HOW TO STAY YOUNG:

Starve-destroy-recycle-eat-build-eat-build-starve...

The human ecosystem (our internal environment) has the same processes as the environmental ecosystem. Destruction & Reconstruction is a universal process. This is how we stay young.

We should take our cue from the senolytic processes of nature. A coppiced Hazel tree is near immortal.
Too much destruction (chronic calorie restriction) and too much growth (hyperfunction/ constant eating) are both bad and lead to derangement.
'A single bout of resistance training induced rapid clearance of senescent cells in muscle' h/t @Mangan150

https://t.co/MW7oFn6bgm
"Conc: Rapid senescent cell clearance of human skeletal muscle during resistance exercise seems to associate with enhanced in situ phagocytosis. High protein availability accelerates resolution of muscle inflammation and promotes muscle increment after training" h/t @SPKP1124
After Resistance or High-Intensity training I sometimes eat directly after (with sufficient protein) but very often don't eat for a couple hours as I want to continue the 'destruction' process.
Physical Standards. Note: These all involve intensity without killing yourself.
FASTING - Why it works.

1 The brain ‘improves’ in response to hunger;

2 The body preserves itself in response to deprivation.

Seen as an evolutionary survival mechanism the fasting rationale becomes clear.

https://t.co/DTKkLkLGMc
Summary:

You have to recycle your body. Just like the environment recycles itself.

Hard exercise (on top of a good aerobic base/gen activity) but no need to overtrain. Work-out fasted (50% of time), eat 18/6, 2 meals a day, default is slight CR, + overfeeding once/twice a week

More from Science

@mugecevik is an excellent scientist and a responsible professional. She likely read the paper more carefully than most. She grasped some of its strengths and weaknesses that are not apparent from a cursory glance. Below, I will mention a few points some may have missed.
1/


The paper does NOT evaluate the effect of school closures. Instead it conflates all ‘educational settings' into a single category, which includes universities.
2/

The paper primarily evaluates data from March and April 2020. The article is not particularly clear about this limitation, but the information can be found in the hefty supplementary material.
3/


The authors applied four different regression methods (some fancier than others) to the same data. The outcomes of the different regression models are correlated (enough to reach statistical significance), but they vary a lot. (heat map on the right below).
4/


The effect of individual interventions is extremely difficult to disentangle as the authors stress themselves. There is a very large number of interventions considered and the model was run on 49 countries and 26 US States (and not >200 countries).
5/

You May Also Like