zisos wrote: ↑Sat Apr 11, 2020 6:00 am
I agree with you that we must be careful. However, in the end someone has to consider the risks of interventions vs the risk of non-intervensions. Personal goals, age, risk evaluation, risk appetite, available information etc play a role in decision making.
Here are some parameters to take into account:
a) Age:
In one of Sinclair's presentation, he mentioned that NAD+ at age 50 is about half than at age 20. At age 90, there is almost no NAD+ left.
So, at age 50 I might not take the risk of reducing CD38, because most likely it is low. At age 70, my decision might be different (I am now 69). I tend to think that CD38 is much higher than the optimum.
b) Personal Goals:
I personally believe Kurzweil's prediction that "Longevity Escape Velocity" (LEV) might be achievable for most people in about 15 years. So my thinking is as follows:
At age 69, if I do nothing, I expect to live about another 10 years. By making risky (Not reckless) interventions, there is a chance that if I am wrong, I might lose 3 years of life, whereas if I am right, I might gain 5 years of life. This might bring me close to the time of LEV. Even though the probability of that happening is relatively small, the potential gain is so huge, that it allows me to take bigger risks (I.e. potential loss of 3 years vs a potential gain of eternity)
My thinking would be very different if I did not believe that Kurzweil's prediction is plausible. I would certainly be more conservative.
My goal is to live indefinitely. So I am willing to take a higher risk for this very ambitious goal.
c) Risk evaluation:
Blagosklonny said that
Not taking rapamycin when over 70 is riskier than driving at excessive speed, drunk, without wearing a seatbelt. Of course, not everyone evaluates risk the same way. In fact, very few people think so. In other words, people that evaluate risk in a different way will come up with different decisions.
To ensure that interventions are not "reckless" we must stay informed. So I appreciate the information that you provided regarding too much inhibition of CD38. I was not aware of it. More good information results in better evaluation of risks.