FOXO4 peptide prices

[updated price list]

 

When I checked last, the price for a full human dosage of FOXO4-DRI (used to kill senescent cells) was $3000 per day, based on the first reply here.

I expect that the price will go down as people discover it, with the various drugs companies fighting each other to catch the market. I’m going to periodically check to see how the prices reduce, and when it gets into a range I’m comfortable with (definitely not $3000 per day!), I will test it myself.

Current prices for 30mg are:
€85,800 at NovusBio
€10,755
$4,060.20 at Novoprolabs
$1,830.00 at MyBioSource (and 6 free USB drives for some reason…)

I don’t understand why the prices are so wildly different.

At this moment, I think it would be cheaper to pay your way through college and then buy the lab equipment and synthesise it yourself. The FOXO4 peptide’s amino sequence is described in the patent, but I don’t think patents restrict you from doing things as long as you don’t benefit commercially from them.

What does it look like at the edge of the universe?

In an article at Forbes, Ethan Siegel walked us through a general overview of the history of the universe. His point boiled down to a simple fact: there is no edge to the universe, because the universe is infinite in size. In his words:

the Universe itself isn’t finite in volume; it’s only the observable part that’s finite

The whole premise is similar to the question “when I stand on a 30 meter hill, I can see for miles around – what does it look like at the horizon?”

The short answer is “the same”. The horizon is not the edge of the world. It is simply as far as you can see in that direction (19.6km) before the world curves away from your sight. If you were to stand at a point on the horizon, then you would see that the world looks pretty much the same as around the hill you were on. Roads, fields, rivers. All the same. And in the same direction, you would see a horizon, 19.6km away…

The same is true of the universe. The “edge” of the universe that we see is stretched away visibly into nothing 46.6bly (billion light years) away, but if you were to magically move yourself to any point on the edge of the visible universe, you would see that you are in an area that looks pretty much the same – surrounded by gases, stars, galaxies. And in the same direction, you would be able to see a further 46.6bly to yet another “edge”.

The difference between the two stories here is that the world is curved, so it really is finite in size. This is how the horizon happens in the first place. But, in the universe’s case, space is not curved, as far as we can see. It just goes on, and on, and on, without limit.

So, there really is no edge to the universe. The idea is a misunderstanding, just like the idea that the horizon is the edge of the world.

SBSI as a simple measurement of health

It would be fantastic if there was a single number out there which you could use to say “I am n healthy”, knowing that you could improve n and directly improve your health.

One attempt at that is the body mass index (BMI) that doctors use to state generally that someone is overweight or underweight. However, the BMI values can be wildly inaccurate depending on your body type – whether you are male or female, European or Asian, active or sedentary.

BMI calculates purely on the weight and height of the person. This gets you a figure that is a good start. For example, my height is 168cm, and my weight this morning was 73.7kg. That gives me a BMI of 26.1 which is classed as “overweight”.

But what does “overweight” mean? When something is “over” or “under”, that means there is an ideal number that should be looked for. When someone says that “your BMI indicates you are overweight”, what they mean is that “an average person with your height and weight has a higher mortality than an average person with your height and a lower weight”.

Of course, no-one actually is average. I have short legs, for example. If they were 4cm longer(172cm) and I had the same weight (73.7kg), I would have a lower BMI (24.9) and no longer be considered overweight.

Some people are sedentary and have fat around the torso, while some people may work out a lot. If my weight was due to extra muscle instead of extra fat, would I still be overweight? Having less fat on the body means that I would be less likely to develop diabetes or heart diseases, so that means that even though the BMI suggests that an athletic 73.7kg 168cm man is overweight, he would actually be more healthy than a sedentary man who weighed 66kg and was considered “normal” weight.

Because the BMI was supposed to be based on the fat content of the body, it makes sense that a more accurate measure of that fat content would take these differing physiologies into account.

The Surface-Based Body Shape Index (SBSI) is a calculation which provides a more accurate index of fat content. It was published in 2015, based on data from 11,808 healthy adults, and provides a much more accurate prediction of health than the BMI does.

To measure the SBSI, you need to measure your height, weight, vertical torso circumference and waist circumference. The first two are used in BMI calculations as well, but the later two give a more discriminate calculation, for example in the case of people with shorter legs *ahem* (affecting the vertical torso circumference), or who are athletic instead of sedentary (affecting the waist circumference).

After calculating the index (here’s an online calculator), you will have a number. That number is the SBSI.

According to table S1 in the research paper, healthy people have an SBSI of .105 (female) or .108 (male).

That number is a general indicator of health. A definite number to be aimed for, rather than a range of weights that might be right or not.

Mine at the moment is .113, so I need to work on getting that down to .108.

My goal at the moment is to work on getting my weight down to 66kg anyway, even though there is no definite reason for that, but while working towards that, I will also be working on reducing my waist circumference to 84cm.

Just a thought, but I wonder if it’s possible to come up with a formula, using the data from that report, that instead of just giving a general fat content index, can accurate predict the percentage chance of death within the next 5 years? Hmm…

Jimmy Joy

A while back, I paid for my first month’s supply of Jimmy Joy, a 100% nutrition “future food”. It cost €150 for 30 day’s worth, and took 7 days to arrive. That averages out at about a €5 per day food bill. €35 per week. That’s slightly below the average food bill for a person living in the EU. Similar foods include Soylent and Huel.

The point of the food is to give you all the nutrition you need (that we’ve figured out so far), with as little effort as possible.

I’m not much of a foodie – the number one criteria I have for food is that after I eat a portion, I should not need another portion for a while. So, my “ideal” meal until now has been to make a bowl of curry noodles, and a sandwich with Marmite and jalapenos to go along with it. No-one likes my cooking – you can see why! I’m more into the efficiency of the thing than the art of it.

The Marmite is a clue as to why I needed to go onto this stuff. I’ve been vegetarian for more than a quarter of a century, vegan for about three years, and I never paid much attention to the diet. So, I ws diagnosed B12 deficient last year.

B12 deficiency takes a while to kick in, so it’s not something you notice as being wrong with your body. It’s something that gradually affects the body but that you think of as “this is fine” all along. Kind of like the story of boiling a frog – it will happily sit in a pot of water that is slowly brought to the boil, not noticing the temperature, because it’s not drastically different than a few seconds before.

I’d been tired for years, to the point that for some long periods, I would come home from work and go straight to sleep on a couch for a few hours. Doctors couldn’t point to anything specifically, even after blood tests. My arms and legs would also tingle every now and then. Especially if I had applied weight to certain parts of them. I passed this off as nerves being close to the skin.

Eventually, one blood test indicated I was very deficient in B12, and I was put onto shots. Not pleasant. I have a phobia against needles going into veins or joints. Blood tests are done at a vein and joint (elbow), while shots go into a joint (shoulder muscles).

So, that’s when I added Marmite to my diet.

Lately, I’ve noticed that I feel restless at night. I’ve self-diagnosed this as restless leg syndrome (iron deficiency), but have not done tests to confirm this.

Since starting to write this book, I’ve learned a lot about what can go wrong with the body if it’s maltreated for too long. One of the points of the book is to try find the most efficient way to stay healthy (no leaping about for hours or careful balancing of 30 food types, etc).

Nutrition-wise, you really can’t get better than using future foods. They’re designed from the ground up to be 100% of what the average adult needs. What I love most about them, though, is that I don’t have to think about it. I just mix the stuff and drink it.

Of course, once something comes to my attention, I tend to start analysing it to see if I can optimise it somehow.

Jimmy Joy is designed to be 100% perfect for the average adult. No-one is average, though, so everyone needs to adjust it slightly. In most cases, people just use it as a breakfast or main meal and “self-adjust” their diet for the rest of the day. In my case, I’m trying to figure out the optimal amount to eat that will keep me at my ideal weight.

I measure my weight every morning without fail, stepping onto the weighing scales multiple times until it agrees with the previous figure (the first time I step on a scales in the morning, it seems to over estimate my weight by almost .5kg).

I weight 74.5kg at the moment (average for the last 7 days), and my optimal weight according to BMI is 62kg.

Everyone is different, so saying something like “eat 2500kCals and you’ll stay steady” is almost certainly false. I live a sedentary life, for example, spending most of my day sitting at a computer. Others might walk around a lot, or run, or pick things up, etc. Each of these things affect your calorie usage.

With a “normal” diet, it is hard to design a balance of foods that will give you a constant weight loss or gain, or keep you at your current weight. As I said above, there is no single ideal number of calories to consume, and even if their were, the calculation needed to make sure your diet hits that and is nutritious is monumental.

It’s much easier to just adjust the number of scoops of future food you take each day.

The instructions on Jimmy Joy bags say to take 3.5 scoops and 500ml water, three times a day. I’m doing about 3 scoops three times a day at the moment and adjusting up or down over the weeks as my weight changes. I don’t want the weight change to be sudden, but I do like to see definite numbers.

Ideal body weight is something I haven’t yet tackled in my book. I’m taking the BMI scale as gospel for now, so I have a goal of 62kg to hit.

search engine optimisation

This is not quite on-topic, but related in that it informs me on what people are interested in, helping me tune the book/website to their needs, and in turn improving the readership.

A lot of the information on this site is based on masses of statistics carefully analysed to figure out causes and effects, and especially what causes to work on if you have specific effects in mind. What food to eat if you want to live longer, how long to exercise to avoid heart disease, what drugs to use to improve your cell functions.

SEO is basically the same. There’s a lot of mumbo-jumbo around it, but if you’re methodical and persistent, and you pay attention to what the numbers are telling you, it can pay off.

This website is a little over three weeks old. Not long enough to make a splash anywhere online, but long enough that a few statistics have started coming through that I can work on.

I want to talk about my process for improving web presence (which in turn, improves the website content itself). There’s a lot to it, so I won’t even try to cover it all in one post. Today, I’ll talk about using Google’s Search Analytics tool. Not the Google Analytics tool – the search analytics tool in Google Webmasters. Google Analytics is only useful once people have gotten onto your website, but to tune how people get to the website in the first place, you need to use the Google Webmaster tools.

The default view in Search Analytics is to show the clicks per link for the last 28 days. I don’t really find that very useful at first while tuning a website’s visibility. Before someone clicks on a link, the link has to show up in the search results in the first place, so I ignore the clicks statistics and focus on two things: Impressions and Position.

The Impressions is how many times your website has appeared as a result in the last n days (default is 28), and the Position is the average position that the result was seen at. Higher impressions are better. Lower position is better.

For the first few days, you won’t have any data to look at. Make sure to publicise the site in some way (like submitting a sitemap) so that Google knows that it exists.

Once the data starts trickling in, you can start working on it.

For example, yesterday, I had the following numbers:

The next thing to do is to analyse those numbers to rank each search keyword by “importance”. I do this by making a spreadsheet which I add to each day, adding a third figure which is the Impressions divided by the Position.

Example from yesterday’s figures:

18
nad+ aging 1 4.0 0.25
foxo4 peptide 8 34.9 0.23
ardouin antonio 5 29.2 0.17
quantum multiverse 1 7.0 0.14
lower respiratory infection 1 8.0 0.13
ken horne aids 5 45.6 0.11
peptide senescent cells 2 27.0 0.07
nad+ 1 17.0 0.06
sinclair nad+ 1 20.0 0.05
quantum immortality 1 26.0 0.04
killing senescent cells 1 24.0 0.04
universe is infinite 2 53.5 0.04
black holes and baby universes 1 39.0 0.03
hippocampal prosthesis 1 40.0 0.03
selma dritz 1 79.0 0.01

You can see that I’ve ordered the entire table by the right-most column. The number there is the “importance” of each keyword to the website at that moment in time (impressions/position).

A search for “nad+ aging” appears in position 4 on the front page of Google, giving it an “importance” of 0.25. A search for “selma dritz” appears right down the bottom of page 8 on Google, giving it an importance of 0.01.

I look through the keywords for those that I think relate to the website in general, and try to figure ways to improve their importance value.

One way to work on this, for example, is to look at the third last column (impressions) and look for “spikes” where the number of impressions leaped up relative to the previous figure. I have an ideal in my mind that the numbers should be large at the top and descend toward the bottom as the importance reduces.

For example, “foxo4 peptide” (the second row) appeared in 8 searches, so you would expect that it should be more important to the site than the search for “nad+ aging”, but because foxo4 peptide appeared on average in position 34.9 (vs 4 for “nad+ aging”), it is relatively less important to the site at the moment.

It is obvious that if we could improve the average position of that keyword in the results, then the importance value would increase, making the statistics more aesthetically pleasing to me, and making the keywords more successful in their intended purpose.

To do that, I choose those keywords that I think need work, then I write a blog post about them, making sure to find out something new about the keyword subject that I haven’t written about before. You can get cheap copy writers to write absolute trash articles based on your keywords, but I think those are ultimately detrimental to the credibility of your website. I always put some real effort into finding something interesting to say.

I use that as a way to improve the book as well, because anything new that I find filters down from the blog into the book.

So yesterday, for example, I found out that there is one person experimenting on himself already with FOXO4-DRI. That in itself is not enough to put in the book, but was interesting enough to write about in a post. After reading more, though, I found that a visitor to his website has figured out that the peptide costs about $3000 per day at present, which is something I can put in.

So, the effort of improving the SEO statistics in turn improves the book.

It’s important not to allow yourself to work on keywords that are ultimately tangential to the core subject. The keyword “ken horne aids“, for example, is another one that stands out to me because of the leap in the impressions, but I think that people searching for that are more interested in learning specifically about Ken Horne, than in learning about, say, the history of HIV/AIDS. I could be wrong, though – the statistics are just starting to grow so I don’t have a full idea yet of what people are looking for and whether it aligns with what the book is about. For all I know, they may be interested to learn about how to cure AIDS, so I’ll work on that as well.

I’m not going to write often about this stuff, as it’s a little off-topic. I just find it interesting, and you might too!

foxo4 human trial (not plural)

There is at least one person trialling the FOXO4 peptide (albeit informally), and blogging about his experiences while taking it. I’ve added him to my list of feeds – looking forward to his progress!

I’d love to know where he’s getting his stash from, but I’m sure he’d prefer not to say, in case the producer gets in trouble (FOXO4-DRI has still not been approved for human trials). [update: he’s in the business, so didn’t need to go through commercial channels]

FOXO4 is a gene that, in senescent cells, uses the p53 gene to stop the cell from splitting further, but also stops it from dying (apoptosis).

Recent research shows that if the FOXO4 gene is blocked using FOXO4-DRI (a kind of peptide), then senescent cells will kill themselves, and the body can recover by growing new younger cells to replace them.

Killing senescent cells is necessary, because if you don’t, then they accumulate over time, eventually being the only kind of cells that you have.

Nutrition chapters, and FOXO4 peptides

This week, I started working on the Nutrition chapters. I read a fascinating 1791 book by George Fordyce titled A Treatise on the Digestion of Food. In it, he proved that calcium is a nutritional need for chickens in order that hens could lay eggs.

He also weirdly was able to prove that goldfish can survive for weeks on end in distilled water with no food. I haven’t taken the time yet to figure out how he got that wrong, but I’m pretty sure he did!

I’ve been searching to see if I can find cheap sources for FOXO4 peptides, but the lowest price is still about $85 for 50μg.

quantum immortality as a get-rich-quick method

First off, do not do this – there is absolutely no proof that quantum immortality is true. Having said that, let’s look at an idea that could be a very quick way to win a lot of money if it is true.

Steps to winning a whole load of money easily, given the premise that quantum immortality is true:

  1. create a program that can read a lottery website and check its numbers
  2. create a device which can release a load of carbon monoxide into a room when triggered
  3. create another device which can detect when you are fully asleep
  4. buy a lottery ticket
  5. set up the program and two devices, so that on the night of the lottery, after the lottery has run and its numbers have been published to its website, the program will trigger the carbon monoxide to be released into the room after you are asleep, if the numbers checked do not match the numbers you bought.

Now, all you need to do is buy a lottery ticket, and on the night of the lottery, don’t check it for yourself, but just go to sleep.

You will wake up the next morning after winning the lottery the night before.

The alternative (that you did not win) results in you simply not waking up at all. Given that there are an infinite number of universes, and that “you” are the conscious emergent property of your memories and neural functions, and memories are properties of physical neuron layouts (of which there are infinite copies in the infinite universes), then “you” are the person that wakes up the next day, after winning the lottery the night before.

There are ethical problems with this. Let’s say the chance of winning the lottery was 1 in 1,000,000. For every universe in which you win the lottery, there are now 999,999 universes where you are dead. Of course you don’t experience those universes, but those people you left behind did.

Does that matter? They are, by definition, in completely different universes from the one you experience, so does it really matter?

I’ll leave that to “you” to decide.

And, of course, another reminder that if quantum immortality does not exist, then you have just killed yourself. Painlessly, let’s make it clear, and you were not aware of it happening, but you are nonetheless very dead. Keep that in mind, and don’t do the above.

[edit – May 15] – as pointed out on FaceBook, if QI is true, it is much more likely that you will screw this up and just damage your lungs very badly, than that you will successfully create a suicide machine on win the lottery.

yet another update

Time flies. I keep on planning to do things, and then failing to do them because there isn’t enough time, in between working 12 hours a day and trying not to fall asleep as soon as I get home.

I finished the basics of my next book, Live Forever, which I put up in website form so I can figure out through statistics which pages (a lot of them!) need work. Tonight, I’m working on the Cancer chapter so haven’t put that in there yet.

Over the weekend, I hope to get a start on a new project, which will help to design 100% nutrition diets based on common supermarket produce. There are known recommended daily allowances (RDAs) for all nutrients, but when you make your dinner, you don’t calculate an optimal meal because it’s just not practical or easy. The new project is designed to get around that by offering meal plans that are affordable and personalisable (you will be able to put your preferences into it). We’ll see if that gets off the ground!

In CoderDojo, some of my students (I really mentor them, more than teach, but what do you call someone you mentor? Mentoree?) are working on some interesting projects for this year’s Coder Dojo conference and next year’s Young Scientist. Two examples: programmable magnetic levitation, and a laser harp.

In work, we’ve moved beyond the frantic development stage that all companies go through, and are now in stabilisation mode, making sure the system is bulletproof and can scale well beyond current needs. I still find it interesting, even though the work I’m doing at the moment is not flashy and user-visible. Today, for example, I was writing a logging system to make sure that even though users access our mobile servers in a “round robin” method at the moment and the logs of their visits are therefore scattered among the servers, I can still aggregate them on the other end into something that can be searched easily. Not flashy, but quietly satisfying.