Bryan Johnson· Author
Potentially long term ideal range for people age 45+ is 75-150 ng/mL based on clinical outcome epidemiological studies
The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
Potentially long term ideal range for people age 45+ is 75-150 ng/mL based on clinical outcome epidemiological studies
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
so igf is kind of the biomarker for this action igf itself is really complicated because there are five actually i hear that there are seven binding proteins and there's a lot of regulation in between but it's true to say that high i that levels of igf are really very good biomarkers even if you don't agree that they're causative for variety of of health outcomes
but the story seems much more complicated than igf is bad i agree and again i think you know going back to the the levine paper that we were talking about again i think it's a it's an important paper it's a well-done paper you really have to recognize that um the population you're looking in might make a big difference as well right so we you know if you're talking about a population of people where 30 of them are obese some high percentage have metabolic disease or diabetes you know having high igf-1 in that context might be very different than somebody who is sensitive exercising eating a high protein diet right and again that those kinds of things don't typically come out in these epidemiological studies