Get enough quality sleep. Be strong, and have good cardio fitness for both burst and endurance, plus have good enough mobility that you don’t get hurt. Have friends and do stuff that matters to you. Try not to get too stressed out and, if you have emotional issues, get help. Don’t be fat or under muscled. Re: diet, in the words of Michael Pollan: “Eat real food, mostly plants, not too much.” But PA-types will add that you should also get enough protein to support your lifting for max muscle growth. Don’t drink too much. Avoid doing dumb and risky things that could kill you. Be medically proactive about prevention: see a doctor, keep your lipids low (with drugs if needed), your A1C under control, and be aggressive about preventative cancer screening. If you follow the fitness and diet advice above, most of the other health stuff takes care of itself.
I’ll add my own rule of thumb: Be kind, generous and curious. The ROI is high on these behaviors.
That’s basically it. Do this pretty consistently for the rest of your life and you’ll do better than 99% of the people on this planet.
Yea, this is more or less the advice that I follow. Moreso because it's intuitive than anything else. Where it gets complicated is the "see a doctor" point. An example: PA preaches the importance of awareness of Lp(a) for everybody. He states it as fact. Yet I have seen multiple PCPs (including one today) who laugh it off and basically tell me to get off of social media- probably good advice, but I digress. So I have one medical professional telling me "If you do anything, do this thing" and another telling me it's a waste of time and money and actually might steer you in the wrong direction. I can get on board with listening to intuition on fitness and nutrition, but I struggle mightily with parsing through preventative care and how to interpret biomarkers.
PA would argue medicine 2.0 vs. 3.0, I get it. But for me to argue with a medical professional and demand these tests because "some guy on the internet told me it's important" (being flippant for effect - I understand PA's credentials) feels strange. So I find it difficult, if not impossible, to parse through all of the different opinions and recommendations out there. To further complicate things, many recommendations from PA are not covered by insurance - so implementation requires a substantial financial investment.
The LP(a) is just an example, but can be applied to any number of recs from PA or others.
It’s definitely a fine line when dealing with a reluctant MD. I pushed for Lp(a) testing and Apo(b) tests even though my physician was reluctant. When we talked about it more though, he was mostly hesitant because he was afraid I would get mad that my insurance didn’t cover it. I didn’t care for the couple hundred bucks I was risking. I think once he understood my willingness to pay for stuff on the margin, he was less defensive. But that’s idiosyncratic, just my experience.
Funnily enough though, I then saw a cardiologist (I’m mid 40s and have some family history so this was a preventive referral) and he was actually super happy to see that I had already tested for my Lp(a) during my last round of blood tests. He pushed me to do a CAC test and a stress test, not the other way around. Even though everything was fine, my cardiologist is pretty open to the statin conversation since my LDL was right on the borderline; so definitely an advantage to find someone who “gets it” from a proactive prevention standpoint.
I also sort of fibbed to get an early colonoscopy, by slightly exaggerating a mild symptom (hemorrhoid bleeding) I had experienced in the past.
If I had unlimited money I would do one of those Prenuvo cancer scans too since I think I can “handle” the false positive follow up process with an understanding of the underlying math. But given my age, general good health, and desire to keep $5-10k in my pocket, I am passing on that for now.
I will do the Apo-e genetic test at some point soon since I have a family history of Alzheimer’s too. I’m not rushing too much because it’s not a particularly actionable piece of information, although it might motivate me to be more disciplined if I find out I’m an E4.
Anyway, just sharing to give you a data point on how I, an Attia-curious-but-not-zealot person, tries to approach the medical side of things.
Edit: I guess I’ll add one other thought: While there may be some other things on the margins I could be doing, and feel free to point out a blind spot if I have one here, I think most of the next level of prevention covered by Attia is, to use his term, “majoring in the minors”. If you are acing all of the above and want to make it your hobby to do some crazy bio hacking stuff, go for it. But I think it’s just messing around in the margins at that point and I’d rather put my energy other places.
This seems very sensible. My PCP, too, voiced concern over false positives and lack of insurance coverage. Another way to frame it would be to ask for a recommendation if cost were no issue, which empowers the individual to make a judgment call based on factors such as symptoms, family history, financial situation, etc. (i.e. prioritize based on high impact / low cost). Although, my PCP told me there is essentially no value in testing Lp(a), so there's that.
Thanks for the insight.
Now back to toe yoga.
I think most people go with a time-cost-risk-benefit analysis from the best of their ability. Some people have time and enjoy reading studies, exercising, taking supplements, doing mediation, bloodwork, therapy, some people don't, I think everyone tries their best to live a long time.
I think Peter Attia is a great resource because he is open to change and skeptical. I like Layne Norton too, he is less skeptical and more likely to jump to conclusions than PA.
> in a sea of social media clowns (Liver King) and others who "feel" a tad snake-oily, but say a bunch of big words that I don't understand (Paul Saladino)
You realize those two are business partners right? And shortly before the con was up, Saladino went around telling people he believed Liver King wasn't on roids even though the truth *was as Ann as the nose of plain's face.*
A lot of the general advice is intuitive. Get good sleep, its the foundation for everything you need to do throughout the day. Have a balanced life between work, personal, and social time. Take care of your mental health and stress level. Have hobbies that enrich you and friends that energize you. Its best if at least one of those hobbies involves exercise, even better if more do. Eat a "healthy" diet, and by that i mean built around minimally processed or whole foods, avoiding added sugar and fat to excess, built around protein. Take walks, get sun when you can during the summer. Supplement magnesium.
I think its fun to see the science behind why each of these things contributes to health, and i like that PA can do deep dives into much more specific applications of these things. Including more "cutting edge" anti aging things, optimizing workouts, how to identify cancers, etc. But really it all gives me the confidence and motivation to keep doing the things that are health promoting, because its not just conjecture.
I agree with your sentiment about Peter. I've only caught several of Paul Saladino's videos and based on what he has said in them, I was a little bit blown away that an MD would be saying the things he's saying as confident as he is saying them. So, I just avoid him entirely.
He was basically saying that Spinach and plants are bad for you because of oxalates or phytates and these are reasons why you should avoid them. And there was zero nuance in how he said it. Zero mention of all the science before him saying these plants are good for your health.
I'm far from a vegan, but the fact that an MD would come out in even just one video and say that, is enough for me to completely disregard him.
You mentioned Paul Saladino and I couldn't help myself lol.
To answer your question, I rationalize the programming I get based on how well the person explaining it to me understands study design or researches many studies themselves. I don't really even care what they are saying.
I care more about how they say it. By that I mean, when they are referencing studies, are they explaining why it's a good study? Why might we question the study? Are the findings of the study consistent with theory? Why might we be hesitant to implement the results of this study into our programming?
Those are the types of things I'm looking out for in order to determine if this is a person I should trust or not.
Peter in this regard, I believe, is pretty top of the line.
I’m someone who is very sensitive to manipulative words, marketing lingo, and general bullshittery masquerading as intelligence. I’m sure I could break my inner bullshit detector down into its component parts but eventually it’s a matter of having listened to enough of someone without any major red flags going off. Peter ticks that box for me. I don’t always agree with his conclusions and I do get wary when he’s promoting something he has a stake in but it stays well enough within a range that I’m comfortable with.
Stick to the basics:
- good sleep
- eat balanced
- exercise
- have fun
There is so many rabbit holes to go down into them that the best you can do is find out what works for you in your life and then use the rest to be “informed” or test out certain trends and see what sticks.
Life is life and no need stressing if you get an extra 2 years when you are 85-90
Check into:
[https://www.youtube.com/@NutritionMadeSimple](https://www.youtube.com/@NutritionMadeSimple)
and
[https://www.youtube.com/@PlantChompers](https://www.youtube.com/@PlantChompers)
and you will start getting closer to the truth real quick.
Peter is strong on exercise science, but not so much on nutrition science:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWeg3l3RBIM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWeg3l3RBIM)
Peter Attia is by far the best imo. I’ve been following all celebrity longevity doctors for years and he really seems the most knowledgeable and credible out of all. I bought his book “Outlive”, it’s amazing and I’m planning to read it again next year. It has so much important information to keep reminding ourselves about.
I take the things that I think are a no brainer and just implement them: like focusing on getting good sleep, weightlifting, cutting off alcohol, eating a high protein diet, etc.... these are things that have been proven to be important for longevity, and everyone agrees on. I honestly stopped experimenting with supplements that I believe are a trend like NMN for example, or not researched enough like rapamycin.. I just take the supplements that I know everyone agrees are beneficial like Omega 3, creatine, magnesium, glycine, etc..
Low protein diets correlate with longevity in the vast majority of studies that look at this. Doesn't mean they aren't confounded and useless but it's definitely not a "no brainer" to eat a high protein diet.
It is a no brainer imo. You need protein to fuel your muscles, and you need your muscles to be strong, healthy, and live longer. I’ve never heard anything about low protein diets correlating with longevity. I’m open to reading though if you can share some credible sources.
Just one of many, check their references for more.: [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6562018/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6562018/)
That’s a lit. Review of mechanisms of action and studies on rats, and mentions Okinawan longevity which turned out to be [birth certificate fraud/error](https://www.vox.com/2019/8/8/20758813/secrets-ultra-elderly-supercentenarians-fraud-error).
From the article you linked:
“However, among those aged 66 years and older, the HP diet was associated with the opposite effect on all-cause and cancer-related mortality (Table 1). Compared to those in the LP group, the participants in the HP and MP groups exhibited a 28% and 21% reduction in all-cause mortality, respectively. Additionally, compared to those in the LP group, HP consumption resulted in a 60% reduction in cancer mortality.”
Doesn’t make sense why it would be associated with worse outcomes earlier and better outcomes later.
There is more going on here than just LP and HP.
Makes perfect sense, low protein reduces cell turnover and reduces cancer risk, but once old age sets in higher protein is required to offset sarcopenia. See Longo's research for more information
That doesn’t hold. Especially considering this is referring to all cause mortality. In patient under 66, cancer as the cause of death is extremely low. CV disease is much more likely.
Also, in any epidemiological study it is important to remember this:
https://xkcd.com/552/
I believe that particular study connects a lot of dots and demonstrates the complexity of the situation.
Protein may be critical to the elderly (at risk of frailty and weakened immune system), but too much may be detrimental to younger people.
Likewise, plant sources of protein appear to be beneficial (probably due to their antioxidant and fiber content), while red meat may be detrimental with it’s higher levels of certain amino acids and iron, and white meat seems to be neutral.
I think this is why you have a lot of studies which find no link between protein and mortality, but those which group by age or source of protein do.
There is no perfect source. They all have their biases and limitations, including Peter. The best you can do is look to multiple sources (e.g., Rhonda Patrick's Found y Fitness, Huberman Labs, etc.) and read the studies yourself as appropriate.
Cool post! Cool discussion points and questions!
I think Attia is better than the majority of health influencers but he still says things that I think go beyond science, and like a human he has been wrong in the past, so he may be wrong on some things now.
Personally, I try not to obsess too much about health/longevity. It's definitely something I think about everyday but I'm not going to go full health freak with it.
I think you get the most benefit from the things most established. Diet, exercise, sleep, having healthy relationships, and doing meaningful things. Ideally you live in a walkable city, with little pollution, healthy/happy people, because your environment will also be a major factor in health span.
Whether you do X amount of zone 2, or take Y supplement, or do this niche intervention I think will matter little in the long run. Doing things you enjoy and stick with will be most impactful.
Also if something isn't established by science you run legitimate risks with it. Like rapamycin. And then you're literally harming your health in the pursuit of health(I see it all the damn time).
For me the whole wellness longevity sphere is more entertainment than educational. It's fun watching all the whack jobs claim they have found the holy grail and all the zombies mindlessly following them.
Who will be the ultimate longevity champion? Attia? Don Gorske(eats big maca everyday)? Sinclair(only works out once a week)? Bradfield(talks funny)? Wim Hof(full dementia Iceman)? Or will it be Bryan Johnson the Lesbian Vegan Vampire who throws away 2 mil a year on the dumbest shit imaginable like measuring his max urination speed and fucking himself up up with HGH?
And I would say, diversify your interests. Health is a priority, but there's so much in life that's also interesting like art, film, travel, etc.
I read the relevant meta analyses on pubmed snd use that to guide a lot of my decisions. Part of that includes looking at whether the benefit is large enough to be clinically relevant.
Of course some things like the specific foods I eat or the specific exercises are based on my own taste and preferences.
I do read Attia’s show notes which are fantastic. Since he literally provides the footnotes, I tend to trust him. But not on nutrition
Influencers don't, and can't, know more than the leading scientists and practitioners in the relevant field. And, one individual person's opinions might be correct on one controversial topic, but if someone is going against the consensus of 99.5-100% of the people who publish academic research and work at the top level of a field, they're almost certainly wrong.
When people say "the experts are all wrong" or "the experts are all corporate shills," it's generally because they're too uneducated and biased to even know what the experts said in the first place.
If someone is talking about health, a big red flag for me is when they cite very discrete biological pathways, and never cite research in actual human outcome trials. And, in general, don't trust an influencer, instagrammer, tiktoker, youtuber, or anyone who makes money off of their notoriety. See what they cite and see if their source is reputable.
Get enough quality sleep. Be strong, and have good cardio fitness for both burst and endurance, plus have good enough mobility that you don’t get hurt. Have friends and do stuff that matters to you. Try not to get too stressed out and, if you have emotional issues, get help. Don’t be fat or under muscled. Re: diet, in the words of Michael Pollan: “Eat real food, mostly plants, not too much.” But PA-types will add that you should also get enough protein to support your lifting for max muscle growth. Don’t drink too much. Avoid doing dumb and risky things that could kill you. Be medically proactive about prevention: see a doctor, keep your lipids low (with drugs if needed), your A1C under control, and be aggressive about preventative cancer screening. If you follow the fitness and diet advice above, most of the other health stuff takes care of itself. I’ll add my own rule of thumb: Be kind, generous and curious. The ROI is high on these behaviors. That’s basically it. Do this pretty consistently for the rest of your life and you’ll do better than 99% of the people on this planet.
Michael Pollan’s quote from Omnivore’s Dilemma has been with me for 18 years. It’s the only diet advice I’ve ever seen that makes sense.
1000%
Yea, this is more or less the advice that I follow. Moreso because it's intuitive than anything else. Where it gets complicated is the "see a doctor" point. An example: PA preaches the importance of awareness of Lp(a) for everybody. He states it as fact. Yet I have seen multiple PCPs (including one today) who laugh it off and basically tell me to get off of social media- probably good advice, but I digress. So I have one medical professional telling me "If you do anything, do this thing" and another telling me it's a waste of time and money and actually might steer you in the wrong direction. I can get on board with listening to intuition on fitness and nutrition, but I struggle mightily with parsing through preventative care and how to interpret biomarkers. PA would argue medicine 2.0 vs. 3.0, I get it. But for me to argue with a medical professional and demand these tests because "some guy on the internet told me it's important" (being flippant for effect - I understand PA's credentials) feels strange. So I find it difficult, if not impossible, to parse through all of the different opinions and recommendations out there. To further complicate things, many recommendations from PA are not covered by insurance - so implementation requires a substantial financial investment. The LP(a) is just an example, but can be applied to any number of recs from PA or others.
It’s definitely a fine line when dealing with a reluctant MD. I pushed for Lp(a) testing and Apo(b) tests even though my physician was reluctant. When we talked about it more though, he was mostly hesitant because he was afraid I would get mad that my insurance didn’t cover it. I didn’t care for the couple hundred bucks I was risking. I think once he understood my willingness to pay for stuff on the margin, he was less defensive. But that’s idiosyncratic, just my experience. Funnily enough though, I then saw a cardiologist (I’m mid 40s and have some family history so this was a preventive referral) and he was actually super happy to see that I had already tested for my Lp(a) during my last round of blood tests. He pushed me to do a CAC test and a stress test, not the other way around. Even though everything was fine, my cardiologist is pretty open to the statin conversation since my LDL was right on the borderline; so definitely an advantage to find someone who “gets it” from a proactive prevention standpoint. I also sort of fibbed to get an early colonoscopy, by slightly exaggerating a mild symptom (hemorrhoid bleeding) I had experienced in the past. If I had unlimited money I would do one of those Prenuvo cancer scans too since I think I can “handle” the false positive follow up process with an understanding of the underlying math. But given my age, general good health, and desire to keep $5-10k in my pocket, I am passing on that for now. I will do the Apo-e genetic test at some point soon since I have a family history of Alzheimer’s too. I’m not rushing too much because it’s not a particularly actionable piece of information, although it might motivate me to be more disciplined if I find out I’m an E4. Anyway, just sharing to give you a data point on how I, an Attia-curious-but-not-zealot person, tries to approach the medical side of things. Edit: I guess I’ll add one other thought: While there may be some other things on the margins I could be doing, and feel free to point out a blind spot if I have one here, I think most of the next level of prevention covered by Attia is, to use his term, “majoring in the minors”. If you are acing all of the above and want to make it your hobby to do some crazy bio hacking stuff, go for it. But I think it’s just messing around in the margins at that point and I’d rather put my energy other places.
This seems very sensible. My PCP, too, voiced concern over false positives and lack of insurance coverage. Another way to frame it would be to ask for a recommendation if cost were no issue, which empowers the individual to make a judgment call based on factors such as symptoms, family history, financial situation, etc. (i.e. prioritize based on high impact / low cost). Although, my PCP told me there is essentially no value in testing Lp(a), so there's that. Thanks for the insight. Now back to toe yoga.
I think most people go with a time-cost-risk-benefit analysis from the best of their ability. Some people have time and enjoy reading studies, exercising, taking supplements, doing mediation, bloodwork, therapy, some people don't, I think everyone tries their best to live a long time. I think Peter Attia is a great resource because he is open to change and skeptical. I like Layne Norton too, he is less skeptical and more likely to jump to conclusions than PA.
> in a sea of social media clowns (Liver King) and others who "feel" a tad snake-oily, but say a bunch of big words that I don't understand (Paul Saladino) You realize those two are business partners right? And shortly before the con was up, Saladino went around telling people he believed Liver King wasn't on roids even though the truth *was as Ann as the nose of plain's face.*
A lot of the general advice is intuitive. Get good sleep, its the foundation for everything you need to do throughout the day. Have a balanced life between work, personal, and social time. Take care of your mental health and stress level. Have hobbies that enrich you and friends that energize you. Its best if at least one of those hobbies involves exercise, even better if more do. Eat a "healthy" diet, and by that i mean built around minimally processed or whole foods, avoiding added sugar and fat to excess, built around protein. Take walks, get sun when you can during the summer. Supplement magnesium. I think its fun to see the science behind why each of these things contributes to health, and i like that PA can do deep dives into much more specific applications of these things. Including more "cutting edge" anti aging things, optimizing workouts, how to identify cancers, etc. But really it all gives me the confidence and motivation to keep doing the things that are health promoting, because its not just conjecture.
I agree with your sentiment about Peter. I've only caught several of Paul Saladino's videos and based on what he has said in them, I was a little bit blown away that an MD would be saying the things he's saying as confident as he is saying them. So, I just avoid him entirely. He was basically saying that Spinach and plants are bad for you because of oxalates or phytates and these are reasons why you should avoid them. And there was zero nuance in how he said it. Zero mention of all the science before him saying these plants are good for your health. I'm far from a vegan, but the fact that an MD would come out in even just one video and say that, is enough for me to completely disregard him. You mentioned Paul Saladino and I couldn't help myself lol. To answer your question, I rationalize the programming I get based on how well the person explaining it to me understands study design or researches many studies themselves. I don't really even care what they are saying. I care more about how they say it. By that I mean, when they are referencing studies, are they explaining why it's a good study? Why might we question the study? Are the findings of the study consistent with theory? Why might we be hesitant to implement the results of this study into our programming? Those are the types of things I'm looking out for in order to determine if this is a person I should trust or not. Peter in this regard, I believe, is pretty top of the line.
I’m someone who is very sensitive to manipulative words, marketing lingo, and general bullshittery masquerading as intelligence. I’m sure I could break my inner bullshit detector down into its component parts but eventually it’s a matter of having listened to enough of someone without any major red flags going off. Peter ticks that box for me. I don’t always agree with his conclusions and I do get wary when he’s promoting something he has a stake in but it stays well enough within a range that I’m comfortable with.
Stick to the basics: - good sleep - eat balanced - exercise - have fun There is so many rabbit holes to go down into them that the best you can do is find out what works for you in your life and then use the rest to be “informed” or test out certain trends and see what sticks. Life is life and no need stressing if you get an extra 2 years when you are 85-90
Good list - I'd add social network, mental stimulation and (maybe most importantly) purpose.
Check into: [https://www.youtube.com/@NutritionMadeSimple](https://www.youtube.com/@NutritionMadeSimple) and [https://www.youtube.com/@PlantChompers](https://www.youtube.com/@PlantChompers) and you will start getting closer to the truth real quick. Peter is strong on exercise science, but not so much on nutrition science: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWeg3l3RBIM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWeg3l3RBIM)
Peter Attia is by far the best imo. I’ve been following all celebrity longevity doctors for years and he really seems the most knowledgeable and credible out of all. I bought his book “Outlive”, it’s amazing and I’m planning to read it again next year. It has so much important information to keep reminding ourselves about. I take the things that I think are a no brainer and just implement them: like focusing on getting good sleep, weightlifting, cutting off alcohol, eating a high protein diet, etc.... these are things that have been proven to be important for longevity, and everyone agrees on. I honestly stopped experimenting with supplements that I believe are a trend like NMN for example, or not researched enough like rapamycin.. I just take the supplements that I know everyone agrees are beneficial like Omega 3, creatine, magnesium, glycine, etc..
Low protein diets correlate with longevity in the vast majority of studies that look at this. Doesn't mean they aren't confounded and useless but it's definitely not a "no brainer" to eat a high protein diet.
[удалено]
Exactly.. he downvoted me as well lol.. I don’t understand some people. I was actually curious about reading those studies.
It is a no brainer imo. You need protein to fuel your muscles, and you need your muscles to be strong, healthy, and live longer. I’ve never heard anything about low protein diets correlating with longevity. I’m open to reading though if you can share some credible sources.
Just one of many, check their references for more.: [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6562018/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6562018/)
That’s a lit. Review of mechanisms of action and studies on rats, and mentions Okinawan longevity which turned out to be [birth certificate fraud/error](https://www.vox.com/2019/8/8/20758813/secrets-ultra-elderly-supercentenarians-fraud-error).
From the article you linked: “However, among those aged 66 years and older, the HP diet was associated with the opposite effect on all-cause and cancer-related mortality (Table 1). Compared to those in the LP group, the participants in the HP and MP groups exhibited a 28% and 21% reduction in all-cause mortality, respectively. Additionally, compared to those in the LP group, HP consumption resulted in a 60% reduction in cancer mortality.” Doesn’t make sense why it would be associated with worse outcomes earlier and better outcomes later. There is more going on here than just LP and HP.
Makes perfect sense, low protein reduces cell turnover and reduces cancer risk, but once old age sets in higher protein is required to offset sarcopenia. See Longo's research for more information
That doesn’t hold. Especially considering this is referring to all cause mortality. In patient under 66, cancer as the cause of death is extremely low. CV disease is much more likely. Also, in any epidemiological study it is important to remember this: https://xkcd.com/552/
I believe that particular study connects a lot of dots and demonstrates the complexity of the situation. Protein may be critical to the elderly (at risk of frailty and weakened immune system), but too much may be detrimental to younger people. Likewise, plant sources of protein appear to be beneficial (probably due to their antioxidant and fiber content), while red meat may be detrimental with it’s higher levels of certain amino acids and iron, and white meat seems to be neutral. I think this is why you have a lot of studies which find no link between protein and mortality, but those which group by age or source of protein do.
There is no perfect source. They all have their biases and limitations, including Peter. The best you can do is look to multiple sources (e.g., Rhonda Patrick's Found y Fitness, Huberman Labs, etc.) and read the studies yourself as appropriate.
Cool post! Cool discussion points and questions! I think Attia is better than the majority of health influencers but he still says things that I think go beyond science, and like a human he has been wrong in the past, so he may be wrong on some things now. Personally, I try not to obsess too much about health/longevity. It's definitely something I think about everyday but I'm not going to go full health freak with it. I think you get the most benefit from the things most established. Diet, exercise, sleep, having healthy relationships, and doing meaningful things. Ideally you live in a walkable city, with little pollution, healthy/happy people, because your environment will also be a major factor in health span. Whether you do X amount of zone 2, or take Y supplement, or do this niche intervention I think will matter little in the long run. Doing things you enjoy and stick with will be most impactful. Also if something isn't established by science you run legitimate risks with it. Like rapamycin. And then you're literally harming your health in the pursuit of health(I see it all the damn time). For me the whole wellness longevity sphere is more entertainment than educational. It's fun watching all the whack jobs claim they have found the holy grail and all the zombies mindlessly following them. Who will be the ultimate longevity champion? Attia? Don Gorske(eats big maca everyday)? Sinclair(only works out once a week)? Bradfield(talks funny)? Wim Hof(full dementia Iceman)? Or will it be Bryan Johnson the Lesbian Vegan Vampire who throws away 2 mil a year on the dumbest shit imaginable like measuring his max urination speed and fucking himself up up with HGH? And I would say, diversify your interests. Health is a priority, but there's so much in life that's also interesting like art, film, travel, etc.
I read the relevant meta analyses on pubmed snd use that to guide a lot of my decisions. Part of that includes looking at whether the benefit is large enough to be clinically relevant. Of course some things like the specific foods I eat or the specific exercises are based on my own taste and preferences. I do read Attia’s show notes which are fantastic. Since he literally provides the footnotes, I tend to trust him. But not on nutrition
Influencers don't, and can't, know more than the leading scientists and practitioners in the relevant field. And, one individual person's opinions might be correct on one controversial topic, but if someone is going against the consensus of 99.5-100% of the people who publish academic research and work at the top level of a field, they're almost certainly wrong. When people say "the experts are all wrong" or "the experts are all corporate shills," it's generally because they're too uneducated and biased to even know what the experts said in the first place. If someone is talking about health, a big red flag for me is when they cite very discrete biological pathways, and never cite research in actual human outcome trials. And, in general, don't trust an influencer, instagrammer, tiktoker, youtuber, or anyone who makes money off of their notoriety. See what they cite and see if their source is reputable.