Mike41

What about the confounder wherein low ldl levels occur with illnesses. I thought that was part of the problem with these studies. Many issues like malnutrition, cancer etc can cause lower ldl levels which would associate it with higher mortality but not be a cause

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10982736/ Looks like moderation in all things! Not to much and not to little! Among primary prevention-type patients aged 50–89 years without diabetes and not on statin therapy, the lowest risk for long-term mortality appears to exist in the wide LDL-C range of 100–189 mg/dL, which is much higher than current recommendations. For counselling these patients, minimal consideration should be given to LDL-C concentration

According to consumer labs Fisher walnut halves were the top pick. Diamond had mold whereas fisher had none. Aflatoxins, and heavy metals were also tested as well as hexanal which is a natural source protectant preventing deterioration.

Hi McCoy, your right two drinks is too much. Just go with the good science. It’s a slam dunk that light amounts of quality red wine with a meal is a good habit. YEAH ETHANOL IS A TOXIN. BUT THE POISON IS IN THE DOSE AND THE CONTEXT!!! LOTS OF POISONS IN THE PLANT WORLD ARE AMAZING SUBSTANCES FOR HEALTH IN THE PROPER SETTING, DOSE AND CONTEXT. THE HEADLINES ARE ABOUT ETHANOL. THEY DONT BOTHER DIGGING HARD INTO THE FACTS. SO NOW WE HAVE THIS EVIDENCE ABOUT ETHANOL AND JUST SAY NO TO ANY SOURCE, DOSE OR CONTEXT. TOTALLY MORONIC, BUT ITS THE EASY, LAZY WAY TO JUST MAKE THE MESSAGE STICK! ALCHOHOL IS BAD FOR YOU END OF STORY. TOO COMPLEX TO SAY WHAT IS ACTUALLY TRUE. STUDIES LOOK AT DRINKERS AND MANY ARE BINGING OCCASIONALLY AND CLAIMING A DRINK A DAY ETC. WELL WHATS A DRINK?? ITS A MESS. THE LINK OF WINE WITH CANCER IS AGAIN ABOUT HOW MUCH. THE EVIDENCE IS LESS CANCER IF AMOUNTS ARE LIGHT. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnut.2023.1197745/full

I agree Ron that industry influence is a concern, but the evidence for red wine is overwhelming and quite a few solid studies measuring physiology are not industry funded. Red wine is a very unique substance when aged and made properly.

Yes for most people, but Michael Rae was taking it many years ago!

Yes Dean, unfortunately!

For what it’s worth Sinclair is now taking taurine.

https://www.jacc.org/doi/10.1016/S0735-1097(22)02448-2

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6478559/ In summary, our studies reveal that the red wines, particularly mature wines (#1 and #3), dramatically decrease the rates of human cancer cell growth and colony formation, while diluted ethanol at same concentration boosts cell growth. The red wines also cause death of the grew up cancer cells and inhibit Pol III gene transcription. It implies that the red wine may contain some bioactive components and function potential to repress cancer development. Thus, identifying the bioactive components in red wine and enhancing their yielding ratio during producing processes will enhance the quality of red wine, which will benefit people with red wine consumption

Human studies are included in this video indicating considerable physiological benefits in older adults that turn back the aging effects Brad concludes that all people over 45 should consider supplemental intervention

Thanks Dean! That is reassuring. I can’t imagine do 30,000 steps a day. I’d be exhausted to say the least. Personally I shoot for 8000 steps as walking exercise including a bit of jogging and brisk hill climbing. Add that to my regular activities and I’m sure I meet the 11,000 threshold.

Thanks Mike for this. Are you taking glynac or considering taking it?