. Mangan says July 5, 2017

    Yes, it might, very close anyway. I checked local prices and metformin was $5.00 for 60 tabs, and I paid about $20.00 for 180 berberine caps.

    Reply
Nicholas says July 6, 2017

I too have run across the trouble of my doctor not wanting to prescribe Metformin and (or) Rapamycin to me, since she’s got a very conservative view of medicine and I’m wanting to use it in the non-daily way you describe in the Metformin article. The rest of this, I’m doing already, and it’s rolling back years really well.

The thing I’ve yet to do is implement anything to re-color my hair. Pretty sure that’s in here somewhere, too.

Reply
Alan says July 12, 2017

Thanks once again for another very interesting blog. I`m considering adding berberine to my list of supplements but was wondering if there might be an interaction with my blood pressure medication lisonopril.
Regards Alan

Reply
    P. D. Mangan says July 12, 2017

    Hi Alan, I don’t know. You should talk to your doctor about any possible interactions.

    Reply
Add Your Reply