Last week, I sat in a session with Dr. David Sinclair, a professor of genetics at Harvard and a well-known apologist for various anti-aging strategies.

The session was mildly interesting, but not earth-shattering. As I listened, my mind wandered, reflecting on the last 25 years I have spent in the supplement industry.

To a large degree, I would say the supplement industry is like most things: the more things change, the more they stay the same. The current anti-aging craze is an example. When I first entered the industry, we had anti-aging, but we mainly talked about antioxidants.

Apparently, someone decided that “anti-aging” is a better marketing term, but the general idea is the same: Protecting cells from various stressors such as free radicals so that they won’t “grow old.”

Dr. Sinclair is one of the more prominent names in the anti-aging world, primarily because he makes some pretty aggressive claims. He is one of a few scientists who claim that not only can we stop aging, but we can also reverse it.

I am not going to take any position on his claims; I really don’t feel qualified. However, there are a few things I will note that you might find interesting:

• Sinclair’s views are debatable, and many scientists view them with outright skepticism.
• To his credit, Sinclair does not push any particular supplement brands. He pushes classes of supplements (which I will cover in a moment).
• Outside supplements, Sinclair’s views on staying young and healthy are mainstream and align with my own views, which I often share here. (Eat healthy, move, etc.)

Now, just for fun, I am going to give you his supplement recommendations. For some reason, he pretends to try to be secretive about these, and I have no idea why. Regardless, I am going to give them to you exactly as he shared them with us.

• NAD boosters (such as NMN): 1000 mg/day
• Berberine (or metformin): 1000 mg/day
• Resveratrol and fisetin: 1000 mg/day and 500 mg/day
• Spermidine: 6 mg/day
• Vitamins D3 (5K U) + K2
• Vitamins B6, B9, and B12
• Alpha lipoic acid: 500 mg/day
• Omega 3-6-9 fatty acids
• Nattokinase: 12K FUs/day

Again, his general goal for these supplements is to keep cells healthy. There is nothing very unusual here, though some of his recommendations (such as resveratrol) are a bit controversial.

Sinclair believes that we are on the cusp of enormously lengthening the lifespan of humans (to around 150 years). He shared many studies being conducted at Harvard that show great promise.

If you want to learn more about his beliefs and studies, here is his Wikipedia article.

I am not sure what to say about a lot of what I heard. While Sinclair is not selling supplements, he wants to be relevant, and the best way to be relevant is to make claims that are a bit outlandish and over the top. Generally, that is the framework through which I view him. I wouldn’t say he is dangerous though; his tips and regimen might strike you as surprisingly mainstream.

In fact, the country is full of people doing very similar health regimens already (but sadly, not living to 150 years old).

Controversial anti-aging strategies

For sure, the anti-aging industry is becoming increasingly crowded, with some approaches being sold that I would say are gimmicky. Here are examples:

• Young blood/plasma transfusions. Inspired by parabiosis studies in mice, some clinics offer young donor plasma infusions.
• Metformin for longevity. This diabetes drug shows promise in some studies for healthy aging, leading to off-label use by biohackers.
• Rapamycin/mTOR inhibitors. Initially an immunosuppressant, rapamycin extends lifespan in lab animals.
• Hyperbaric oxygen therapy. Marketed for cellular repair and telomere lengthening, but evidence for anti-aging benefits is mixed.
• Red light/infrared therapy. Claims about mitochondrial enhancement and skin benefits are popular on social media.
• Peptide therapies. Various synthetic peptides are marketed for growth hormone release, cellular repair, and longevity.
• Cryotherapy and cold exposure. Potentially beneficial for recovery and stress response.

All I can say is to be careful and hold onto your wallets. You will find great marketing behind these approaches, but not one of them has much in the way of scientific support.

None of us enjoys getting older, but unfortunately, avoiding aging seems to be a pretty tough nut to crack.

Foto de Malin K. en Unsplash

I frequently discuss weight management here. It is not because I am vain; it is because weight management is important.

I get that there is a growing crowd that wants to pretend that obesity is not a problem and, in fact, is normal. Unfortunately, they are wrong. The science matters, and the science is very clear: there are very few (if any) more important things you can do for your overall health than actively manage your weight. The list of risks associated with being overweight is extensive.

That being said, it is absolutely true that the number you see on a scale does not tell the tale. You have to take that number with a grain of salt. I want to go into the reasons for that, and then tell you the metric you really need to focus on.

The “noise” problem

There are a lot of misconceptions about weight gain and loss, and one of the biggest revolves around the “noise” that surrounds your body weight.

Here are examples of noise. Some of these may be obvious to you, but are not obvious to everyone.

• If you drink a liter of water and step on a scale immediately afterward, you will “weigh” 2.2 lbs more than you did before you drank the water.
• If you urinate an hour later, you will suddenly “lose” a pound or two.
• If you eat dinner at 8:00 pm, you will probably weigh more the next day than if you had eaten at 5:00 pm.
• If you eat a salty meal, you will probably weigh more the next day than if you had eaten the exact same meal with less salt. (This is due to the salt increasing your water retention.)
• If you exercise hard for an hour and sweat a lot, you may “lose” up to 3 lbs (if you are not drinking water during the workout).

As you may have noted, this noise generally involves the amount of water in your body, which comes and goes. Don’t get too excited or worried about what the scale says at one particular time. You cannot gain or lose much real weight in a day, but your scale may show a variance of 3-4 pounds a day simply due to water.

Avoid trying to fool yourself by working this noise to your advantage. For example, it is a fool’s errand to exercise for two hours without drinking anything, so that you can comfort yourself with a low weight number immediately afterward. That is not real weight loss.

The “measuring the wrong thing” problem

There is an element of truth to be found in the “obesity is normal” crowd, and that is this: The number on a scale does not mean too much anyway. BMI calculations don’t mean much either.

I am not out of shape, but my BMI is right at 25 (the border between normal and overweight). Why? Because I have a bit more muscle mass than the average person.

If I chose to buy into just trying to hit a number on the scale so that my BMI looks better, I would be making a big mistake. Here’s why: Your weight is actually a component of four primary things.

• Músculo
• Fat
• Hueso
• Agua

Weight loss management does not affect bone mass, of course, and while it does affect water mass, we have already noted that water mass is just noise.

Weight loss management affects both muscle and fat, but here is something very important: You do not want your muscle mass to shrink. Regardless of what the scale says, this is not something to celebrate. I do not want a BMI of 24 if it means I have to give up 5 pounds of muscle.

Muscle mass is extremely important as you age, and ironically, it is your muscle mass that actually helps you burn more calories. Losing weight at the expense of losing muscle is not a winning strategy. This is a big part of why protein is so popular in weight loss right now.

The only number that you want going down

So, water mass is noise, bone mass is unaffected by weight management, and muscle mass should be protected.

That means the only actual body mass you want to reduce is fat.

Ideally, your fat mass should be the only thing shrinking when you are trying to lose weight.

This is the problem with using a scale to measure your weight. A scale weight is not a measurement of your fat mass. Scales essentially measure the wrong thing.

A solution to this problem

Sadly, measuring fat mass in the human body is not easy, and if you want accuracy, can be expensive.

There are several options on the market.

• Some scales attempt to measure fat by sending signals through the body. They are not horribly expensive, but likely not very accurate.
• Body fat caliper measurement systems are unsophisticated but inexpensive. They work if you follow directions carefully.
• Some doctors and clinics have more sophisticated and accurate machines. My Orange Theory gym, for example, has a machine for this purpose. Unfortunately, there is often a charge for using them (in my case, the machine is part of the membership fee).

If you are serious about weight management, I encourage you to choose one of these methods and start measuring your fat content on a monthly or quarterly basis. You can use the scale as well to stay on track in a general way, but it’s crucial to find a way to monitor your fat intake.

Remember your goal: Lower your fat but protect your muscle. Muscle matters.

A mantra I often repeat here: If a diet is unbalanced, it is probably bad for you.

This is common sense, and it is especially true when the imbalance in diets comes from eliminating fruits and vegetables.

But, alas, even healthy people fall for these kinds of fad diets, which is why I am going to discuss the carnivore diet today.

What is the carnivore diet?

The carnivore diet involves consuming exclusively animal products while eliminating all plant foods. This typically means eating meat, fish, eggs, and sometimes dairy products, while completely avoiding vegetables, fruits, grains, legumes, and other plant-based foods.

Potential benefits

Proponents of the carnivore diet report several potential advantages:

Weight loss is possible due to the diet’s naturally low carbohydrate content and high protein intake.

The elimination of processed foods and simple carbohydrates may lead to more stable blood sugar levels, potentially benefiting individuals with insulin resistance or type 2 diabetes.

Many followers report reduced inflammation and improvement in autoimmune conditions.

The diet’s simplicity appeals to those who struggle with food choices or have multiple food sensitivities, as it eliminates most potential trigger foods.

Some people experience improved mental clarity and energy levels, possibly due to stable blood glucose and ketosis from minimal carbohydrate intake.

The high protein content supports muscle maintenance and growth, while the elimination of anti-nutrients found in some plants (like phytates and lectins) may improve nutrient absorption for certain individuals.

Animal products provide highly bioavailable forms of nutrients like vitamin B12, iron, and complete amino acid profiles.

Significant concerns

The complete elimination of plant foods means missing out on essential nutrients like vitamin C, fiber, folate, and thousands of beneficial plant compounds called phytonutrients. This nutritional restriction could lead to deficiencies over time, despite animal products being nutrient-dense.

The lack of dietary fiber is particularly problematic, as fiber supports digestive health, feeds beneficial gut bacteria, and helps regulate cholesterol levels.

Long-term adherence may negatively impact the gut microbiome diversity, which is crucial for immune function and overall health.

The diet’s high saturated fat content and absence of heart-protective plant compounds could potentially increase the risk of heart disease.

The restrictive nature makes the diet difficult to sustain both socially and practically. This is not an insignificant thing.

The elimination of potentially beneficial plant foods like berries, leafy greens, and nuts means missing out on compounds with proven anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties.

The verdict

While some individuals may experience short-term benefits from the carnivore diet, particularly those with specific autoimmune conditions or severe food sensitivities, the short-term benefits generally have no real science backing them, and the long-term effects are probably flat-out bleak.

Most nutrition experts recommend a more balanced approach that includes a variety of both animal and plant foods.

So do I.

The A2 milk industry has exploded in recent years, with companies like The a2 Milk Company commanding premium prices by promising easier digestion and reduced gastrointestinal discomfort. But beneath the slick marketing lies a fundamental question: is A2 milk a legitimate health innovation or an elaborate marketing scheme designed to extract more money from consumers’ wallets?

The science behind the claims

A2 milk contains only the A2 variant of beta-casein protein, while conventional milk contains both A1 and A2 proteins. Proponents argue that A1 protein breaks down during digestion to produce a peptide called BCM-7, which allegedly causes inflammation and digestive issues. This theory sounds compelling, but the scientific evidence remains frustratingly thin.
Several small studies have suggested that some individuals experience less bloating and stomach discomfort when drinking A2 milk compared to regular milk. However, these studies are limited in scope and often funded by A2 milk companies themselves, raising questions about bias. The European Food Safety Authority has stated that current evidence doesn’t support claims that A1 protein causes negative health effects in the general population.

The marketing machine

What’s undeniable is A2 milk’s marketing prowess. The industry has successfully positioned itself as a solution for people who experience discomfort after drinking milk, often targeting those who assume they’re lactose intolerant. This is particularly clever because many people who struggle with regular milk may actually be reacting to other components entirely, not specifically the A1 protein.
The premium pricing strategy is telling. A2 milk typically costs 50-100% more than conventional milk, despite coming from cows that require no special feed or care beyond genetic testing. This price premium suggests the value proposition lies more in perception than production costs.

The lactose confusion

Perhaps the most problematic aspect of A2 milk marketing is how it can mislead consumers about lactose intolerance. A2 milk contains the same amount of lactose as regular milk, yet marketing often implies it’s suitable for people with milk sensitivities. This confusion can lead genuinely lactose-intolerant individuals to waste money on an expensive product that won’t solve their underlying problem.

The verdict

Calling A2 milk an outright “scam” would be unfair. Some consumers do report feeling better when switching to A2 milk, and there’s legitimate scientific rationale behind the protein difference. However, the evidence supporting dramatic health benefits remains weak, and the marketing often oversells limited research.

The reality likely lies somewhere in the middle. A2 milk may provide modest benefits for a subset of consumers with specific sensitivities, but it’s not the revolutionary health breakthrough that marketing suggests. For most people, the premium price isn’t justified by demonstrable health advantages.

Consumers would be better served by first determining whether their milk-related discomfort stems from lactose intolerance, milk protein allergies, or other factors before assuming A2 milk is the solution. While not technically a scam, A2 milk represents a classic case of marketing outpacing science—a premium product built more on promise than proven performance.

Foto de Anita Jankovic en Unsplash

A recently published meta-analysis (essentially an analysis of multiple clinical studies) attempted to answer an important question: Can probiotics help older adults think better?

Key Research Findings
The analysis found that probiotics significantly improved cognitive performance compared to a placebo in older adults already experiencing memory and thinking difficulties. Study participants were between 60 and 82 years old, with many having cognitive impairment related to Alzheimer’s disease.

The research examined various probiotic formulations, primarily containing Lactobacilli and Bifidobacteria strains. Treatment periods ranged from 4 to 52 weeks, though 12-week interventions were most common across the studies.

Why? Understanding the Gut-Brain Connection
The relationship between gut bacteria and brain function becomes increasingly important with age. Older adults typically have less diverse gut microbiota than younger people, and those in long-term care facilities show even greater reductions in bacterial diversity compared to those living independently.

Probiotics may support cognitive health through several biological mechanisms. They can reduce inflammation throughout the body, improve blood sugar regulation, and decrease oxidative stress; these are all factors that contribute to brain aging and cognitive decline. Chronic inflammation and poor glucose control have been consistently linked to increased dementia risk.

Animal research has provided additional understanding of how gut bacteria influence brain function. Studies show that probiotics can reduce stress responses and increase levels of GABA, a neurotransmitter that promotes calmness and mental clarity. Some research also suggests that certain probiotics can increase brain levels of DHA, an omega-3 fatty acid essential for proper brain function.

Two surprising results
I was particularly interested in two takeaways from the study. First, single-strain probiotics actually seemed to work better than multi-strain probiotics for improving cognitive function. Second, the best benefits appeared in situations where participants took probiotics for 12 weeks or less.

To be honest, I’m at a loss for words about these two conclusions, except that I was surprised by both of them.

Conclusion
Current evidence suggests that probiotics may offer cognitive benefits specifically for older adults who already have memory or thinking problems. The supplements may be particularly helpful for those with more significant cognitive difficulties.

Probiotics are generally considered safe with minimal side effects and have many benefits beyond just improved cognition. For those reasons, we can heartedly recommend them. We look forward to seeing further high-quality studies that will help determine the best probiotic strains, optimal dosages, and treatment duration for cognitive health.

Foto de Rohtopia.com en Unsplash

For a health newsletter, I may talk about coffee a bit too much, in glowing terms at that. There is a reason: I have a bias in that coffee is just pretty important to me.

There are two important aspects of coffee that extend beyond its taste and the presence (or absence) of health benefits.

• Coffee is my ritual during a very important part of the day for me: the 30-60 minutes after I first get up, where I intentionally try to stay unproductive and relaxed. That is important. I will go to the mat for that ritual, not just because it improves quality of life, but also because it is healthy to invest my time that way.
• Coffee is a community-building activity. I recently read a great article making a case for alcohol consumption. The gist was that alcohol is a ritual in which people get to know each other (at a local bar, etc.), and has been an important social lubricant for thousands of years. Alcohol is not a big part of my life, but I get the point, and coffee is often my substitute for alcohol in that regard. Sometimes, I just drink with Marla, and sometimes, it is with other people. However, coffee is generally a communal experience.
  For these two reasons, I will unapologetically argue that coffee makes my life better. Perhaps I could switch to a healthier drink, but I haven’t found anything that works as well.

Now, that being said, a new study recently published makes a bold claim that coffee consumption is connected to healthy aging. In other words, from a health perspective, you can “have your coffee and drink it too.” 🙂

The study examined the relationship between coffee consumption and healthy aging in over 47,000 female nurses followed for several decades starting in the 1970s. The research found that women who consumed the most caffeine (equivalent to nearly seven cups of coffee daily) between the ages of 45-60 had 13% higher odds of healthy aging compared to those consuming the least (less than one cup daily).

The study defined “healthy aging” as women who were 70 or older in 2016, reported good physical and mental health with no cognitive impairment, and were free of 11 chronic diseases, including cancer, Type 2 diabetes, heart disease, and Parkinson’s disease. Only about 3,700 women met these criteria.

Importantly, the benefits were specifically linked to caffeinated coffee. Drinking tea or decaffeinated coffee showed no association with healthy aging, possibly because participants consumed less of these beverages overall, or due to their different caffeine content and chemical compounds. Interestingly, cola consumption was associated with significantly decreased odds of healthy aging.

The findings align with extensive research linking coffee to health benefits. A recent study of over 46,000 U.S. adults found that consuming one to three cups daily reduced death risk by about 15% over nine to 11 years. However, this benefit disappeared when people added more than half a teaspoon of sugar or significant amounts of saturated fat to their coffee.

Previous research has also connected regular coffee consumption to lower risks of heart disease, Type 2 diabetes, Parkinson’s disease, liver disease, osteoporosis, and certain cancers. While these observational studies cannot prove causation, the consistency of findings across multiple studies suggests genuine benefits.

Researchers aren’t entirely certain why coffee may be protective. Caffeine appears to improve memory and protect brain cells in animal studies, while both regular and decaf coffee contain hundreds of compounds that may reduce inflammation and prevent cell damage.

Here is my advice: if you don’t drink coffee now, don’t feel any compulsion to start in the hopes of improving your health. Focus on more proven health strategies like balanced nutrition, regular exercise, adequate sleep, and social engagement.

But, if you do drink coffee and it improves your life, including in the areas of mindfulness and engagement with other people, don’t feel guilty. Drink up!

Foto de Jakub Dziubak en Unsplash

A year or so ago, I recorded this video comparing the various chlorophyll options at Caring Sunshine.

The reason I am bringing up this video again is not because of which of our chlorophyll options is the best value (Clorofila ES, by the way), but to remind you of how we think you can effectively price-shop supplements in any category.

And, let’s be real: this is a good time to talk about how you can save money. There does not seem to be a lot of extra money lying around these days 🙂

Let’s talk about this in terms of questions that we typically get at Caring Sunshine. Here are two very common ones:

• How many capsules are in the bottle?
• How much does the product cost?

The main problem with these questions is that they are focused on the wrong things. When considering the cost of supplements, your primary focus should be on a metric that few companies readily provide: the cost per day.

If a product contains 30 tablets and the instructions call for you to take one per day, that represents a 30-day supply. If the price is $30, the cost per day is $1.

Asking how many capsules are in a bottle is not helpful unless you know how many of those capsules you will be taking each day. Only when you know both numbers can you accurately calculate your actual cost.

At Caring Sunshine, we provide the cost per day for every product and even give you the ability to sort and filter products based on cost per day. It is important to us that you have that information.

I wish I could say it is that easy to price shop supplements, but it isn’t. As you hear me discuss in the video above, you sometimes need to isolate down to the active ingredient in products, normalize the amounts of active ingredients between products, and then compare the cost per day based on the quantity of those active ingredients.

And obviously, there are other factors that can complicate things as well: the quality of ingredients, the form of the ingredients, and much more.

However, if cost is your primary concern, cost per day is a metric you should consider first. Get used to looking at the cost per day on Nature’s Sunshine products if you can.

One last tip, which most of you will find obvious. With no exceptions, buying bigger sizes (when available) always saves you money. There is a big difference in the cost per day between buying the 180-count Vitamin D3 vs the 60-count Vitamin D3. You also save money buying the 2-pack of Chlorophyll ES vs the single bottle.

Foto de Corinna en Unsplash