supplements

Supplements, medications and Silicon Valley vampires: the promise of living (well) over 100 years: Crossover 1×40

by

A few weeks ago we brought Dr. José Hernández, an expert in longevity and rejuvenation, who told us about what it really means to get older And what technologies allow us to stop this curse? biological. Well, the thing did not stop there, because in the pipeline we had this second installment of an interview that now goes even further. Thus, on this occasion we focus especially on the drugs and medications that try to extend our longevity and let’s also do it with quality of life. There are some here usual suspectsand there has long been talk about how certain supplements can contribute to human longevity. We took the opportunity to talk about Mounjaro and Ozempic and how these medications “reprogram” the brain and what impact that strategy can have. But in addition, Jaume de la Hoz —who is “deep inside” this segment, as he says— reviews many other drugs and supplements in addition to taking the conversation to another fascinating terrain: that of the vampires of Silicon Valley and that of millionaires like Brian Johnsonwhich has become famous for its unique methods of rejuvenation. Without a doubt, an exciting topic in which, of course, AI can also play a fundamental role. Platforms like AlphaFold and their implications when it comes to proposing a potential revolution in biology are certainly promising, but here we have to be cautious: There are many expectations and, at the moment, few certainties. On YouTube | Crossover

collagen supplements are not delivering what they promise

by

For years, we have been sold collagen as some kind of shortcut to youth. It seemed that it was enough to cast a tablespoon of coffee powder, take one capsule a day either join the latest fashion routine on networks to, supposedly, stop the clock. Creams, supplements and drinks have ended up making this protein the main protagonist of current anti-aging discourse. However, that narrative is beginning to crack. More and more scientific evidence, supported by dermatologists, agrees that collagen supplements do not work as we think. In many cases, there is not even clear evidence that they do anything. The gap between what marketing promises us and what science really says is today greater than ever. Collagen, under scientific review. The notice does not come from just any blog or from a passing criticism; It comes straight from academic dermatology. According to ScienceDailyspecialists insist that there is no conclusive evidence to support the use of these supplements to effectively combat skin aging. Dr. Farah Moustafa, dermatologist and professor at Tufts University, she is very clear about it: “Oral collagen supplements are not currently recommended to treat skin aging, although they may be considered alongside other more effective and better-studied interventions.” A good melon has opened. The debate does not center on whether or not there are favorable studies, but rather on what type of studies support these claims. As Moustafa explainsafter reviewing 23 clinical trials, a pattern that gives food for thought was detected: Studies with positive results were usually of low quality or paid for by the brands themselves. The most rigorous, independently funded studies found no real benefits from taking collagen. In other words, when the level of scientific demand is raised, the promised effect is diluted. Everything is born from a misunderstanding. Much of the success of collagen is based on an idea that seems logical but is false: “If I lose collagen, I eat it and get it back.” But the body is not a reservoir that is refilled like this. It is true that collagen is key since It represents 30% of our protein and supports skin, bones and tendons, and it is also true that over the years we make less, which brings wrinkles and sagging. The mistake is in believing that ingesting it means sending it directly to the face. At Tufts Universityremember that the digestive system It breaks everything down into small pieces (amino acids) before absorbing it. Once inside, the body distributes these pieces according to its biological priorities (such as organs or muscles), which do not always coincide with our desire to look better. There is no way to guarantee that this “material” end up in the dermis. Reformulation of the message. Seeing this biological obstacle, the message has been mutating. They no longer just sell plain collagen; Now they talk about hydrolyzed collagen, peptides, marine or even vegetable. The idea is to sell you that, if the body does not absorb the entire protein, perhaps it will make better use of these loose pieces. Even so, the data continues to be taken with a grain of salt. Although some studies find modest improvements in the hydration or elasticity of the skin, most of these works are small in size, analyze supplements that contain other added ingredients (vitamins, minerals) and do not allow the real effect of collagen to be isolated. Furthermore, even in the best case scenario, there is no control over where that newly synthesized collagen will be used. But there is an added problem. Beyond effectiveness, dermatologists warn about another less visible aspect: the safety and control of supplements. According to Dr. Moustafacollagen supplements, especially those of marine origin, can be contaminated with methylmercury. Added to this is a structural problem, supplements do not go through the same controls as medications. According to the American Academy of Dermatology, cited by ScienceDailymany of the supplements available do not have third-party verification, do not clearly detail their ingredients, and have not been previously evaluated for safety or effectiveness. However, this regulatory gap is not exclusive to collagen; we can also observe it in stem cell supplements in a strategy known as scienceploitation. So what do dermatologists really recommend? Experts do not say that you should stop taking care of yourself, but rather that you should go back to what has been proven. According to dermatologists consulted by ScienceDailythe best tricks are the usual ones: Use sunscreen daily to prevent UV damage. Regular application of topical retinoids at night. Balanced diet, rich in protein and vitamin C. Avoid tobacco and reduce sun exposure. Collagen as a cultural phenomenon. The rise of collagen cannot be understood from biology alone. This boom also responds to a increasing aesthetic pressureamplified by social networks, filters and discourses of constant self-optimization. The obsession with “staying young” does not affect everyone equally. The anti-aging industry disproportionately targets women, reinforcing the idea that aging is a flaw that must be corrected. In this context, collagen becomes not only a supplement, but a symbol of a social demand. While science advances cautiously, the market accelerates. The global skin care industry moves hundreds of billions of dollars, and constantly needs new ingredients, promises and narratives to sustain its growth. The end of a myth (or at least, an exaggerated promise). The current medical consensus does not state that collagen is useless, but rather that it is not the miracle it has been sold. It does not rejuvenate the skin on its own, it does not directly reach where it promises and, in many cases, it offers benefits that are difficult to distinguish from a good general diet. In the end, real health is less glamorous than a bottle of shiny powder: it’s about perseverance, good habits, and understanding that aging is not a mistake that can be solved with capsules. Perhaps the problem is not collagen itself, but our need to believe that youth can be bought and bottled. Image | Unsplash and freepik Xataka | The … Read more

How Amazon Has Been Filled With Supplements That Sell Imitation Science

by

Just over 20 years ago, the stem cell research promised a revolution against disease and aging. These master cells, with the potential to become any tissue in the body, seemed the key to true regenerative medicine, something that It moved away from the complex reality that we have inside our body. Although there are different merchants who try to sell us stem cells as a true wonder. Distorted. Something we are accustomed to (unfortunately) is that where science hits the brakes, the market hits the accelerator. In the infinite Amazon showcase, next to the vitamins and the collagen supplementsa new family of miracle products has emerged: stem cell supplements. Of course, they cannot contain cells in a capsule or in a cream, but that does not promise them to stimulate or regenerate them. Something that for many is the most ideal. This is something that a group from the Health Law Institute of the University of Alberta (Canada) has decided to investigate. has put the magnifying glass on this emerging market. To do this, it analyzed 184 of these products from 133 different companies associated with Amazon.com and has been able to conclude that behind an apparent scientific rhetoric hides a deliberate strategy to avoid regulation and deceive the consumer. The trick. The study published in the journal Stem Cell Reports shows how the sellers of these supplements exploit a legal loophole that allows them to launch ambiguous health messages without the need to demonstrate their effectiveness. The labels carefully avoid terms such as ‘cure’ or ‘prevent’ diseases, something that legislation prohibits. Instead, they use harmless verbs like “support,” “promote,” or “maintain” brain health, energy, or healthy aging. This ambiguity is its main weapon. In the United States and Canada, regulations allow calls structure/function claimswhich are vague claims that link a product to overall well-being without requiring rigorous clinical testing. That loophole is where most of these supplements slip through. The data. They can be summarized in several points: More than 40% of products explicitly mentioned “science” or “scientific evidence” to support the features they promised. 35% included references to health professionals or scientists to reinforce legitimacy. 94% of the supplements made promises related to specific ailments by pointing out that they were anti-aging, strengthened immunity or increased the consumer’s energy. This type of marketing, which the authors call scienceploitation (exploitation of science), “gives the consumer the impression that there is broad scientific support, which contrasts with the current state of stem cell therapies,” the study warns. Regulation. The strategy works because regulation in North America barely requires testing for safety or efficiency before a supplement hits the market. In theory, public bodies can sanction misleading advertising, but their oversight capacity is minimal. In the United States alone, it is estimated that there are more than 100,000 supplements in circulation. In practice, you only have to add a phrase that is “this statement has not been evaluated by the FDA” for pseudoscience to become legal. In Canada, although a license from Health Canada is required, a 2021 audit found that the agency did “little” to prevent poor consumer information from being provided. The case in Spain. Although the study in question focuses on the United States and Canada, its conclusions can be extrapolated. In Spain, any statement about health must be authorized by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) or the Spanish Agency for Medicines and Health Products (AEMPS). However, law enforcement on the internet is often very lax, and on Amazon.es you can find products with language very similar to that reported by researchers. Products on Amazon.es that promise anti-aging effects thanks to the stem cells they contain. The authors of the work, led by Alessandro R. Marcon and Timothy Caulfield, warn that this situation not only harms consumers’ pockets, but also erodes trust in science and real research on stem cells. Selling products without a scientific basis under the umbrella of biotechnology is, they conclude, a form of marketing that exploits the prestige gained by science to sell smoke. Images | Doodlart mmmCCC In Xataka | Amazon lost 25 billion with Echo because no one bought with it: now it punishes you with constant advertising for having bought it

A man gave up his image for $ 750 without thinking too much. Your double digital now “sells” horoscopes and supplements

by

Scott Jacqmein charged $ 750 and a trip. In return, she delivered her image for an external agency to make her a Avatar Digital For a year. That avatar has appeared in Tiktok Selling horoscopes, supplements and insurance in Spanish and other languages, although Jacqmein lives in Dallas and has not recorded any of those ads. His face, without his usual beard, continues to circulate in videos generated by artificial intelligence. With the contract he signed, he has no simple ways to stop him. The man signed a license to use his image for twelve months, without royalties, and without legal representation to advise him. The agreement was not with Tiktok directly, but with an external agency that, According to The New York Timesgathered actors material to create avatars for advertising purposes. At the time, he saw that recording as a professional opportunity. Today, he acknowledges that he did not fully understand how his digital image would be used or in what kind of campaigns would appear. AI AVATARES: Licenses, Control and Business Seeing his double digital speaking another language and moving with an expressiveness that is not his was, for Scott Jacqmein, a disconcerting experience. The only real thing in those pieces is the original source: the face and voice that delivered an agency under contract. Although videos include a “Ai-generated”the realism of avatars makes this warning easily pass unnoticed, probably pending as authentic testimonies in the Feed of users. According to the American newspaper, the Jacqmein avatar is part of a catalog that Tiktok offers companies as an advertising tool. Advertisers can choose between several profiles, age, gender and appearance, and Generate videos directly from the platformno need for filming. These avatars are free for brands and are used in Tiktok advertising service, within a creative suite called Symphony. Jacqmein does not have clear contractual mechanisms to stop the use of his avatar. The license he signed with the agency was for a year, although it has not been made public at what exact moment of 2024 was formalized. Until this month, he says, his acquaintances continued to warn him that they saw him in Tiktok ads, which suggests that his image is still active in recent campaigns. The actor regrets not having negotiated restrictions on products, languages or environments in which his avatar could be used. On the left, Scott Jacqmein’s avatar created by AI for ads on Tiktok. On the right, the actor in a real image taken during a walk Jacqmein’s story is a reflection of the type of situations that may arise in an environment where artificial intelligence It allows to replicate faces and voices easily. We do not know if all agreements of this type are managed the same, but this case shows what can happen when the terms are not clearly defined. In a digital world where opportunities multiply, the consequences of what we sign can also do. In the prominent image that accompanies this article, the avatar generated by AI appears on the left and the real photography of Jacqmein, on the right. Images | Scott Jacqmein | Tiktok capture In Xataka | Duolingo believed that AI was his ally. GPT-5 has just demonstrated that it can be its mortal competition

We had supplements to live more, improve our strength and sleep better. Now we have one to get less angry

by

We are likely to associate the name “Omega-3” for the beneficial effects that these fatty acids have on our cardiovascular health. However, over time we have discovered that these compounds They have more advantages. Let’s not lose the papers. For example, Now we know That the consumption of omega-3 fatty acid supplements is related to less aggressiveness. It is the conclusion reached by a group of experts after reviewing almost thirty studies on the subject published between 1996 and 2024. Omega-3. Surely we have heard on numerous occasions about the Omega-3 but what are they really? It is a group of polyunsaturated fatty acids that we often obtain through fish consumption (especially species such as northern bonito or white tuna, mackerel, salmon, sardines and trout), but which we can also find in other foods, such as nuts, flaxseed oil, soybean or chia seeds. We usually associate these fatty acids with better cardiovascular healthand for good reason: they reduce the presence of triglycerides (other types of fat present in our blood, these not so beneficial), as well as decrease the possibility of developing arrhythmias or the accumulation of plaque in our arteries. These fatty acids can also help us reduce blood pressure. Body and mind. But the studies carried out around the physiological benefits of these compounds have been complemented with analysis on the psychological and neurological impacts. Studies like a decade ago He detected a relationship between these nutrients and schizophrenia, or clinical trials that began establishing their relationship with aggression levels. 29 randomized essays. The team responsible for the new analysis compiled 35 independent samples extracted from 29 studies (including 3,918 participants) published between 1996 and 2024. From this exhibition, the team conducted a meta -analysis, a quantitative study of compiled essays. This served to detect modest but statistically significant effects in the relationship between Omega-3 and aggression. The team estimated a reduction of almost 30% in the levels of aggression, apart from gender age, diagnosis, duration of treatment and dose. The analysis found evidence that these fatty acids could reduce both reactive aggression (in response to a provocation), such as provocative (planned) aggression. The details of the study were published In an article In the magazine Aggressive and Violent Behavior. Continue investigating. Those responsible for the new study indicate that the fact that Omega-3 fatty acids are a normal component of our diet that we can find in a simple way in the form of supplement makes them a harmless treatment when reducing aggressiveness. Therefore, although there are important limitations regarding what we know about its effectiveness, they recommend their use, even as a complement to other measures. “The Omega-3 is not a magical bullet that will solve the problem of violence in society. But can it help? Based on these findings, we firmly believe that it can, and that we should start acting based on the new knowledge we have,” pointed in a press release Adrian Raine, co -author of the study. Despite this, the limitations that can be considered. For example, we do not know the biochemical mechanisms that could justify the casual relationship between Omega-3 consumption and the reduction of aggressiveness. In addition, according to Raine himself, analyzed studies focused mainly on short -term effects, so the task of evaluating them in the longer term is still pending. In Xataka | What food supplements really work and which are not, in a great graphic Image | Medieservice / Alesia Kozik

We believed that creatine was one of the most useful supplements to gain muscle mass. We are no longer so sure

by

Creatine is an old acquaintance of people who exercise in order to increase muscle. Evaluate in our own meat the effectiveness of a supplement is useless, especially because we surely accompany it with a strict exercise regime that will prevent us from distinguishing its net impact. That is why, if we ask ourselves to what extent the creatine works, we need to study it rigorously. Not so effective. And the verdict of the last study that has tested this substance It has not been favorable. In a study that included a 12 -week training program and the consumption of 5 grams daily of creatine supplement were not observed relevant differences between those who took the substance and those who did not. “We have shown that taking five grams of creatine supplement per day does not make any difference in the amount of muscle mass that people earn when performing resistance training,” explained in a press release Mandy Hagstrom, co -author of the study. “The benefits of creatine could have been overestimated in the past due to methodological problems,” the researcher adds Creatine. Creatine, or α-methyl guanido-acetic acidit is a compound that can be found naturally in our body, especially in the muscles and cells of our nervous system; And also in some foods, such as red meat, fish and shellfish. Creatine molecules are formed from three amino acids and Stores phosphocreatinemainly in the muscles. There is used as a source of energy. That is why the creatine supplement is used to obtain better results when exercising and gaining muscle mass. 54 participants. The recommended maintenance dose of this supplement is between three and five grams per day. The 54 study participants, aged between 18 and 50, were divided into two groups, some would begin to take five grams Creatine Monohydrate (CRM) first and a week later they would start a 12 -week resistance program. The second group would also face this exercise program, but without the supplement. The food of both groups was monitored to verify that there were no relevant differences in their diet. Both groups increased their muscle mass, but they did it in a similar way, about two kilos won during the period. The details of the study were Published in an article In the magazine Nutrients. The problem is in the water. Part of the study key is in time: that the experimental group (the one who took the supplement) began this “treatment” before training allowed the team to test (and verify) a hypothesis, that a part of the muscle increase that we associate with creatine is due to a greater water retention. The team observed that, during this first week, indeed, the group (and especially women in this) began to gain muscle mass, a 0.5 kg difference that dissipated after starting training. Hagstrom pointed out, of course, that more studies are still necessary to understand the impact of water retention associated with the consumption of this supplement. Dose question? The study responsible for the study suggests that, in addition to water retention, the chosen dose could also have had effect on the results. The five grams daily represent the upper limit of the recommended daily maintenance dose, but those who consume This supplement They often resort to a “load phase” that implies consumption between 20 and 25 grams of the supplement per day. This possibility was discarded by the equipment since these consumption levels, they explain, can cause gastrointestinal problems and is not necessary to achieve saturation levels. However, they affect the need to carry out additional studies with intermediate doses, for example of 10 grams. They also point out that longer -term studies could help us better understand the impact of creatine supplements on the increase in muscle mass. In Xataka | The 17 best apps to exercise Image | Aleksander Saks / Victor Freitas

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.