Longevity-Associated Triglycerides
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 сен 2024
- Join us on Patreon! / michaellustgartenphd
Discount Links:
At-Home Metabolomics: www.iollo.com?ref=michael-lustgarten
Use Code: CONQUERAGING At Checkout
Epigenetic, Telomere Testing: trudiagnostic....
Use Code: CONQUERAGING
NAD+ Quantification: www.jinfiniti....
Use Code: ConquerAging At Checkout
Oral Microbiome: www.bristlehea...
Enter Code: ConquerAging
At-Home Blood Testing (SiPhox Health): getquantify.io...
Green Tea: www.ochaandco....
Diet Tracking: shareasale.com...
If you'd like to support the channel, you can do that with the website, Buy Me A Coffee: www.buymeacoff...
Conquer Aging Or Die Trying Merch! my-store-d4e7d...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Papers referenced in the video:
Effects of blood triglycerides on cardiovascular and all-cause mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 61 prospective studies
pubmed.ncbi.nl...
Elevated plasma triglyceride concentration and risk of adverse clinical outcomes in 1.5 million people: a CALIBER linked electronic health record study
cardiab.biomed...
Serum Cholesterol and Impact of Age on Coronary Heart Disease Death in More Than 4 Million Veterans www.ahajournal...
Plasma metabolomic profiles associated with mortality and longevity in a prospective analysis of 13,512 individuals www.nature.com...
A single quote mark at the start of a cell, in front of your '54:9 will force excel to treat it as a string.
Thanks for that @santosvella!
fascinating and well presented as usual
Thanks @barrie888!
Dr. LG, amazing content as always! I'm a little fuzzy on the traceability of a TAG to a fatty acid. Is it hypothesized which fatty acid produces the TAG metabolite in Quadrant II of the Longevity vs. mortality graph, by using simple arithmetic of the carbon atom and double bond value of the lipid number? Would it be an exhaustive effort to produce which fatty acids possibly produce this combo?
Thanks Tom. In the paper, it's the sum of each individual TAG, but unfortunately, they didn't identify which individual FAs were in each TAG.
In iollo's kit, they may indeed be missing some of the FA combinations that contribute to a given TAG-for example, C54:9 only has 1 TAG, whereas there are many others for 56:6. That's not a perfect system, but it's probably better than doing nothing (at least that's my bet).
Definitely on the exhaustive effort, but hopefully I made it easier by showing which TAG combinations could be grouped and tracked. I'll track it, and we'll see how it goes in upcoming videos...
@@conqueragingordietrying123 Thanks for the response, that makes sense. More specifically for example I notice that none of the coconut fats are indicated in your list. So if I understand column one correctly you could be put lauric acid in there and then subtract this number from TAG 56_6 and thatvalue would be the number to the right of the _? If I'm understanding correctly both of these numbers on each side of the _ are proposals with KnownProposed_CalculatedRemainingCombo?
Good video. Do we have any understanding of how/why these specific triglycerides increase lifespan?
Nope, no studies have tested causation, so they're associations, for now
Some of the FAs in these TGs are EPA, DPA, and DHA, which decline during aging and are associated with an increased all-cause mortality risk, so it could be a reduced fish intake or inflammation-related FA degradation as a reason for less being incorporated into TGs
Doing some simple math, one would expect TG 56:7 and 56:11 to often incorporate one or more of the following acids, as also shown in the last slide:
α-linolenic acid (ALA; 18:3 ω-3),
stearidonic acid (SDA; 18:4 ω-3),
stearic acid 18:0, (SA, 18:0)
eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA; 20:5 ω-3),
docosapentaenoic acid (DPA; 22:5 ω-3),
docosahexaenoic acid (DHA; 22:6 ω-3)....
Quite a lot of these are well known omega-3s. Thoughts?
Yep, that's definitely possible, and some of those FAs decline during aging (EPA, DPA, DHA), which could explain some of the TG effect in the video.
Just read from chris masterjohn, that 46% of methylation is used to create creatine,
So the reason creatine lowers homocystiene in vegetarians,
Maybe by reducing methylation,
Freeing up methylation,
To break down homocystiene
I think you commented on the wrong video? This one focuses on TGs
Complicated but interesting - further study needed.
Hopefully I made the story less complicated!
Audio's really low.
I hear it just fine
Maybe on mobile? I just checked on PC, it's ok
Fine on mobile for me.
@@conqueragingordietrying123 The critique is valid. Right click on the video > Stats for nerds > Volume / Normalized 100% / 100% (content loudness -21.2dB). Anything under -4 is bad audio and under -10 is already horrible. Some devices can compensate. It's still not ok though. Sorry.
@@nootriHah, thanks for this. I've never right clicked on a video before. Subjectively, the audio for this video on my computer IS very low. I can make it out, but my computer and youtube volumes have to be maxed out.
The associations reported from the Wang paper combine all three fatty acids in the reporting (e.g. 56:8), yet iollo seems to distinguish one of the fatty acids and combines the other two. This is helpful of course as there is more data. But it means the iollo data could have positive, neutral and negative TAGs within an overall positive TAG category (such as 56:8). Meaning trying to increase each TAG in the e.g. 56:8 category many not be the right strategy. Perhaps your continued experiments would shed some light on this at least in N of 1.
Mike - What was happening at Test 3? Was that tryptophan?
600 mg of nicotinic acid + 1g of tryptophan/d...but whether that caused it, or is normal variability, need more data...
Hi Michael, the audio is very low again. fyi, jt
Sorry to hear that, @johntaylor7952. Got any suggestions? The computer is new, the microphone is right next to my face...
@@conqueragingordietrying123 I'm sorry I don't. :(
I can predict the main correlative factor - saturated fat.
Keep SF low = low overall triglycerides and higher relative levels of the good triglycerides.
SF high = higher overall triglycerides
Maybe, but I'd bet a lot more factors are involved, too, including inflammation
Triglycerides can be manufactured from carbohydrates and proteins.
my triglycerides are 45mg/dl. I drink glasses of heavy cream 33% each day, slather butter on everything, and cook all my hot food using coconut oil. My sugar consumption is next to zero.
U tellem bro! all the data is used as a smokescreen the proof is in the pudding or rather the Tbone buttered sidedish@@JeffreyRGriese
@@rejiequimiguing3739 I eat a very low fat diet and high carb (esp high glycemic carbs) with a lot of protein and my trigs are 50, so there must be some mediating factor
Do you know why iollo combine two of the fatty acids? They are doing a good job to get one of the three as most of the previous studies I've seen were combining all three.
iollo's MS tech is probably better able to identify at least 1 of the 3 FAs, in contrast to published studies reporting the sum, but not any individual FAs.
Wondering if u continued to take fish oil?
For Test #4 in the video, but I dropped it after that. I may increase fish intake to further that experiment...
I don’t know if you have some good discount on iollo, but if you did it would be really cool to do this test on 3-4 consecutive days to see how much this stuff varies from day to day.
That's a question that can't be answered in just 4 tests, but I intend on using their kit indefinitely, so we'll have that data, but it will take some time.
Fishoil lowered my triglycerides at least vasepa did.
On another note the study about 160 minutes of strength training being beneficial, are we considering rest times or is it time under tension = 160 minutes? Because my gym sessions are 1hr long, but clearly not all of that is under a weight
I personally think the only lipid number that should matter is ApoB, but doctors don't generally requisition that and most people are left with imperfect approximations (e.g. LDL-C). A ratio that is often used it Trigs/HDL, which apparently should be under 2. Not sure if it really matters You already said elsewhere that the optimal HDL for longevity appears to be around 55, so that means trigs should be under 110.
My trigs are typically low. They've been in the low to mid 20s for the last few years, down from a high of 55 when I was on a strict keto diet and my lipid markers generally were through the roof. Needless to say, I changed my diet and now they're back to normal.
For CVD maybe, but there are many metabolic pathways that impact living to 85y (defined as longevity in the video), and some TGs being high, while keeping overall TGs may be a good strategy for living at least that long.
I am concerned with this nomenclature of simply counting carbon atoms and double bonds, and loosing thw distinction between saturated fats, omega-3 or omega-6 fats.
Reporting the exact FAs is easier said than done, we're at the limit of technology in this case...
Which foods specifically would therefore help? Thanks.
Not sure yet-I'll start calculating correlations after test #5, which I sent for analysis yesterday...
To my surprise 18:3 is only listed twice. It would need to pair up with a 38:4 to make a TG 56:7. Anyone knows why this isn't a valid combination?
Oh, because those aren't correlated.
You would need to find two fatty acids that add up to 38:4, such as Arachidic acid 20:0 + Stearidonic acid 18:4, and then if those were positive they would have a chance of showing up. If you search "fatty acids lipid numbers list" you'll find the number lists. Note 18:3 could be hidden in some of the diacyl numbers.
I'm not sure if iollo measures all possible combinations. They seem to be able to identify one fatty acid, just then the other two are combined, maybe someone can correct me if I'm wrong on that.
Interesting. Can we sum up simply as: triglycerides high in Omega-6 PUFA is bad and low in Omega-6 PUFA may be associated with longer life? If so, that'll be c/w with what we already about Omega-3 and -6 PUFA.
Hey @rzcheng, maybe not, as some O6-PUFAs were found in some of the longevity-associated TGs, like 20:4.
my triglycerides are 45mg/dl 😅
That's great, but as shown in the video, keeping TGs low while having selected TG species high may be good for living to at least 85y.
This looks like fish and beef.
Could be...
Hi everyone. I've looked through these studies and the different TAGs a few months ago. This is quite a complex area and its hard to know what the best approach is. Some thoughts that I came away with:
1) Since its generally accepted lower total TGs are better for longevity, that places an overall constraint on TGs, meaning we are better to look at ratios rather than absolute numbers. At a minimum I'd track both positive and negative TAGs and then form total positive, total negative, and neutral and analyse those categories separately.
2) The formation pathways of TGs seem simple at first but have some nuances, and analysing each TAG separately is worthwhile if you are interested in TAG components from diet.
3) TAGs at this level of granularity are probably sensitive to intake a few days in the past, rather than only average 6-8 weeks, which would complicate interpretation and make standardisation important.
4) Grouping TAGs by their composition, such as all positive TAGs with at least one DHA, seems like a sensible approach if one is interested in diet effects.
5) On the other hand maybe the best dietary intake markers are TAGs with 2 or 3 copies of the fatty acid in question, assuming there is a competitive process in operation.
6) Many other interventions can change total TG levels, such as exercise, and it would be easy for confounding effects from other interventions to make analysis and interpretation of these high granularity TAGs very murky without careful control.
I follow a keto diet, and have done before but very dirty. I didn't like how a lot of research seemed very smoky with mortality rate and triglycerides in general. This video helps shed some light on it at least. I feel much better when my diet is more "plant" based, going from bacon and eggs as a staple to coleslaw with walnuts and olive oil, with fish oil being my no-negotiation with supplementation.
Hopefully I'll be in a position to track a lot of my markers soon. I'd hate trying to modify my diet/life for longevity to find out one area is a massive red flag. Keep loving the dream for those who can't!
Conjugated linoleic acid is also a triglyceride, i believe and to my knowledge it should be very good for health. Any knowledge on this?
Along these lines, you might be interested in Trans-vaccenic acid and tumour growth. Pass me some cheese (part of the French parodox and transfats). And the role of fat cell lepton production and relief from neuropothy. Cheers.
My triglycerides are always 30-40. I haven’t been able to find out if this is really really good or really really bad.
mine are pretty low too. Seems to be a good thing
whats your full list of supps you take?
The most recent list is here: ruclips.net/video/3UxAQ3hkUek/видео.html
Update video for Test #7 coming in about a week
in my opinion, summing up the acyl residues for a tri-glyceride does not make much sense. they are all cleaved of when they going to enter the metabolism.
The ultra longer ones, beyond 22 or so, may serve more as signalling molecule than as a nutritional energy carrier, besides the fact that they are metabolized outside of the mitochondria. A higher ratio of C18 : any is known to have bad influence, especially C!8(0). So, as this is largely uncharted territory, in any analysis, I would group them in different ways. E.g not including those tri's containing an acyl shorter than 20, or those containing one without double bonds... etc etc.
I am very excited to see the relation to diet, and the relation to other bio markers.... :))
That's how the TG nomenclature is reported in metabolomics, it's standardized (not my designation, or iollo's). Also, you're assuming TGs are always cleaved, which may not be the case, either.
I broadly agree about the grouping, but I don't think anyone knows how best to group or not group at the moment. I would be fully inclusive and do everything and then try to sort of the resulting complexity in a Bayesian way using what we know about specific fatty acids and pathways. Overtime we may find that specific TAGs are markers for specific processes, while groups give different information.
@@conqueragingordietrying123 Mike is right on both counts, and yes they definitely don't have to be cleaved.
@@jamesgilmore8192 agree, sth like that I had in mind
Final comment on this hopefully Mike! In the Wang paper they do a Metabolite Set Enrichment Analysis and if you want a simple grouping for TAGs:
Positive: >56C or >3 double bonds
Negative:
Yep, thanks James, I saw that, but the grouping potentially includes TGs that weren't significantly associated with living to 85y. I prefer grouping based only on the significant TGs, in contrast.
@@conqueragingordietrying123 Thats OK Mike. Relying on significance is a frequentist approach, whereas Metabolite Set Enrichment Analysis is more Bayesian as it uses other information. Sometimes changes in a group of quantities is clearer than the change in any specific quantity and its good to have these additional approaches available.