#26 - AMA #3: supplements, women's health, patient care, and more
Episode Stats
Length
2 hours and 9 minutes
Words per Minute
204.31122
Summary
In this episode, Dr. Peter Atiyah answers a bunch of your questions about women's health, supplements, and other topics. He also discusses his plans for monetization of the podcast, and gives advice to medical students and residents who are thinking about going through medical training or perhaps in medical training.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Hey, everyone. Welcome to the Peter Atiyah Drive. I'm your host, Peter Atiyah.
00:00:10.160
The drive is a result of my hunger for optimizing performance, health, longevity, critical thinking,
00:00:15.600
along with a few other obsessions along the way. I've spent the last several years working with
00:00:19.840
some of the most successful top performing individuals in the world. And this podcast
00:00:23.620
is my attempt to synthesize what I've learned along the way to help you live a higher quality,
00:00:28.360
more fulfilling life. If you enjoy this podcast, you can find more information on today's episode
00:00:41.360
Hi, everybody. Welcome to the Peter Atiyah Drive. This is an AMA episode, Ask Me Anything episode,
00:00:47.260
and it's our third such AMA. First time, however, that we use the site to aggregate questions. For
00:00:53.800
the prior ones, we'd done it through Twitter. This seemed a heck of a lot more efficient,
00:00:57.220
so I think we're going to continue to do this. So if you want to ask a question or vote up or down
00:01:02.740
on a question, just go to peteratiyahmd.com and you'll see a little AMA thing to click on the top
00:01:09.180
right part of that, and you can go ahead and do that. In this episode, which by the way, we also
00:01:13.220
did via video. So I think this is the first podcast where we also have a video that'll be released,
00:01:18.400
presumably going to be on YouTube or wherever, but we'll link to it here in the show notes. Maybe
00:01:21.700
there's somebody who prefers to watch this stuff as opposed to listen to it. In the future,
00:01:25.220
I suspect we'll do a couple things by video, but have no plans to do that en masse.
00:01:31.580
Let's see. What do we talk about? We talked about reference ranges for labs,
00:01:34.780
a lot of questions about where I draw my cutoffs versus where the laboratory might draw a cutoff.
00:01:40.220
Talked about women's health, specifically a couple of issues that I think are kind of
00:01:44.240
underappreciated, maybe understudied. Gave some advice to medical students and residents or people
00:01:48.900
who are thinking about going through medical training or perhaps in medical training. Talked about
00:01:53.680
what my plans are to monetize the podcast, which is something I'm going to need to do pretty soon.
00:01:58.860
Talked about the two wearables that I find most sticky, which is my sleep ring and my CGM,
00:02:05.360
my continuous glucose monitor. Talked about heart rate variability, how I use it, why I use it,
00:02:10.540
things like that. Discussed a number of supplements and drugs that people had some very specific
00:02:14.400
questions around, specifically statins, ezetimibe, baby aspirin, lithium, berberine,
00:02:19.480
metformin. And I think we talked also about nicotinamide riboside, which of course is
00:02:24.160
getting a lot of attention as an NAD precursor. We talked about the memoir that I'm working on
00:02:30.220
about being a shepherd. And we talked about that whole coconut oil as a poison thing and a bunch of
00:02:36.340
like recent epidemiologic studies that are sort of goofy. One thing I would like to remind people
00:02:40.960
about is I have a weekly email that comes out on Sundays. All you have to do is give us your email
00:02:45.580
and you'll be on the list. And I promise to make it not lame and worth the time to read
00:02:49.900
on the website. Remember there are show notes and I know I say this every time, but it's probably
00:02:54.620
worth reiterating. Sometimes these podcasts do get a little bit technical. And I think that
00:02:58.980
our team does a really good job trying to put notes in that make it a lot easier to go back
00:03:05.300
and either follow up on a, you know, a term that might be obscure or a study that we reference and
00:03:09.940
go over loosely. And I also want to point out a lot of the times when I'm talking just sort of off the
00:03:15.240
cuff, I'm getting things wrong. And this is where my team is. They're just, they're incredible,
00:03:19.840
right? They're going to go back. They're going to listen to everything I say, and they're going to
00:03:22.820
put the correction in the show notes. So just because I say something, you know, I think that
00:03:27.620
hopefully I don't say things that are wrong that often, but it's going to happen. But I'll cite a
00:03:31.360
study and I'll say, oh, there were 40 patients in it, blah, blah, blah, blah. No, actually, Peter,
00:03:34.440
there were 32 in it. And here's the link to the actual study. So that's the kind of stuff that's worth
00:03:38.020
doing. And then lastly, if you are enjoying these podcasts, please go to Apple and review them. I'm told
00:03:43.720
that that's actually a valuable thing to do. And if you don't like the podcast, yeah, don't go and
00:03:48.020
review it. Actually, that would be much appreciated. Okay. So with nothing else to say, welcome to AMA
00:03:52.740
number three. Hey, Bob. Peter. Welcome back to New York. Thank you. Thanks for having me. It's a huge
00:04:00.320
sacrifice to have you. Hey, everybody. Welcome back to our third slash second AMA. I guess technically our
00:04:09.340
second when you consider that the nothing burger one was very specific to the fast. Again, we're
00:04:14.020
still thinking that this might be a quarterly thing. We've got an AMA page up on the blog. So
00:04:18.160
now folks are asking questions and voting up and down and that's sort of making it much easier for
00:04:23.060
Bob Kaplan here. Who's my, I don't know, my right hand, my main man, my sidekick, my shepherd, whatever
00:04:30.360
to aggregate before that he was doing it through Twitter, which was super painful.
00:04:33.900
So let's see today. We have a lot of questions. I haven't looked at them yet, but I've like seen
00:04:41.620
on your screen, how many there are. It's stressing me out a little bit. Yeah. I'm suspecting it's
00:04:46.400
impossible to get through all of them. So maybe we'll just kind of try to draw a hard stop in a
00:04:51.020
couple of hours and see how far we got. Also, for those of you watching this, this is the first time
00:04:55.960
we're going to record one of these in video. So I have no idea if that's going to prove to be of any
00:05:01.500
value or not. Maybe it won't, but nevertheless, for those who like to be able to watch a couple
00:05:06.040
of knuckleheads drink their Topo Chicos, as opposed to just listen to the bubbles, welcome to my little
00:05:12.560
apartment. All right. All right. I'm going to let you take it away, Bob. Let's get started.
00:05:16.540
And so one of the features on the AMA page is a vote up, vote down feature. So we can see it,
00:05:22.460
which ones are more popular than others. So we'll bias some of those questions towards this.
00:05:27.780
And so one of the most popular questions was curious, what other reference ranges Peter
00:05:35.000
considers too soft? Okay. So this is sort of on the heels of the last podcast or the last AMA,
00:05:42.060
where I talked about my blood values before, during, and after the fast. So because I don't
00:05:47.360
remember what I actually talked about, I'll just probably just start from scratch and there might
00:05:51.380
be some repetition here. So as I just sort of think about going through the labs from start to finish,
00:05:56.060
when it comes to the lipids, I generally take a harder line on triglycerides than is typically
00:06:02.620
given. So the typical reference range on triglyceride is less than 150 milligrams per
00:06:07.440
deciliter. Apologize. I don't know what that is in millimolar for people who are outside of the United
00:06:11.600
States. I generally like to see triglycerides below 100. And if we're really going to get fancy,
00:06:18.280
I'd like to see triglycerides lower than HDL cholesterol when both are measured in milligrams
00:06:23.460
per deciliter. So again, that's probably a bit more of a stringent level that I would put on
00:06:28.820
things, but that that's sort of the first place I think about it. Secondly, looking at the LDL
00:06:32.720
particle number, which is measured in animal per liter, just morally and philosophically,
00:06:37.660
I feel like that number ought to be below a thousand animal per liter, which is about the 20th percentile
00:06:43.500
of the population. And the reason I feel that way is heart disease and atherosclerotic disease are the
00:06:48.080
most ubiquitous causes of death. So to be average on the disease that is the most common strikes me as
00:06:56.240
just backwards mathematics. So you have to, you really do need some alpha when it comes to a metric
00:07:01.020
like that. And I know that there's going to be some people watching this that are saying,
00:07:04.420
oh my God, LDL, there's all this controversy. I don't know when this podcast is going to come out
00:07:09.020
in relation to the discussion that I had with Dave Feldman about this and the discussion with Tom
00:07:14.220
Dayspring. So either by the time you're listening to this, hopefully that point will have been long
00:07:19.080
addressed. And if not, I assure you it will be addressed. So it might make sense to define what
00:07:24.980
reference ranges are because I think people might get confused with what is average and what is
00:07:31.560
optimal. And so people might look at, I don't know, that two thirds of the country is overweight and
00:07:38.900
or obese. And so when you look at the average, it's going to be different from what is actually
00:07:42.840
either normal or healthy. So thanks for bringing that up. So reference ranges are usually given
00:07:50.500
around a population distribution, but it evolves over time. So if you went and looked at a laboratory
00:07:59.140
test from 25 years ago and you looked at in the same units for the same variable, you know, for example,
00:08:06.480
ALT or AST, the transaminases, you would see different numbers. And all that's telling you is
00:08:13.380
every few years, the labs have to kind of update their reference range on what they're seeing in
00:08:17.420
the population. So for some things like hormones, you're often going to see, you know, between X and
00:08:24.360
Y and any lab will tell you upon asking, they usually don't print this on the lab, but we go back and
00:08:30.940
usually ask them, what do your reference ranges represent? And it's usually either 10th to 20th
00:08:38.360
percentile to 80th to 90th percentile, or two standard deviations below the mean to two standard
00:08:44.000
deviations above the mean. And again, that's usually something they could only say if the data
00:08:47.660
approximate a normal distribution, which many of these things do just like height, for example.
00:08:52.500
So you could report height as the average height or the, you know, interquartile range. So the
00:08:58.900
25th to 75th percentile of height, I'm making this up. If for a male in the United States would be,
00:09:04.240
I don't know, five foot eight to five foot 11 and a half. But of course, if you're asking a separate
00:09:10.520
question, which is if you're trying to optimize to be a rower, a heavyweight rower, you know,
00:09:15.280
someone who rows crew, you'd obviously want to be probably between six foot two and six foot four.
00:09:20.600
Again, I'm making that up. But the point is showing you that you would pick a range that's
00:09:24.940
completely outside of the statistical norm, because you're optimizing for something very
00:09:28.520
particular in that case rowing. So I basically just disregard all the reference ranges when I
00:09:33.440
look at labs and I kind of have my own set of standards that are based on my belief system
00:09:39.160
around what should and shouldn't be the case physiologically. So again, going down that list
00:09:43.560
after the LDL, I'd like to see the small LDLP below 500 nanomole per liter, which is represented
00:09:49.660
by the 50th, 25th percentile, pardon me. I like to see the oxidized LDL below 40. That's a very
00:09:56.380
stringent criteria because most labs will acknowledge that anything below 60 is reasonable.
00:10:00.980
I like to see that even lower. I like to see C-reactive protein below one, even though most labs
00:10:06.680
consider anything below two reasonable. Just kind of mentally scrolling through this, I like to see
00:10:11.520
uric acid below 5.0. Again, most labs consider anything below six to be normal. Some labs even
00:10:17.980
consider anything below seven to be normal. And again, I think in part that's because they're
00:10:21.940
optimizing around the prevention of gout and it's very unlikely you're going to have a gout attack
00:10:26.580
with a uric acid of 6.2. However, I think there are a number of other health consequences to that.
00:10:32.980
No. So ALT and AST, as of now on the lab that I use, the upper limit of ALT is 44, maybe 42,
00:10:45.180
and AST is about 40. I think both of those are unnecessarily high. And we typically like to see
00:10:54.940
Oral glucose tolerance test. You mentioned this, I think, maybe in another AMA. You talked about the
00:11:00.180
one hour, two hour, both insulin and glucose. Actually, you gave those.
00:11:03.740
Right. So again, I don't know. I can't remember what the reference ranges are on our lab, but I know
00:11:08.900
that they're geared primarily towards a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes. There was a day when you would use
00:11:14.300
the OGTT to diagnose type 2 diabetes and not what we do today, which is rely on hemoglobin A1c.
00:11:20.160
I think the use of an OGTT is a better test. And I think the hemoglobin A1c is not a particularly
00:11:24.920
helpful test. So yeah, I generally like to see the fasting glucose below 90 milligrams per
00:11:30.620
deciliter, the fasting insulin below six, and at one hour following a 75 gram glucola challenge. So this
00:11:38.180
is a liquid glucose challenge. Again, if you change the way that you do the test, you have to
00:11:43.980
come up with a whole new set of reference ranges. At one hour for a reasonably muscular male, I'd like
00:11:49.660
to see the glucose below 120 or maybe at a max 130 milligrams per deciliter in the insulin below 20
00:11:55.860
or 30. In a less muscular individual or in a woman who is just smaller, I will tolerate slightly higher
00:12:01.660
levels. And at two hours, I like to see the glucose back down to below 100 milligrams per deciliter
00:12:07.600
and the insulin ideally below 20 or potentially even only 2x what the one hour glucose was. So if
00:12:14.400
the glucose at one hour was eight, to see it at 16 or less at two hours would be great. You know,
00:12:19.340
on the hormone front, boy, it's complicated there because you're dealing with so many other issues,
00:12:25.140
which includes symptoms that go far and beyond just the numbers. But if someone's TSH is between
00:12:31.720
about 0.5 and 2.0 and their free T3 is above 3.0 and their reverse T3 is below 12, I find it very
00:12:44.000
hard to see how they could have hypothyroidism regardless of the symptoms they have. And if
00:12:49.280
they do have symptoms that sound and smell and feel like hypothyroidism, I'm generally searching much
00:12:55.120
harder for another cause, which again is not to say you can't be fooled. I think you always can be,
00:12:59.780
but that would be what I would consider sort of biochemically optimal for thyroid. And then of
00:13:04.700
course, I think it's probably too nuanced to get into a discussion of what happens when one or more
00:13:09.260
of those is out of whack. How do you begin to make the diagnosis? And I've probably talked about this in
00:13:13.980
the past, but you know, the TSH is really only telling you about what the pituitary gland is seeing
00:13:19.780
in terms of T4 to T4, T4 to T3 conversion. So that's telling you about the diodinase in the brain
00:13:26.720
that's making that distinction. The free T3 is telling you how much peripheral T4 is being
00:13:31.280
converted to T3. And then the reverse T3 is telling you how much peripheral T4 is being converted to
00:13:35.600
reverse T3, which opposes T3. And so the reverse T3 opposes T3 and each of those has a completely
00:13:42.080
different sort of cause. So again, probably a little more complicated and maybe we'll save that for
00:13:46.560
another AMA. That's a great conversation with a whiteboard. Yes, that's a whiteboard discussion
00:13:52.120
because I'm going to screw it up if I try to explain it without being able to show D1, D2,
00:13:56.900
D3 is the diodinases and all the hormones. Probably another whiteboard discussion then would be the
00:14:01.860
male and female sex hormones. That's an even more complicated pathway. There are about nine things
00:14:07.420
that we measure there beginning with DHEA, FSH, LH, all the way to dihydrotestosterone or DHT.
00:14:14.700
Again, these are hormones that are sometimes we're looking to keep things below a certain level or above a
00:14:20.160
certain level. Sometimes we're looking to keep things between a certain level. I think for EPA
00:14:24.360
and DHA, when we look at the red blood cell index of EPA, DHA, I know this is a very messy topic and
00:14:29.820
it's also something we're going to absolutely talk about on a future podcast. So I don't want to get
00:14:34.040
too far down that rabbit hole. I definitely want to have Bill Harris on the podcast to discuss that.
00:14:39.440
But I do like to see the EPA, DHA index above about 8.5%. I used to sort of think anything above 8%
00:14:45.620
was ideal. Frankly, now I let patients up to 10% and even sometimes 12% if they're not having any
00:14:52.240
issues like nosebleeds or something like that. But again, it's more complicated because that's just
00:14:57.320
showing you the total EPA, DHA. And in some patients, you really want to see that DHEA
00:15:01.720
preferentially higher versus the EPA. And it does depend quite a bit on which axis we're most worried
00:15:08.520
about, whether it be the neurodegenerative axis, in which case the DHEA might be a little more
00:15:13.140
important, or the atherosclerotic axis, in which the EPA might be more important. And of course,
00:15:17.560
it all comes without saying, the source of that EPA and DHA is heavily dependent on sort of what you
00:15:23.480
care about and what you're worried about. A lot of the other ranges are kind of complicated. I've
00:15:28.280
talked about it before, so I'll bring it up again. Desmosterol is a very important sterol that we
00:15:33.780
measure. So we measure markers of cholesterol synthesis, of which there are mainly two that can
00:15:39.980
be measured commercially and measures of cholesterol absorption in addition to stanol production. So
00:15:45.800
sterols and stanols are slightly different. They have a slightly different chemical composition.
00:15:50.200
I don't particularly have an interest in how high or low the stanols are or the phytosterols,
00:15:56.480
but I use that very much so when making therapeutic interventions with lipids. But I do care about the
00:16:03.320
desmosterol. And I do, all things equal, if given the choice, like to see that above 0.5.
00:16:09.980
And the reason for that is potentially obscure, but I do have some concern about overly suppressing
00:16:15.960
cholesterol synthesis, which is typically an issue in patients who are taking statins. If you over
00:16:20.300
suppress cholesterol synthesis, I think in aggregate, there's a meaning at the population
00:16:24.700
level, this does not seem to pose a problem, but at the individual level, I would exercise some
00:16:29.440
caution. And so the desmosterol becomes a guidepost. Of course, that's all complicated because there are
00:16:33.880
some medications that interfere with the enzyme that converts desmosterol into cholesterol. And so the
00:16:39.520
whole thing becomes a bit challenging. And you can't really interpret the level in that context.
00:16:48.280
Oh, yeah. That's a good one. IGF, boy, this is one where I've really changed my tune a lot over time.
00:16:53.460
I used to be in the camp that said, you know, low IGF is best. And in an ideal world, everybody should be
00:17:00.360
at or below the 50th percentile. And that's one where it's not even worth explaining what the numbers are
00:17:05.440
because it varies so much by age that you just have to look at the table that gives you the IGF
00:17:10.360
breakdown by age. But I actually no longer think that's the case. I really think that IGF should
00:17:14.980
be cycled between high and low. And, you know, for example, like when I did my fast after seven days,
00:17:20.100
my IGF was probably, you know, at the fifth to 10th percentile. And it might rebound to the 80th
00:17:26.600
percentile when I'm not fasting. And so I think epidemiology mostly sucks, especially like
00:17:33.200
epidemiology that is involving an intervention. Like people who do X get Y. I think that epidemiology
00:17:39.620
is absolutely the worst. The next layer of epidemiology that's like less shitty is looking
00:17:45.880
at IGF levels and contrasting it with disease because at least there you've simplified a
00:17:50.120
variable. You're not trying to figure out like, did those people eat more eggs or less eggs? Like
00:17:54.900
that becomes a separate question. And I think based on the epidemiology, there's a U-shaped
00:18:00.200
mortality curve with IGF, except it's very skewed. So it's not even a perfect U. And I'm having a
00:18:06.480
hard time being convinced by anyone, including proponents of very low IGF, that an IGF outside
00:18:13.260
of the range of about the 60th to 80th percentile is anything but optimal. So there I've really
00:18:18.360
switched my tune and become a little more liberal in what I like to see. Obviously, the two things that
00:18:24.100
say three things that impact IGF the most are amino acid intake. And there are some
00:18:29.500
amino acids like methionine that seem particularly potent. Insulin levels indirectly through the
00:18:35.660
binding proteins. So therefore, you know, which is largely determined by dietary carbohydrate.
00:18:39.720
And then of course, exogenous hormones like growth hormone, which is obviously very popular
00:18:43.520
in the longevity slash whatever-y circles. But growth hormone, which is an analog, it's the exact
00:18:52.700
analog of the human growth hormone is a hormone secreted by the pituitary gland that tells the liver to
00:18:58.280
make more insulin-like growth factor. So if a doctor is using GH, I hope they're monitoring IGF levels.
00:19:04.220
And so when you're looking at IGF on a blood test, you're looking at a snapshot, whereas you're
00:19:08.700
living your life as a more of a movie. And for example, I think if we, Walter Longo is probably
00:19:16.360
people think of him as a proponent of low IGF. One of the things that he points out in his
00:19:22.440
FMDs and the studies is that you get the shrinking of tissues and organs and the low IGF.
00:19:30.260
And then there's the regeneration, which sort of looks like rejuvenation. I suspect when those
00:19:37.160
tissues and organs are rejuvenating or regenerating, IGF levels aren't necessarily at the floor.
00:19:42.500
That's your rebound. That's where you're actually looking at synthesis and the other thing. So
00:19:49.220
you're looking at an average when you really should be looking at the cycling.
00:19:52.660
That's right. And I think Longo was influenced by his mentor, by the negative effects he saw on his
00:19:57.700
mentor and felt that maybe this having low IGF all the time isn't such a good thing either.
00:20:04.380
Again, I don't want to speak for somebody else's views. I don't know exactly where Longo falls out
00:20:09.420
on that, but you're right. Luckily, IGF is much more stable than GH. So people always ask,
00:20:15.920
should we be measuring GH in people? And my view is that's sort of like measuring ACTH,
00:20:20.980
which is another pituitary hormone that is the one that's most responsible for the secretion of
00:20:25.880
cortisol. And unfortunately, the answer is outside of very extreme pathological cases,
00:20:31.280
like acromegaly or pituitary Cushing's disease, very difficult to infer what the hell is going on from
00:20:38.240
looking at those hormones because they are so pulsatile. You know, you go in a sauna for 20
00:20:42.860
minutes, that's going to change your growth hormone level significantly, probably won't change your IGF
00:20:47.020
levels as significantly. So the advantage of looking at very high fidelity, high frequency moving hormones
00:20:52.600
is great. You're closer to the physiology origin. The drawback is the noise can be too much.
00:20:59.940
I'm sure there are a bunch of other things that I care a lot about. You know, I do. I mean,
00:21:03.660
but I just, I think I'm tired of this question. I was going to get into iron and ferritin and TIBC
00:21:09.720
and hematocrit hemoglobin and white blood cell count. I have points of view on everything. I'm
00:21:14.180
a little, probably too opinionated on this topic. Okay. We blew through our time limit on that question,
00:21:19.860
man. Let's see what next. This might be a quick one. What aspect of women's health is the least
00:21:28.440
studied slash understood. Was that a high scoring question? It was. You wouldn't be asking it this
00:21:35.800
early in the podcast if it wasn't. So ironic that I would be asked that question given that I'm
00:21:41.380
not particularly knowledgeable in this subject and I hope I don't represent that I am. I do have
00:21:46.660
a number of women patients. I would say a quarter to a third of my patients are female. But when you
00:21:51.860
start to talk about things that are uniquely female, a couple of things come to mind. So I guess what I'm
00:21:56.740
going to do is not answer this question because I don't know the answer, but just go off a little
00:22:00.620
bit and hopefully something I say is of value to the people who answer this question.
00:22:04.740
Obviously the most important distinction between men and women are the sex hormones. That's an
00:22:08.040
enormous difference. And the other difference that comes along with that is that men experience a much
00:22:13.440
more gradual decline in their sex hormones. And as such, it's often harder to appreciate
00:22:20.260
symptomatic changes in men. You got a guy who's walking around with his testosterone,
00:22:25.340
two standard deviations below the mean. He can actually feel pretty reasonable because
00:22:29.000
just like a frog who's been in water that's been slowly getting warmer, he doesn't actually
00:22:33.480
realize how hot the water is because he's been in there the whole time. Whereas if you dropped him
00:22:36.360
in that water overnight, it would be pretty stark. Conversely, women experience two completely,
00:22:42.540
again, I'm just completely empathetic to what women go through, which is during their menstrual cycle
00:22:47.640
or during their reproductive years, they have a menstrual cycle, which even over the course of 30 days
00:22:53.220
or so, 28 to 31 days on average, they're experiencing profound fluctuations in their hormones. And this
00:22:59.380
is another one of my favorite whiteboard topics. And, you know, I remember there was this one patient,
00:23:03.420
I'll never forget. She was, I remember sitting down with her in her living room, actually drawing this
00:23:08.660
out for her and explaining to her why she has PMS because her chief complaint actually, which I thought
00:23:15.120
was an odd reason to come to see me because I don't think like I offer any genius expertise on this.
00:23:20.160
But I mean, mostly it was just to help control her emotional swings during her cycle.
00:23:25.240
And when I actually drew for her the time course of here are the, you know, here's day one,
00:23:31.540
the day your period starts, here's day one of your next cycle. Here's how your FSH,
00:23:37.440
your follicle stimulating hormone, your LH, your luteinizing hormone, your estradiol,
00:23:41.400
your progesterone and your testosterone vary throughout that. And let's highlight what's happening
00:23:46.680
on about day 22 to 28, which is when you have this drop in progesterone and explaining to her that
00:23:52.340
for some women, that central meaning in the, in the brain, that reduction, that withdrawal of
00:23:58.340
progesterone can create emotional lability and other things. And it's like, you're not crazy.
00:24:03.540
Like that's like saying like someone who's depressed because they don't have enough serotonin
00:24:07.120
is crazy. No, I mean, it's just, everyone has different neurotransmitters and everyone
00:24:10.200
has a different response to hormones. So, I mean, it was a very profound thing for her. She's
00:24:14.400
like, Oh my God, like I've always just thought I was kind of crazy and I'm just like a moody bitch.
00:24:18.460
And I was like, no, I mean, and your mom went through the same thing. Your sister goes through
00:24:22.140
the same thing. I mean, this is hereditary and here are two things that you can do about trying
00:24:26.520
to control this. Again, I don't want to get off on the tangent and go what those two things are
00:24:30.180
that we talked about. So that's during a woman's reproductive years. The second thing that's
00:24:34.600
really profound is by the time a woman is in her fifth decade, typically all of a sudden that stuff
00:24:39.780
gets shut down. So all of a sudden she's losing estrogen, she's losing progesterone and she's
00:24:44.900
losing testosterone. And I include that last one because most people forget about it. So when you
00:24:50.440
talk about the distinguishing characteristics between men and women, we usually think about
00:24:55.020
testosterone being the male phenotype describing hormone, estrogen and progesterone being the female
00:25:01.080
dominant hormones. And that's true. But what most people don't realize is when you actually convert
00:25:05.640
the units to the same numbers. So when you go from nanograms per deciliter and picograms per
00:25:10.640
milliliter, which they're often reported in different units and you do an apples to apples
00:25:13.860
view, when you look at a woman's highest estrogen level in her life, which I mean, outside of pregnancy
00:25:21.340
is during her ovulatory cycle. So when she's ovulating, when she has that burst of estrogen,
00:25:27.960
if you take that estrogen level and compare it to her testosterone level on average, which is
00:25:33.580
testosterone varies a little bit by cycle, but not enormously, the testosterone is about 10 times
00:25:38.740
higher than the estrogen. Now the number never looks that way because testosterone is reported
00:25:43.500
typically in nanograms per deciliter, whereas the estrogen is reported usually in picograms per
00:25:48.180
milliliter. But if you do like the high school, you know, calculation of what your chemistry teacher
00:25:53.020
would have you do and put them both in the same units, you'll realize that testosterone is much
00:25:57.060
higher. So even though a woman's testosterone level is much less than a man's testosterone level,
00:26:01.820
a free testosterone in a woman might be one nanogram per deciliter. Whereas in a man,
00:26:08.100
the 50th percentile would be about 14 nanograms per deciliter. So call it 14, 15 times higher.
00:26:14.200
It is still a very dominant hormone, even relative to estrogen. So when all three of those hormones are
00:26:20.440
basically taken away in a period of two to three years, I don't want to get too far on the soapbox,
00:26:26.360
but like definitely top 10 pet peeves are maybe top five pet peeves are doctors that completely
00:26:33.680
disregard perimenopausal and postmenopausal symptoms in women and who without having ever
00:26:39.120
even read a single study or tried to understand the limits and the methodologies of the women's
00:26:44.660
health initiative come to the conclusion, well, no woman should ever take hormones and they should
00:26:48.780
just deal with their postmenopausal hot flashes and perimenopausal symptoms and eventually,
00:26:54.540
you know, let them lose their muscle mass and bone density because God forbid hormones cause
00:26:58.600
cancer or some other equally knuckleheaded conclusion. So those are, those are really two
00:27:03.740
huge things. I think a third thing that I've seen, and I gotta be honest, I'm kind of lazy.
00:27:09.540
I don't think I've seen this in the literature and I haven't probably made a strong enough effort to
00:27:12.860
look at it, but empirically it is so overwhelming that I would be surprised if it's not described in
00:27:17.920
literature is there's something about multiple pregnancies and the HPA axis in women.
00:27:25.060
So I usually don't see it after a woman has had two kids, but usually if a woman has had three
00:27:29.680
or four kids, the likelihood that her thyroid bounces back to normal seems not that high.
00:27:37.440
And so I have a couple of patients who came into the practice again, interested in longevity,
00:27:43.320
but the, the, their proximate issue of concern was, you know, ever since two years ago when I had my
00:27:49.340
third child or my fourth child, I have not been able to get back to the same level of energy that
00:27:54.700
I once had. And you look at them and they have a normal TSH typically, but usually their peripheral
00:28:01.440
metabolism of T4 is, is very altered. And, and these are, I think in some ways, like kind of the
00:28:07.500
easiest saves, like you, in a very short period of time, you can make a patient feel a hell of a lot
00:28:12.700
better. And they're just, they're, they sort of fall through the cracks. And again, I think it
00:28:16.580
might come down to just a failure to appreciate some of the, the, these subtle differences between
00:28:22.180
men and women. Again, men aren't giving birth. Fortunately, or else our species would have died
00:28:26.200
and we wouldn't have a species if you and I were responsible for procreation. Trying to think what
00:28:31.400
else are fundamental differences. I mean, there are many others.
00:28:34.340
Part of the question is least studied or understood. I think it was a Freakonomics
00:28:39.420
podcast. They talked about this a little bit where there's the thalidomide issue. And I believe there
00:28:45.980
were, I think they were maybe doing studies or something where women were involved and obviously
00:28:49.800
birth defects and horrible things happened. And they sort of took women virtually off the table in
00:28:55.200
terms of studying. And so there's a long period of time where it was, I think men were predominantly
00:28:59.720
being studied and the subjects of, yeah, we would just sort of assume that's whatever is we see in
00:29:05.840
the men we might see in the women. But I think there's been, as far as epidemiology goes, there's
00:29:10.020
been a resurgence in women's studies and things like that. But I do think that there's overall,
00:29:15.040
they've been understudied just in that regard as well. Just looking at the female body versus the
00:29:19.740
male body instead of just assuming, you know, they're, they're the same.
00:29:23.540
Yep. That's a great example. I remember that. I remember hearing that and thinking, God, that's,
00:29:27.400
I mean, everybody knows the story about thalidomide. Yeah. You can't get through med
00:29:30.240
school without it, but it's the ramifications of that. It's that, it's that what happened as a
00:29:34.200
result of that. That's a very interesting point. You know, another difference between men and women,
00:29:37.740
I don't know how well it's been studied, but most epidemiologic assessments would make a clear case
00:29:42.440
that women, all things equal, tend to get less cardiovascular disease. Now, I don't know how
00:29:46.760
eloquently these studies have been done, and I don't know if they've been normalized for ApoB in
00:29:50.640
addition to LDL-C. My guess is they may not have been, but nevertheless, if you were to make the
00:29:55.020
assumption that once that analysis is done, if all things equal, inclusive of ApoB inflammation,
00:30:00.880
all of the other things, insulin sensitivity, even if you want it to be really rigorous,
00:30:04.380
women still get less heart disease than men. And after you've normalized for blood pressure,
00:30:08.720
smoking, and really all of the major factors, you'd have to look at iron levels as a next
00:30:14.320
interesting concept. So there's pretty interesting data in men that the more metabolically deranged
00:30:21.880
they are, the better they do with therapeutic phlebotomy, whereas the less metabolically
00:30:26.620
deranged they are, the less of an effect they have by giving blood, reducing the oxidative stress
00:30:32.520
of iron. So it might be the case that somewhere buried within there is this idea that because
00:30:39.180
for a great number of years of a woman's life, she is going to have less iron than a man due to her
00:30:44.900
menstrual cycle, that may actually offer a protective benefit against heart disease. Again, something I would
00:30:50.100
be interested to know if that's, certainly people have speculated that, but again, I don't know how
00:30:53.940
rigorously it's been documented. And we have another thing out there that's lingering, and you're talking
00:30:59.240
to Richard Isaacson very soon, actually. He'll probably have more insight into this, which is if
00:31:04.380
you look at Alzheimer's disease and you look at the prevalence, I think it's two out of every three
00:31:08.880
cases are women. And so two out of every three cases of Alzheimer's are women, and you could probably
00:31:15.140
say that age is a factor. Longevity may be a factor in things like that, but I think that that needs to
00:31:19.980
be studied more too. Yeah, because I have a hard time believing that that is purely an age issue.
00:31:24.880
I don't think that the increase in longevity of a woman can affect that much of a gap in, and again,
00:31:32.380
it would be a great discussion with Richard. You're right, because you want to make sure that you're not
00:31:35.880
being fooled by, you know, a diagnostic distinction and things like that as well.
00:31:40.100
So piggybacking on the women's health a little bit, what are your thoughts on fasting and ketosis
00:31:45.060
for females? Well, you know, again, a real tough question because I find all questions of nutrition
00:31:52.220
to be so individual that it's hard to answer them sort of in a one-size-fits-all, sort of one-stop-shop
00:32:01.280
approach. That said, I think there are a couple things women need to be thoughtful about. If any woman
00:32:07.000
is having an issue with fertility, I couldn't make a case, I can't make a very compelling case
00:32:12.120
for nutritional ketosis if a woman is trying to get pregnant. And I'm sure this is just going to
00:32:16.600
piss off a lot of the keto herd, but because, of course, if you're in the keto cult, you believe
00:32:21.560
that ketosis is the optimal state for everything, including, you know, global warming. But the reality
00:32:27.940
is if you look at the FGF levels, and also if you just think about it from an ancestral standpoint,
00:32:32.800
the higher the level of ketone during our evolution, the more likely we were separated from
00:32:40.280
food. And the more likely you're separated from food, the less genetic pressure you should have
00:32:46.700
to be reproducing at that point in time. And this concept is so well-preserved in biology. I mean,
00:32:53.400
we had a great discussion with David Sinclair recently to talk about this, and it's even true
00:32:58.440
in the case of the sirtuins, which would be, you know, one of the more important regulators of
00:33:02.800
our aging and including, you know, our reproductive stress. So I think when you look at the FGF 21 data
00:33:09.900
and the ketosis data, there's a very, and I don't want to bastardize this because I wish I'd known that
00:33:14.440
I was going to be asked this question. I would have looked up the paper. It's from a researcher in
00:33:18.140
Texas. I think he's at, he might be at UT Southwestern, but he's, if you search, you know,
00:33:22.720
and his name's first name's David, I'm blanking on his last name, begins with an M though.
00:33:26.000
But if you Mangle, Mangle's door. Yes. Yes. Yep. That's him. I saw him presented a meeting
00:33:30.460
once and it was remarkable data that looked at the differences in a male and female brain
00:33:36.120
in the presence of changing FGF 21 levels. And it was so cool to see this difference.
00:33:42.700
The pituitary gland is one of the very few pieces of tissue in the body that has what's called portal
00:33:48.100
circulation, the liver being the other one. So the pituitary has a direct connection via the
00:33:53.660
pituitary stock to the hypothalamus. The long and short of it is in a calorie restricted state,
00:33:58.640
when ketones are elevated, it suppresses FSH and LH in women, but not in men. This is super
00:34:03.860
interesting to me. And it has an, it has a profound evolutionary. I mean, again, maybe I'm just making
00:34:09.600
up a story to fit this, but if we're going to subscribe to any of Occam's razor, this would be a
00:34:14.200
great application. In a period of famine, you would want women to stop reproducing. You would want to
00:34:21.020
shut off FSH and LH. You would want men to have no impairment on their testosterone level. That's
00:34:27.180
all the more time that they should be out there and able to, to get food. So again, I've always
00:34:32.120
been kind of a little bit careful of suggesting that a, that a woman who's trying to get pregnant
00:34:36.580
be in ketosis. Now, look, I know what's going to happen. Everyone's going to say, well, I got
00:34:40.440
pregnant when I was in ketosis. Yeah, obviously it's possible. I mean, I'm not suggesting it's not,
00:34:44.340
but if we're talking about optimization, the second thing of course, is should a woman be in
00:34:48.240
ketosis during pregnancy? And the, and the answer is I simply don't know the answer.
00:34:52.360
Clearly we evolved with mothers being in ketosis and having children. I mean, it'd be impossible
00:34:58.220
for our species to be here if mothers were not in ketosis during pregnancy. I mean, we didn't have
00:35:03.360
buffets, but that said, is it optimal? You know, again, just because something happened in, in sort
00:35:09.080
of our evolutionary time history, does that mean it's optimal? No, almost not at all. So as a general
00:35:16.320
rule, and again, I don't like to make general rules when it comes to nutrition, I'm not convinced it's
00:35:22.180
necessarily the best strategy. Just like, I don't think it's the best strategy for kids unless they
00:35:25.500
have seizures or something else, for example. So, you know, a far better strategy is just like,
00:35:30.780
don't eat junk food, you know, don't eat, don't eat sugar, don't eat highly refined carbohydrates.
00:35:34.980
But, you know, should one restrict carbohydrates to the point where they're in ketosis as a very
00:35:39.380
deliberate act? I'm not convinced that's the case. And of course, when you start to look at things
00:35:44.080
like maternal diabetes or gestational diabetes, rather, that's where it gets a little tougher
00:35:48.480
because ketosis can be a very effective tool for treating type 2 diabetes. And gestational
00:35:53.920
diabetes is not type 2 diabetes, but it has some of its features. So again, I really, I hope there are
00:36:00.400
some obstetricians out there who spend a lot of time on this problem because it is a huge problem.
00:36:06.020
There are many women who go through this. My sister, I probably have talked about this in the past,
00:36:10.360
and I don't think she'd mind me talking about it. And if she does, I'm in trouble. But, you know,
00:36:14.620
my sister had an operation when she was quite young that took out two thirds of her pancreas.
00:36:19.600
So during her first pregnancy, she got gestational diabetes, which was to be expected because she had
00:36:24.820
like a third of the insulin producing capacity. And then it happened again during the second
00:36:29.200
pregnancy. And then after that second pregnancy, she actually got type 2 diabetes. Over the course of a
00:36:34.400
year, going on a ketogenic diet, actually working with a company called Virta Health that I'm an
00:36:39.760
advisor to an investor in, although that is unrelated to the fact that my sister wasn't
00:36:43.880
getting care from them. You know, she'd lost 50 pounds. Her hemoglobin A1C went from somewhere
00:36:49.060
in the twelves to in the fives in the course of a year. And then she got pregnant again. Well,
00:36:54.880
she decided to go off the ketogenic diet, but still be much more diligent and strict. And despite that,
00:37:00.340
she still, you know, requires insulin during this third pregnancy. I suspect she'll have a much
00:37:05.060
easier time recovering following this pregnancy. But one of the things that's been frustrating,
00:37:09.900
which maybe goes back to this, the question prior to this is her obstetricians, like they have no
00:37:15.360
insight. Like they have not a thing to offer her as far as how she should be thinking about managing
00:37:20.940
her blood sugars other than just kind of cram more insulin into her exogenous insulin. So,
00:37:26.140
yeah. And this is why context matters. And there's no bumper sticker that you could have,
00:37:32.180
you know, the question thoughts on fasting and ketosis for females. You could have somebody with
00:37:36.580
the constellation of abnormalities that is metabolic syndrome, insulin resistant, type two
00:37:42.840
diabetic. And maybe for that person, their fertility might be an issue and going on a ketogenic diet may
00:37:48.960
get them in a healthier state. Yeah, exactly. It might actually improve their fertility because of
00:37:53.400
the inflammation and all the other stuff that could be happening as a result of what you just
00:37:56.680
mentioned. So, yeah, I, I, well said you should just answer the questions from now on. You do a
00:38:01.680
better job than me. I probably have way too many bumper stickers there that lack context that
00:38:06.740
need it. What advice would you give to medical students and residents? It's pretty broad. With
00:38:13.000
regard to what? Don't do it. Do it. Definitely change your scrubs every day. Yeah. How do I probably,
00:38:19.300
how do I, I don't know, I'm, I'm inferring stuff from this, but probably how do I get through it to,
00:38:26.040
all the way from how do I get through this thing to how do I optimize my time in medical school?
00:38:33.060
And maybe you can, you can sort of look back on your experience.
00:38:36.320
Maybe I'll start even broader. So I definitely re I really enjoy talking to kids in high school and
00:38:42.820
college who want to go into medicine. And I think the most important piece of information,
00:38:47.720
most important piece of advice I would offer these folks, which is probably somewhat biased by my own
00:38:52.760
experience. So I explained that as a caveat and I say, look, you know, here's my bias is don't study
00:38:58.400
pre-med in college. And for a lot of them, they're like, wait, why? But I know I want to do medicine.
00:39:02.620
Like, why wouldn't I study pre-med? And I'm like, that's exactly why all that stuff you learn in
00:39:06.600
pre-med is like the JV version of what you're going to learn in med school. Like, yeah, you're going to
00:39:11.460
learn a little bit of anatomy and some biochemistry and, you know, physiology and a whole bunch of things.
00:39:17.140
And you'll learn them at like, you know, some sort of superficial level of depth.
00:39:20.680
And then you're going to go to medical school and learn it all in real depth.
00:39:24.940
Okay, great. You just wasted four years. What you really ought to do in college is study first,
00:39:31.480
something that you freaking love. In the end, you want to study something where you don't care about
00:39:35.700
the grades. You're going to do well because you are absolutely obsessed with mastering this subject.
00:39:42.280
Look, that could be going an inch wide and a mile deep on something like, you know, I want to really
00:39:48.660
study genetics or biochemistry or molecular biology or something. Alternatively, it could be, you know
00:39:54.640
what, I want to study philosophy and history, or I want to study engineering or whatever, you know,
00:40:00.680
but the point is what you, the absolute last thing you want to do is try to cobble together an
00:40:05.140
education that is geared towards acing the MCAT. Like I can think of no sadder thing to do than to do
00:40:13.040
that. So that's, that's sort of my advice on the people going to medical school. Once you're there,
00:40:19.140
you know, I mean, this sounds kind of touchy feely, but I remember there were some days in
00:40:24.120
medical school where I was super unhappy. A large part of it was, it was the first time in my life I
00:40:30.840
realized you just had to memorize certain shit. And I had prided myself up until that point in life of
00:40:37.060
never memorizing things. Like I, I could remember the dates of boxing matches and that was it.
00:40:41.520
Couldn't remember a birthday to save my life. Like didn't want to memorize anything. And then you get
00:40:46.780
to medical school and you just can't get through on first principles. You didn't, you just, there's
00:40:50.340
just certain things you have to generate a certain base of knowledge before you can even participate
00:40:54.680
in a thoughtful discussion. And so that took me like a year to just accept. And there were times
00:41:00.240
when I was super pissed off when I was sitting there studying, thinking like, I'm getting so dumb.
00:41:04.700
Like I'm not solving problems. There are no differential equations. I don't even get to use vector
00:41:10.920
calculus anymore. One of the things that was very helpful, and I don't remember where this advice
00:41:15.460
came from, but it was very wise advice, which is at any point in life where you're sitting somewhere
00:41:20.120
and you're in a situation and you think it sucks, go and find someone who would give their left nut to
00:41:25.900
be in your situation and go and help them out. So I remember having this thought and thinking,
00:41:31.480
you know what, I'm sitting here at, you know, med school at Stanford. I've got a whole bunch of
00:41:35.160
undergrads at Stanford who were among the smartest undergrads in the country. And, you know, half
00:41:40.240
these kids, one and a half, you know, some percentage of these kids want to get into medical
00:41:43.600
school and they might not. So I remember actually going and just putting up my name on a billboard
00:41:48.380
in the, I forget even the name of the, God, it's been so long. I don't remember the name of the quad,
00:41:52.340
like what the main quad at Stanford was called, but putting up a thing like, Hey, anyone who needs
00:41:56.080
help setting for MCAT, like I'm going to be in this room at this time and I'm just going to answer
00:42:00.360
questions. And a bunch of kids showed up and I didn't charge them anything. It was more,
00:42:04.880
it was actually, I was doing it for me, right? I was doing it to see what their level of
00:42:10.060
enthusiasm was. And could I catch some of that infection again? And it works, you know,
00:42:15.640
it's really a powerful tool. And I did it again in residency. So in residency, there were days when
00:42:20.380
I was like, this fucking sucks. I haven't slept in two days. I haven't eaten a proper meal in a week.
00:42:27.660
I haven't even changed my underwear in two days. Like I, I just hate my life. I haven't exercised
00:42:32.780
in three days. And then I thought, wait a minute, you are so privileged to be sitting here, right?
00:42:37.300
Like, you know, you are one of six residents that's chosen to be in this categorical program.
00:42:42.520
Look at all of these medical students at Hopkins that would give anything to be here.
00:42:47.340
Do the same thing, grab two of them, sit down and walk them through something, help, you know,
00:42:52.320
teach them something. And you'll see like they'd give anything to be where you are. And so
00:42:57.340
I guess that's, I mean, you could apply that to life, I suppose, but it's particularly helpful
00:43:01.940
in sort of this transition from college to medical school, to residency and beyond.
00:43:06.080
What other advice could I give? I mean, I think a lot of the advice I have is so glib and so cliche
00:43:11.200
that, I mean, I feel a bit embarrassed saying it, hearing it come out of my mouth makes me cringe,
00:43:15.560
but you do have to maintain a balance. In other words, you'd be surprised. Like, let's just say
00:43:20.700
you've, you think there's like a hundred hours of work you need to do to prepare for a certain exam.
00:43:25.380
You're probably better off putting 85 hours into it and spending 15 hours doing something else
00:43:31.380
that is, you know, sort of replenishing you in another way. And for some people that's
00:43:35.780
pleasure reading, like, you know, reading fiction for others like me, that was always going to be
00:43:39.940
exercise for others. It's just sort of blowing off steam and going to get drunk again, not advocating
00:43:45.840
necessarily, but the point is it is important to get out of that, you know, get out of those books
00:43:52.240
for a while. I did not do that in college. So when I went to college, I just decided I just wanted to
00:43:58.520
know everything that was knowable. And that meant studying every minute of every day. I mean, I did
00:44:04.040
exercise, but I didn't socialize at all in college. Very, very little actually. Probably drank twice in
00:44:10.300
all of college. And they were both incredibly epic nights, actually. That's another story. I feel like
00:44:17.460
Chevy Chase. Like, I feel like there's like a Fletch moment here. We're reflecting on that little
00:44:22.280
bubble. We'll go back to you playing basketball in the Lakers. Yeah. With the fro at six inches.
00:44:27.960
But in medical school, I definitely spent way more time having fun. And part of it was like being in
00:44:33.500
such a, it was my first time living in California and it was like, oh my God, like you can ride your
00:44:37.900
bike outside every day. You know, you can swim, you can do all these other things. So I think that is
00:44:43.280
important. I think the other thing in medical school, not to lose sight of is why you're doing
00:44:47.620
it. The more frequently you can interact with patients in medical school, the better. Not for
00:44:54.400
the reasons that I think the consortium would say, which is the problem-based learning. There may be
00:44:59.080
some truth to that. Meaning when you take what's called a problem-based learning approach, which was
00:45:02.900
something that I think Harvard borrowed, actually McMaster University was the first to do it. And then
00:45:08.060
Harvard and two or three other prominent schools started doing it, which is basically this idea of kids
00:45:12.720
weren't going to sit in class anymore and do the traditional stuff. They were going to go straight
00:45:16.300
into the wards from day one and then encounter a patient, encounter a problem, and then go back
00:45:21.700
and learn what they needed to learn to do that. You know, whether that approach is right or wrong,
00:45:25.140
I actually have no insight. But what I think you do get out of seeing patients, whether it's in a
00:45:29.920
traditional path like they had at Stanford, where you spent, you know, the first two years grinding
00:45:34.600
through class and not was, it's really exciting. Like it's, it's, it's, you start to, I mean,
00:45:39.860
again, now I think at my stage, it's very easy to take that for granted and be like, you know,
00:45:43.280
oh, my patients are calling me and I'm trying to enjoy my weekend. And I'm like, you know,
00:45:47.840
stuck answering 27 emails or calling the lab or doing that. I think, but boy, when you're starting
00:45:52.620
out, it is just amazing to realize like you have this bizarre privilege. Like people are going to
00:45:56.660
tell you shit that they would never tell anybody else. You know, you're going to see people at a very
00:46:01.120
vulnerable state. And that's, I guess it's good to figure out early if that's appealing or not.
00:46:05.920
Because if it's not, if you're not odd by that, you, you probably don't belong in medicine because
00:46:10.900
it's, there's enough things that'll beat that out of you in medicine that if that initially doesn't
00:46:15.800
awe you, there's an issue. This is totally unrelated, but Tim Ferris had a podcast once about how to say
00:46:22.400
no elegantly. And there, I forget who he credits this to, but there's someone who has this criteria,
00:46:28.340
which is if when someone asks you to do something, if the answer isn't hell yes, don't do it.
00:46:33.240
Cause it's all downhill from there, right? If you call me up and you're like, I've got this great
00:46:37.880
idea. We're going to do blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. If I think, okay, I'll do
00:46:44.060
it. Bad, bad idea. I have to think that's the greatest idea I've ever heard. And so similarly,
00:46:48.680
like if as a college student or as a medical student, you aren't bowled over by the beauty
00:46:54.020
of this interaction with a patient, you, it's worth questioning why you're doing this because it,
00:46:58.860
you will slowly have that sort of the forces that'd be will, will do everything in their power to beat
00:47:04.980
that out of you. That makes sense. It sounds touchy feely, but it is. Yeah. It's touchy
00:47:09.680
feely. It's begin with the end in mind. You really have to know what your goal is because
00:47:15.160
more or less you turn the have tos into get tos. So you know, like, Oh, I have to get up early in the
00:47:21.960
morning. I have to be on call. I have to, you know, whatever it is, even like a profound thing is
00:47:27.240
like for a mother saying like, I have to change these dirty diapers or something like I get to
00:47:30.920
change these dirty diapers because I have a kid that I love and we were able to, you know,
00:47:34.340
make this baby together and things like that. And I think when you go through something like
00:47:38.280
medical school, how rigorous and how tough it is you need, regardless, you're going to have to
00:47:42.200
remind yourself at times because it's going to be tough. Yeah. Yeah. That's again, well said. I don't
00:47:46.680
know why I'm answering these questions. You always say it better. We'll see. You wrote on Twitter
00:47:53.320
that you're considering different avenues to monetize the podcast in order to make it sustainable.
00:47:58.840
What do you think is the best way to do it? So this is something that, so, so we're recording
00:48:03.520
this today on September 11th. I'm not sure when this podcast will actually come out probably
00:48:07.440
later this month or in October, but it'll have been about three months. We started this in July.
00:48:12.200
So first of all, the whole thing was started as an experiment. Have we officially put every podcast
00:48:16.820
out that was in that first trial balloon? Yeah. Okay, cool. So as of yesterday with Lustig's
00:48:22.740
coming out, that is the experiment. Yeah. We might've squeezed one more in. I think it was,
00:48:26.660
we're going to do 12 and he's episode 14 maybe. And there's also the sneak peek. A couple AMAs.
00:48:33.180
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Deep dive. So I guess I would say now having completed the experiment,
00:48:39.440
I have enjoyed the hell out of this way more than I thought I would. And I know what you and Nick
00:48:43.960
sitting over there, you guys are both rolling your eyes at me because you were saying this forever. And
00:48:47.800
so was Tim and so was Kevin and Jocko and Anahad and Patrick. And like, everybody had been telling
00:48:53.980
me, you got to do this. You got to do this. And honestly, I, this was one of those things where
00:48:57.320
all I thought of was I have to, like, I have to do that. I have to do that. And now I look at it,
00:49:02.460
like I get to do this. Like I get to go and interview people who know more about a subject than
00:49:06.780
I do and pick their brain. And the only thing I have to do is set up a bunch of goofy recording
00:49:10.560
equipment in front of us. It's really amazing. And I don't actually have to do any of the heavy
00:49:14.640
lifting after like you guys do it. Travis does it, right? There's like basically three people,
00:49:20.280
four people who do a whole bunch of work after I do a recording. And I never think about it again.
00:49:25.560
I've never listened to one of the podcasts after the fact, so I'm hoping they're turning out okay.
00:49:29.240
But basically I just get to walk around having spending, you know, about three hours a week,
00:49:33.240
having a cool discussion. So that said, it still is a highly expensive proposition by my back of the
00:49:38.980
envelope calculation. It costs about $2,500 to make each podcast, not including my time,
00:49:43.220
which I wouldn't necessarily want to put a price tag on, um, cause I don't know how to value it.
00:49:47.680
But if I just include the priceless, my time is priceless. Maybe that takes up to $2,500, $50.
00:49:57.540
Um, so, so whatever. So you're going to spend 10 grand a month making a podcast. That's great.
00:50:01.740
But the reality of it is we do need to, we do need to remunerate this for two reasons. One,
00:50:06.160
it's not cool to flush 120 grand down the toilet every year. And two, there are a lot of things that I
00:50:10.680
want to be able to do that upon further inspection. If the podcast can not only pay for itself, but
00:50:16.600
pay for some of the research that we want to do, that would be great. We have a, we just hired our
00:50:20.100
sixth analyst this month. So we have a team of analysts that basically I would like to be as
00:50:25.960
large as we could afford to manage, which means you manage. You can tell I don't do a lot around
00:50:33.380
here. I sort of take care of patients and that's, but right now our research team is basically
00:50:39.320
subsidized by our clinical practice. So everything is under an umbrella called a Tia medical and the
00:50:43.980
patients are basically subsidizing our research. And that's fine because the patients benefit the
00:50:49.240
most from the research, but I would like to figure out a way for the podcast to cover the cost of our
00:50:54.560
research. And if I'm really going to be wishful, not just cover the cost of our analysts, but
00:51:00.540
generate an additional pool of capital to invest in the types of research we want to do at certain
00:51:08.460
universities. So there are a number of investigators around the country who are doing really interesting
00:51:13.700
work who I think could be doing way more interesting work if they had unrestricted funding to do certain
00:51:19.080
stuff. For example, people have heard me talk about my obsession with wanting to understand if there
00:51:24.380
are biomarkers or things that could delineate a metabolic signature for autophagy. This is the type
00:51:30.220
of project that by my estimation could be done for a relatively low sum of money, meaning this is not a
00:51:35.520
billion dollar project. This is a project that a few people could get together and solve. I would
00:51:40.120
like to contribute heavily to that. Have a pretty good sense of who the people are that would need
00:51:43.840
to be involved in that project. If we can get IRB approval to do some of the experiments that I think
00:51:49.280
would need to be done, I think those are elegant. So all of those things are things that I would like
00:51:53.100
to see partially and maybe in a dream state completely funded by the podcast. Here's what I have
00:51:59.600
figured out I probably don't want to do. I don't think I want to sell ads. A couple months ago,
00:52:04.220
I put out some questions on Twitter about, uh, so we can, we can fully talk about the fact that
00:52:10.360
we're drinking Topo Chico because we're just advertising for free. We're not getting paid to
00:52:14.380
do this. It's refreshing. I was actually very touched by the feedback that we got on Twitter
00:52:18.740
when we put that question out about, Hey, what do you guys think about me shucking ads? Because
00:52:23.160
I almost don't remember a single person saying no bad idea. Everyone was like, look, you got to make
00:52:28.740
money too. You've been putting out free content since 2011. You literally have never charged us for
00:52:33.800
anything. You don't have a single ad on your website, blah, blah, blah, by all means sell ads.
00:52:38.560
And so I think I thought, I thought, I thought at the time, okay, well, let's do it. And here's
00:52:42.900
the way we'll do it. We're only going to sell ads for things that we love and care about and blah,
00:52:46.580
blah, blah, blah, blah. But to be honest with you, and I don't want to close the door to this,
00:52:49.920
but I'm having a hard time seeing how I could make it work because there just aren't that many
00:52:53.460
things that I love. And frankly, I have no idea if Topo Chico would want to sponsor this podcast.
00:52:58.780
They might not care. So at this point, I guess there's another deeper point, which is at some
00:53:04.620
point you will probably have to take an advertising dollar from someone who is incoming versus outbound.
00:53:10.020
So today, if we were going to start advertising, I would just say, Nick, by the way, Nick is behind
00:53:15.500
the camera. So at some point, Nick, you should just walk through so people can see who Nick is. But
00:53:19.420
I would say, Nick, can you please go and reach out to these 12 companies? And we've already made a list
00:53:23.860
of like, these are the companies that I love the most and I use their products religiously.
00:53:27.320
And I pay to use their products, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Let's go out to them and have
00:53:31.660
them sponsor the podcast. And who knows, maybe like a subset of them would do it. Invariably,
00:53:36.480
you're going to have to, you're going to exhaust those avenues and you're going to need to take
00:53:40.100
inbound. My fear is, even though I do, I think I have, you know, very high integrity. At some point,
00:53:47.280
I'm concerned, like, what if I just start deciding subconsciously that a certain product is better
00:53:53.260
than another product because it's going to pay a lot more than another product would.
00:53:57.320
I don't know. I'd like to think that's not the case. I'd like to think that I'm impervious to that
00:54:01.640
kind of influence, but I don't know if I am. And if I could prevent having to go down that path,
00:54:07.000
I would like to do so. So I think I don't want to do ads. So I think that basically leaves two
00:54:12.440
options. The first option is to do what my really good friend, Sam Harris does. And Sam has been
00:54:18.060
beyond generous in his time that he has spent with me, walking me through what is involved in a
00:54:24.960
listener support model, which is what Sam does, an entirely listener support model.
00:54:29.780
Sam also, if anyone hasn't listened to his podcast, he also does a great job explaining
00:54:34.580
his rationale for it. And he does it far more eloquently than I could reproduce it here.
00:54:39.280
So if you're interested in why Sam feels strongly about that, it's worth doing.
00:54:43.680
Rhonda Patrick is also entirely through a listener support model, though it's a different model than
00:54:48.160
Sam's. So I think that is one really good model. Again, I don't think it's going to be as lucrative
00:54:52.840
as ads. I mean, if we're going to be honest, it's probably not as lucrative as ads. But I think in
00:54:57.260
the long run, it actually could be better. The second model is something that I would only be
00:55:02.380
a participant in. And it would be there are lots of people out there talking about kind of a model
00:55:07.380
like Netflix, where there's a number of people would be part of a podcast network, where you only
00:55:13.960
get to listen to their podcasts if you are a member of the Netflix equivalent. That is something that
00:55:21.020
has only been put on my radar over the last two or three weeks. So it's a little hard for me to sort
00:55:26.060
of quantify and understand the economics of that. I mean, I understand the economics of it, but really
00:55:31.180
pressure test them. But that could also be advantageous because, again, it has the luxury
00:55:35.340
of being it frees you from the constraints of ads. It has its drawbacks, frankly. I mean, you're going
00:55:41.020
to lose listeners if you do that. Even if you make more money, you still lose listeners. It will reach
00:55:46.460
fewer people because the probability that everybody who's listening to a podcast for free will go and
00:55:51.300
join a service for that, I think, is relatively low. So I know that's not a great answer because
00:55:56.600
I haven't given the answer, but I would like to believe that by 2019, we are absolutely monetizing
00:56:02.860
this podcast. And I suspect it will be one of the latter two approaches and not an advertising approach.
00:56:08.960
I will say this. If we end up going down those paths, I would still like to talk about products
00:56:13.620
that I like. Because one of the pieces of feedback we did get from that very informal poll we put out
00:56:19.260
was people want to know what things we like. And to be able to actually shuck the products we like
00:56:26.860
when we're not getting paid to shuck them tells you we're really just shucking them because we like
00:56:30.500
them. So I like this ring. I like this ambulance siren. I like this bottle of water. Whatever it is,
00:56:38.060
we can just talk about it openly. And I think that there's benefit to people in that because then
00:56:42.100
they'll know like, okay, wow, that's an ideal way to get an ad. Do you have anything to say to make
00:56:47.600
what I just said better like you did with every other question? What is it? Buffett and Munger,
00:56:54.060
they do the annual meetings. Yeah. A lot of times I forget what he said, basically. I thought that was
00:57:00.800
well said. What he said. Yeah. All right, good. I have nothing to add. I think that's what it is.
00:57:05.500
He'll say, you go to Charlie Munger after Buffett does like a dissertation on economics. I have nothing to
00:57:10.840
add. That's what I'm going to strive for. Next question. What exactly are you looking to achieve
00:57:18.920
and monitor with your blood glucose monitor, your CGM, your G6, which you, another product you
00:57:26.320
probably, you love. I love the G6 and I'll talk about it all day long without, you know, receiving
00:57:31.640
advertising dollars to talk about it. You know, it's funny the G6 along with the aura ring, which I've
00:57:36.420
talked a lot about are these, and I've worn every wearable that there is, but they're the only two
00:57:41.780
that seems sticky enough that I can't stop wearing them. Like if I, like a month ago, I went to charge
00:57:47.200
my aura ring and I forgot to put it back on my finger when I went to bed. So I slept without it.
00:57:51.180
And I woke up the next morning and realized I didn't have it. And I didn't have the data. Like
00:57:53.880
it made any goddamn difference in my life. I was so pissed. The horror. I was like, God, how could you
00:57:59.360
forget to put your ring on last night? There's probably a whole separate issue with that. But,
00:58:04.060
and the same thing with like the continuous glucose monitor, I just, it's hard for me to imagine. I
00:58:10.140
used to not know my glucose in real time. So there are a couple of things from it. The first is it's
00:58:15.360
a great way for me to control my behavior. And I know it's tempting to want to believe that I'm
00:58:22.480
somehow impervious to the forces of bad food, but the reality of it is I am not. There was a day,
00:58:29.040
I think when I, you know, had a remarkable resilience and willpower and I could do anything,
00:58:34.580
eat this, don't eat that exercise like this exercise. I could, I was a robot for so much of
00:58:41.000
my life until three years ago. And something just happened in 2015. And I just fell off the rails and
00:58:49.080
I've never got back on. I simply do not possess the intestinal fortitude to be a robot anymore.
00:58:55.360
And I could speculate on several of the reasons for that, which I don't want to get into,
00:59:00.360
but the long and short of it is here I am. I am in an environment where like, you know,
00:59:06.040
yesterday I was on a plane and they were handing out shit, cookies and bullshit. I really wanted a
00:59:13.780
cookie. I think the only reason I didn't eat that cookie that was bigger than my head
00:59:17.460
is because I knew I'd have to look at my CGM data after.
00:59:20.540
So there is no more powerful behavioral tool for me than my CGM. Because in the end I'm kind of a
00:59:29.580
competitive person internally, much more competitive internally than externally, by the way. And I just
00:59:35.060
can't stand to see spikes of glucose. It just drives me nuts. And so, which is not to say I don't go off
00:59:42.800
the rail sometimes. I absolutely do. We were in Fenway Park the other day and I had fries. Now,
00:59:47.760
luckily I'd fasted all day and worked out. So I didn't actually experience a spike of glucose from
00:59:52.260
the fries. So I got to have the fries without the badness, but I was sort of ready for it. I was
00:59:56.880
kind of bracing myself like, Oh, you might, you might get a little testy seeing this thing,
01:00:00.780
but that actually gets to the second point, which is it has allowed me to very eloquently calibrate
01:00:07.380
how to tether activity levels, nutrient deprivation, the consumption of treats and minimize the damage.
01:00:17.960
I don't know that I could drive a race car very well without seeing my RPM tack. Like if you plugged
01:00:24.700
my ears so that I couldn't actually hear the rev of the engine and you took away my RPM tack and said,
01:00:31.780
drive, could I still drive the car? Yes. Could I drive it half as well as I can drive it when I
01:00:38.080
know exactly where I'm shifting at every moment where I need to shift? No, there's simply no way.
01:00:44.020
Like we just, we're feedback machines. We need feedback. So I'm a huge CGM advocate and really
01:00:50.800
looking forward to what the next few years will bring when these things can become a lot more
01:00:55.160
affordable and a lot more accessible. And the question is, can that be done without them remaining as
01:01:01.700
medical devices? So the one I wear now is the Dexcom G6 is a medical device. It's an FDA approved
01:01:08.200
device and it gives you a number that is in this case, incredibly accurate. It's probably plus or
01:01:13.260
minus two or 3% specifically for the purpose of someone with diabetes being able to dose their
01:01:18.300
insulin. The FDA will very likely not allow such a device into a consumer market because the concern
01:01:26.260
would be that such a device could be used outside of a prescriptive relationship with a physician to
01:01:31.060
dose insulin. So therein lies a whole bunch of issues that would basically, the way it would
01:01:37.780
happen today is the FDA would basically have to neuter the device such that the information couldn't
01:01:43.880
be used for treatment purposes, which means they either take away the real-time nature of it,
01:01:49.720
which is what makes it so valuable, or give you a bunch of ranges and dilute the accuracy. Those are
01:01:55.500
basically the two levers with which you could neuter one of these devices deliberately, which sounds
01:02:00.580
crazy, right? Like it's like a backwards step. Okay. I know you have a Zippo lighter. We're going to
01:02:06.080
start using sticks instead. We're going to rub them together, you know? So, but all that said, you
01:02:12.040
know, hopefully, you know, in an ideal world, the medical device becomes cheap enough that if you want
01:02:18.120
that level of precision, fidelity, and real-time feedback, you'll just, you know, look, doctors write
01:02:23.440
prescriptions for way crazier things than CGMs, right? I mean, you've got docs out there writing
01:02:27.960
prescriptions for pain meds all day long and every hormone under the sun. I don't think it's a big
01:02:32.380
stretch to say, doc, I need a CGM. And I think you might've mentioned this too in terms of what you
01:02:37.520
are looking to achieve and monitor with your blood glucose. You might've said that it's a proxy for
01:02:42.500
your insulin. And maybe you could explain why there isn't a continuous insulin monitor alongside
01:02:48.720
your glucose monitor, because that would be a nice get if it actually exists.
01:02:53.200
Yeah. And I looked into this a lot in 2011 and 2012. I even met with the engineer. He's actually,
01:03:01.100
I don't know if he's still there, but I don't remember his name now, unfortunately, but he was,
01:03:04.700
he might've been an emeritus professor of engineering at UCSD, but he was actually the
01:03:08.100
first guy to figure out actually how to do these real-time glucose monitors, what are called a
01:03:13.700
point of care device. And I actually took him out to lunch one day to pick his brain on, well,
01:03:17.340
why don't we just do this for insulin? And he was like, would that be interesting? And it was just
01:03:21.800
funny to talk to him because he's an engineer. Like why would he know that insulin would be as
01:03:25.400
interesting as glucose or more interesting? And, and so we actually dug into this a lot.
01:03:29.660
And basically the short of it is if you can't measure the assay using an antibody or enzymatic
01:03:37.340
reaction that very quickly without any washing yields an answer, you can't do it at a point of care
01:03:43.640
device. And insulin is pretty hard to measure. So it was initially measured using something called a
01:03:48.820
radioimmune assay. I believe today they're usually done with something called ELISA's,
01:03:53.260
which are these enzyme link, you know, I won't rattle off what ELISA stands for, but it's,
01:03:57.540
it's like, it's a chemical reaction where you have to, you know, puts, put an enzyme on something,
01:04:02.000
rinse it off, put another one on, rinse it off, et cetera. So in other words, it can't be done in a
01:04:05.260
moment. So absent that, I don't really see any direct way to measure insulin in real time. Now
01:04:11.340
I've had discussions with some companies who are interested in using CGM data to impute changes in
01:04:18.880
insulin. And I think that could be done, but I think it's a lot harder than people realize. And
01:04:25.200
you would need a lot of data to do it. Meaning you'd have, you wouldn't just be able to do it
01:04:29.320
off the CGM. You'd have to do the CGM coupled with a lot of blood draws where you actually could,
01:04:34.500
you know, basically build a regression curve off insulin and glucose to predict for future insulin.
01:04:40.140
Therein may lie an answer down the line. So absent that a good proxy for having a low level of
01:04:48.540
insulin is going to be a low level of glucose and a low level of glucose variability. And the CGM
01:04:53.000
spits out those reports. So you go, you know, you go into. In low glucose variability, one might.
01:04:59.480
Yeah. I don't know if people can see this, but I'm going to infer that the A1C might be telling you
01:05:04.520
that. The A1C is not telling you anything about the variability, but I don't know. Let's talk about
01:05:09.740
A1C in a moment, but you can see that I can spit out at any point in time, a 90 day, 30 day, 14 day,
01:05:14.280
or seven day report. And that report gives me average glucose and glucose standard deviation.
01:05:19.840
That's the variability. So why is that relevant? Well, you could have an average glucose of 85,
01:05:27.660
95, whatever, with the standard deviation of 10, which is very low variability, or you could have the
01:05:32.600
same glucose level with a standard deviation of 30. And those are very different insulin profiles.
01:05:37.820
So you want to keep, you want, you want to keep that balance closer. I've largely
01:05:42.060
discounted hemoglobin A1C in an absolute sense as a meaningful number. I think it's,
01:05:48.120
it's directionally tolerable, but mostly shit. And I know that because now I've used CGM in so many
01:05:57.400
patients with calibration and compared it to A1C. And you realize that the A1C is really at the mercy
01:06:03.680
of its most important assumption, which is a red blood cell lives for 90 to 120 days.
01:06:09.960
Anything that takes it outside of that range leads to an over or underestimation of the A1C,
01:06:15.220
and therefore an over or underestimation of the average glucose.
01:06:18.420
And you can, with an A1C, theoretically, you can say, I have an A1C of 5.4, and you can impute
01:06:24.280
what your average glucose levels were, theoretically.
01:06:27.420
Yeah. So the way the A1C works is you measure the A1C and you impute the average glucose. The way
01:06:33.060
the CGM works is you measure the average glucose, which is actually all that matters, but you can
01:06:37.060
impute the A1C. My A1C runs very high because I have this condition called beta thalassemia trait.
01:06:43.360
So I have a bunch of these little, I think I talked about this in the podcast on one of the-
01:06:46.540
Shit for blood is what they used to call it. It's one of your nicknames.
01:06:48.860
Matty used to call me shite for blood, always in a Scottish accent. You got shite for blood.
01:06:53.000
Blood. So my little shite blood cells live a long, long, long time. I mean, I have no idea,
01:06:58.900
but it's clearly longer than 120 days. So my A1C is very high. The lowest A1C I've ever seen in
01:07:03.420
myself is 5.6, and the highest is 6.0. So I'm basically just on A1C, I'm a pre-diabetic pretty
01:07:09.600
much all the time. On CGM, when you take a highly calibrated, rigorous look, my average blood glucose
01:07:18.600
imputes that I would have an A1C between 4.5 and 5. That's sort of the range that I would live in.
01:07:25.560
So that's a material difference. And again, I've seen that difference in both directions
01:07:30.160
with patients using CGM. So my hope is that in 10 years, maybe that's ambitious. I would hope that
01:07:36.600
the hemoglobin A1C can't even be ordered on a lab and everyone just has a CGM, you know, and it's like
01:07:42.000
a trivial little, you know, thing that, you know, even if you're getting a life insurance exam,
01:07:46.060
you just wear the CGM for two months and the data comes from that as opposed to actually
01:07:51.840
measuring this nonsensical number. Is it just me or are there like way more like sirens today?
01:07:58.380
Yeah. 9-11 in New York City. I don't know if that's...
01:08:01.700
Yeah. It's interesting. I feel like it's been nonstop sirens today, which is... I'm sorry for
01:08:07.640
the listener, but... I think they get the heads up that you're doing a podcast and just want to
01:08:11.420
buzz the tower. That's just how it works. I'm surprised there hasn't been drag racing and...
01:08:27.440
Lithium or lithium supplementation? Can you share your thoughts slash experiences?
01:08:32.520
Yeah. So I think the evidence that groundwater containing higher levels of lithium rather
01:08:40.900
than lower levels of lithium contributing to better mental health is as good as any such
01:08:49.120
data can be, which is to say not great. I call it like tier two epidemiology. So the worst epidemiology
01:08:55.440
in the world is people who exercise this way have this much life or people who eat this way have this
01:09:01.260
much disease or whatever. That's the worst epidemiology because you're measuring... you're
01:09:05.720
trying to accurately assess inputs and outputs. So that epidemiology, I just think we should stop
01:09:11.960
For the most part, it's epidemiology is hypothesis generating. And this is an interesting
01:09:16.420
observation, more or less. It's an interesting hypothesis.
01:09:19.460
Yeah. But the reason I'm calling this tier two epidemiology is one of those variables is fixed.
01:09:23.540
Like the groundwater lithium concentration doesn't require you guessing.
01:09:28.840
There's no healthy user bias in who's doing that. The only thing you're measuring is the
01:09:33.500
mental health on the other side. So in other words, that's a better type of epi, just like the
01:09:37.740
IGF one I alluded to earlier. But it's actually not subtle. So if you look at those data, it's actually
01:09:43.500
not that subtle. When you overlay like the US map of groundwater of lithium and mental health,
01:09:49.100
it's a very nice association. Now, there is no doubt in my mind that you could think of other
01:09:55.900
explanations for that. I mean, and that's the beauty of trying to be thoughtful about these
01:10:00.440
things as well. Maybe the lithium in the groundwater is a proxy for something else. Maybe it's a proxy
01:10:05.800
for education, for socioeconomic status, for weather. Like you could think of 10 other things that
01:10:11.220
could be... So all of that said, at the first order, it doesn't appear that there's an obvious
01:10:16.600
proxy. But there still may well be. But at the other end of the spectrum, what's the cost of
01:10:22.160
the intervention of trying it out? And so I decided several years ago that I wanted to try
01:10:28.720
taking some lithium to see if it could help stabilize my mood. But that's sort of a crazy
01:10:35.320
thing to do. So I did a ton of homework. And luckily, one of my best friends, Paul Conti, who I've
01:10:41.100
interviewed and will hopefully be on the podcast shortly, maybe even by the time this has come out,
01:10:45.180
well, that's that true. Do you know the order of those, Nick?
01:10:49.800
Oh, sweet. All right. So you'll have you'll have already met Paul Conti by the time this comes out.
01:10:54.240
Paul has an unbelievable experience with lithium because he is one of the few psychiatrists out
01:10:59.540
there remaining who is still very comfortable using lithium in monotherapy for high risk bipolar
01:11:06.380
patients. So usually a patient with bipolar disorder is treated with several drugs. But in some
01:11:12.240
cases, some of the drugs, either the patients don't respond, they're recalcitrant to the drug,
01:11:16.500
or they produce such negative side effects. They can drive up suicidal ideation, things like that,
01:11:22.760
that you basically have to resort to just lithium. And now that's a really scary. That's about as scary
01:11:27.960
a case as a psychiatrist can be. And because you basically have to put enough lithium in that patient
01:11:32.960
to take them almost to a toxic dose without pushing them over. So I wanted to learn everything
01:11:37.560
about lithium toxicity from talking with Paul. And this is going to sound a little crazy. But when I
01:11:42.300
first started taking lithium, I actually took it at a very high dose, not the dose that someone who
01:11:46.560
was taking monotherapy for bipolar would take. But I was taking about half that amount. So I was taking
01:11:50.920
about 600 milligrams a day. And again, I hesitate to talk about this because I know some knucklehead is
01:11:56.160
going to go and take 600 milligrams of lithium a day. Let me be crystal fucking clear. If you were not
01:12:01.760
under the care of a physician who is super dialed in on how to measure lithium levels,
01:12:07.440
when to measure lithium levels, which lithiums you take, because it comes in a bunch of forms,
01:12:11.820
doing this is tantamount to suicide. I mean, it's complete stupidity. So with all of that said,
01:12:18.460
under the most careful, closely monitored conditions that one could have, including getting lithium levels
01:12:24.180
checked constantly, I spent about a year taking 600 milligrams of lithium a day. In two doses,
01:12:30.820
there's two different types of lithium, a slow release, a fast release. I did it as an interesting
01:12:35.660
experiment and I didn't tell anyone I was doing it because I wanted to know if anybody else would
01:12:40.780
appreciate, because I'm an emotionally volatile, crazy guy. So it was like, there should be a
01:12:45.940
noticeable difference. And interestingly, the first person to notice it was my wife, which was about
01:12:51.600
four months in when she was like, something's different in you. What is it? Again, I have no idea
01:12:57.580
because of course, by me knowing I was taking the lithium, maybe that altered my behavior.
01:13:02.700
In the end, I decided I did not want to take mega doses of lithium because I did notice
01:13:07.760
I could actually have side effects. The first side effects of too much lithium are nausea.
01:13:14.000
Now, even when you're nauseous on lithium, you still don't reach the blood level that approaches the
01:13:19.600
toxic levels, which makes me wonder how those poor patients who are constantly taking 900 to 1200
01:13:25.440
milligrams a day of lithium are tolerating it. But I noticed whenever I traveled through different
01:13:31.400
time zones, if I took the lithium at different times because it was being compressed, if I was
01:13:37.560
stacking time zones flying east, I would start to get nauseous when I took it. And I was like,
01:13:42.560
what the hell is that from? And I realized, oh my God, like you probably just effectively took 900
01:13:46.280
milligrams. So I was like, you know what? I don't think there's enough upside. I feel a bit better on
01:13:50.520
this, but I don't feel that much better that it's worth this hassle. So I just stopped it for a
01:13:54.480
couple of years. And then recently, like about two years ago, I decided I went back and looked at the
01:13:59.600
data and I was like, look, if those groundwater data are correct, you don't need to be taking that
01:14:04.540
much lithium to reproduce the levels. It's we're talking 10 to 20 milligrams. And that's actually
01:14:08.920
an over-the-counter dose. So, so that's why I take it. Now, again, I have certain, you know,
01:14:15.320
things that I take that I put in the category of probably not harmful, not sure how much value I'm
01:14:20.600
getting out of it. This would be one of those things. This is the, the penny in front of a
01:14:24.940
bulldozer. Yeah. This is the two by two, right? So the reward is, are you getting a penny or are you
01:14:30.640
getting a Bitcoin? The risk is, are you picking this up in front? Is it like picking that thing up
01:14:36.020
in front of a tricycle or a train? This to me is trying to pick up a penny, call it a dollar
01:14:41.920
inflation. It's picking up a dollar in front of a tricycle. Yeah. At the end of the day, Hey,
01:14:47.860
it's a dollar. It's a dollar more than I had before. And if, if I'm wrong, the tricycle
01:14:51.740
hitting me is not a lot of work. What you never really want to do is pick up dollars in front of
01:14:56.680
trains. If you are going to step in front of a train, it better be to get a, you know, a basket
01:15:02.260
a bit. Yes, exactly. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So I don't know if you, you said this, but when your wife said
01:15:10.160
there's something different, she noticed something different. Did she say what it is or do you know
01:15:14.500
what was that difference? Yeah. She said, you're less of an asshole. Interesting. It wasn't subtle.
01:15:23.100
She said, I don't know how to put my finger on it. It's something about your, um,
01:15:33.080
Okay. And then when you supplemented on, you said maybe like 10 milligrams versus 600,
01:15:38.680
were you, do you think you're achieving the same effect? Now it's impossible to know because the
01:15:43.660
very first time I did all this stuff was before I meditated. And frankly, before I paid attention
01:15:48.800
to any of this stuff, I think I can be just as much of an asshole today as I used to be. I think
01:15:52.620
the difference is I'm now so much more aware of it that I can correct my assholeness quicker. Like
01:15:57.780
I can be an asshole, but then I'll snap out of it in like 20 minutes as opposed to two days.
01:16:02.960
So I think now there are so many confounders that it would be impossible for me to say,
01:16:07.800
has lithium made any difference in my mental health? Truthfully, uh, insights about berberine.
01:16:13.700
So berberine is a plant derived extract that has two properties, one of which it gets a lot of
01:16:20.160
attention for one of which it might not be as well known. The first is that it is a weak AMP kinase
01:16:26.520
activator. And for those of you that have shown an interest in what metformin does, that's sort of the,
01:16:32.480
that's probably the secret sauce of metformin is it's AMPK activation. So berberine when taken at,
01:16:41.160
you know, sort of recommended OTC doses, which I don't remember the doses anymore. I think it's
01:16:47.400
like a, it might be actually a comparable dose to metformin. It might be like either 500 twice a day
01:16:52.620
or a thousand twice a day does have some of that weak AMPK activation. And what that, the net effect of
01:16:59.680
that is it decreases hepatic glucose output. So it's upregulating AMPK is telling the liver,
01:17:07.100
Hey, you can make less glucose. So send less glucose out of the body. And so in that sense,
01:17:12.940
it's a poor man's version of metformin. I don't find that, that interesting. I prefer to just use
01:17:18.860
metformin. If we're going to go down that path, like let's do it pharmacologically with potent drugs
01:17:23.620
that we understand that are consistent from batch to batch that have a much higher sort of oversight of
01:17:28.680
regulation and that kind of stuff. The other thing about berberine, and this is the, this is when I
01:17:32.380
still do use it in clinical practice is it is also a weak inhibitor of the enzyme PCSK9, which any
01:17:40.920
listener of this podcast is going to be very well up to speed on what PCSK9 is. The word on the street
01:17:47.420
is it probably only works in a subset of people who overexpress PCSK9. So if you, so PCSK9 is a,
01:17:56.840
is a protein that degrades LDL receptors. So if you overexpress this enzyme, you're going to really
01:18:05.280
degrade LDL receptors. You're going to have a higher LDL particle number and probably a higher
01:18:10.260
LDL cholesterol. If you take that subset of patients, they seem to respond quite nicely to
01:18:15.420
berberine. Now the question is, how do you know that? I don't think there's a test anymore to measure
01:18:21.120
that. Atherotech, which I think might've got absorbed into VAP or something like that. I think
01:18:26.840
he used to have a test, but in the end I was like, why am I going to do some test on somebody to see if
01:18:30.580
they overexpress PCSK9 before I give them berberine? I'll just give them berberine, make no other change
01:18:34.800
and see if there's not a significant enough difference in their LDL. I don't care.
01:18:39.120
And every once in a while, you just, you look like a rockstar. You get this patient whose LDL is
01:18:44.340
really high and you check your boxes. Like they don't have, their triglycerides aren't that high.
01:18:51.300
Their phytosterols are not that high. Their stanols are not that high. Their desmosterol is not that
01:18:56.440
high. Hey, they clearly have defective LDL clearance. Maybe they overexpress PCSK9, which would be one of
01:19:02.740
a thousand reasons you could have high, like literally there are 2000 genetic mutations that
01:19:08.220
can lead to an inability to clear LDL receptacles. This is like one of them, but this one amounts to about
01:19:12.560
5% of them. And so in that patient, you hit them with berberine and all of a sudden like
01:19:17.000
everything's fixed. Do you see that with metformin at all? No, no, I don't think metformin possesses
01:19:21.840
that piece of what berberine has. Okay. Now, what is your reasoning for taking baby aspirin and what
01:19:28.900
does the science say? Well, interesting timing. So the science has changed on this as of about a month
01:19:33.480
ago. So my thinking on this has actually changed in the past month. Historically, I took baby aspirin just
01:19:38.740
because I come from a family where heart disease is rampant and that's sort of, you know,
01:19:42.560
in the spirit of our good friend, Charlie Munger, you brought up a moment ago, you know,
01:19:46.180
show me where I'm going to die and I'll try to not be there. So, uh, you know, the crystal ball
01:19:50.520
says I'm probably going to die of heart disease. So let's do everything in our power to mitigate it.
01:19:54.920
Let's keep the lipids as low as possible. Inflammation as low as possible. Don't do
01:19:59.280
anything that's going to exacerbate endothelial dysfunction. Take the baby aspirin, which probably
01:20:04.420
has some effect on inflammation, but probably the majority of its effect is, is obviously on platelets
01:20:09.380
and therefore reducing thrombotic events, which are the final, like that's, that's what pushes you
01:20:14.980
off the cliff when you have an MI. I would have said that prior to a month ago, my view on baby
01:20:20.480
aspirin was if your aspirin works test is positive. So the aspirin works test is a test we do in urine
01:20:26.000
that measures metabolites of platelets and basically tries to predict which patients will and won't
01:20:35.640
respond to baby aspirin. If that level is high, my practice used to be to put patients on a baby aspirin
01:20:41.640
if there was at least one other reason to do so. So if they had an elevated LPPLA2, if they had an
01:20:47.820
elevated LPPLA, if they had a significant enough risk of heart disease, that I would feel that those
01:20:54.100
two things, and I fit in that category, right? So I have a normal LPPLA2, normal LPPLA2, but my family
01:21:00.500
history for heart disease is high and my aspirin works was high. So that's why I take a baby aspirin.
01:21:05.280
And then you have to weigh that against the consequence of a baby aspirin, which is, look,
01:21:08.540
you're going to have a little more easy bruising. You have, you run a small risk, almost unmeasurable
01:21:13.000
of having an ulcer. Nowadays we're using, you know, because you're using a baby aspirin,
01:21:17.600
it's enterically coded. You know, this is a far lower risk than say taking ibuprofen or something like
01:21:22.460
that. The coating helps it get into the small intestine rather than the stomach. Yeah. It basically
01:21:27.600
prevents it from, you know, sort of destroying the gastric mucosa. Now that said, there was a study
01:21:33.580
that came out probably about three weeks ago, we could link to it, that looked at healthy, so low
01:21:39.620
risk populations. And it found that the risk of taking a baby aspirin was very small, which we
01:21:46.140
always knew, but the benefit was also very, very small, such that it was pretty much a wash. And I
01:21:50.960
would say that, you know, that's the nature of clinical medicine. As more and more data become
01:21:54.840
available, you start to revise your criteria. How will this change the way I practice? I will
01:21:59.280
likely be just a little bit less interested in giving baby aspirin to a patient who is otherwise
01:22:05.080
low risk. And certainly patients that had, didn't have an elevated aspirin works, I would rarely use
01:22:09.400
it anyway, unless there were some other overwhelming reason. Will I keep taking it? Eh. As I look to
01:22:15.440
streamline the list, you know, I'm always kind of tweaking what I'm taking. You know, one thing that's
01:22:19.140
interesting about baby aspirin, it's not a great, this is a great example of like what our research team is
01:22:23.900
capable of, right? I used to also think baby aspirin was a reasonable thing to take on a
01:22:28.480
flight. You know, if you're flying, if you're on a long flight, you don't want to minimize your risk
01:22:32.060
of a blood clot, take a baby aspirin, especially if you have another risk factor. So any patient I
01:22:36.440
had that had an elevated LP little a, which is increases your risk of blood clotting probably by
01:22:40.660
two X, although that's still debatable. Those are patients that should take two baby aspirin on a
01:22:45.060
flight kind of thing. Then we had the team look into this, right? I think Dan looked into all of this
01:22:48.920
stuff and wrote a really nice white paper on it. And it turned out that the data didn't support it at
01:22:52.980
all actually, you know? So you were basically in the camp of either taking flight tabs or low
01:22:57.980
molecular weight heparin, which I've taken low molecular weight heparin, but it's injectable.
01:23:02.180
I've taken it on really long flights. And in the end, I'm like, it's just not worth the fricking
01:23:05.820
hassle. Like I'd rather just get up and walk around as much as possible. So, but yeah, and just a great
01:23:10.600
example of how a lot of times things that are intuitive might turn out to be not necessarily standing
01:23:15.480
up to the rigor of a clinical trial. And these are the things that are easy to study in clinical
01:23:19.700
trials. You know, a lot of times clinical trials don't answer questions that we care about, but this
01:23:24.260
is the kind of stuff where they can give you a pretty good answer. Okay. This is switching gears
01:23:28.640
a little bit. How do you use heart rate variability as a metric in your practice and or in your own
01:23:34.340
personal use sleep, pre post exercise, pre post eating every morning readiness? So when I started
01:23:42.740
getting into heart rate variability, it was long before there were commercial, you know, like rings and
01:23:48.680
wearables that were making it easy to track. So God, I'm blanking on the guy's name who got me
01:23:54.160
into it. His name is Will Eden works for Peter Thiel. And I don't know how I met Will, but you know,
01:24:01.240
we had a bunch of friends in common and somehow we met and, um, probably like six years ago. And I went
01:24:06.580
up and spent a day in Peter's office and he was showing me like the raw data on their heart math.
01:24:12.700
So heart math was a company that was running the algorithm on chest strap. So chest strap that was
01:24:17.580
gathering the data and then heart math was the algorithm. You're doing it. And I was really impressed
01:24:22.360
by the data. Roughly speaking, what is heart rate variability? I guess it's worth defining this. Uh,
01:24:26.400
this would be another great whiteboard discussion. Why didn't we get a little, like we should have had
01:24:30.020
like a little post-it, like a little white little flip chart here. We could, we could just draw on the
01:24:34.900
walls too. I'm sure your kids do it sometimes. You want to hear a funny story about this? So I got in
01:24:40.540
really late last night, but it was still early enough that somehow my son Reese was up. But I
01:24:47.400
like, as I landed, he's just getting ready to go to bed. And I'm like, Oh, I just, I want to like
01:24:51.520
FaceTime him. Right. So we have this thing where I tell him stories every night and I don't know where
01:24:56.120
this came from, but like, I just decided the name of the character was Reginald. I just love the name
01:25:00.820
Reginald. Right. So I'm like, Reginald is a four-year-old boy who has a younger brother and an older
01:25:05.360
sister. And it's like, everything is about Reese, except it's not about Reese. It's Reginald. And
01:25:10.020
Reese is obsessed with trash cans, but Reginald's obsessed with helicopters. So we're into a sweet
01:25:15.640
Reginald story. And you can see my wife is sitting next to him and she's like kind of rolling her
01:25:19.700
eyes. Like, come on, get on with it. Like, I got to get this kid to bed. And I'm like, so I was like,
01:25:24.280
I got to make it a quick story. So I'm like, one day Reginald wanted to draw a picture, but he
01:25:31.220
couldn't find any paper. So he grabbed his markers and he drew a big helicopter on the wall
01:25:37.840
and Reese like sits up and he goes, he did what? And I hear my wife go, good story, dad. And I'm
01:25:45.460
like, oh, I mean, but after he drew the helicopter on the wall, he was grounded for a month and never
01:25:50.840
allowed to draw again. And I had to like walk myself back. It's a good save. Um, I think dads just do
01:25:59.660
that. Like, I think we just give kids bad ideas and we don't realize it because we put foot and
01:26:04.840
mouth disease. I think it's term. Yeah, I think so. Even like today I heard, I heard about it again.
01:26:10.880
She's like, he's still talking about Reginald drawing on the wall. Like just so you know, when
01:26:15.980
that happens, you're the one painting it. It was like, fine. I'm sorry. I'm just trying to tell a
01:26:22.060
story. What was I talking about? HRV. Oh, HRV. Right. So, so when you look at this, so, so people listening
01:26:28.700
to this, I'm sorry, this won't make much sense, but if you're watching this, hopefully you'll see
01:26:32.160
this. So when you look at an EKG, which you probably appreciate is there's like this little
01:26:36.280
P wave, which is the atrial contraction. And then there's the little downtick of the Q,
01:26:41.900
the R and the S wave, and that's the ventricular contraction. And then there's the T wave,
01:26:47.400
which is the repolarization. And so that is like one heartbeat P dip Q spike R S T. Can people
01:26:56.200
see that Nick when I'm doing that? I bet I can figure out the technology that it like makes
01:26:59.700
when you're doing that, we can make the sinus wave. That would be very Rhonda Patrick. Rhonda
01:27:04.560
would do that. That's, that's, that's, that's Rhonda would take it to that level. We might be
01:27:09.360
too lazy. Okay. So let's say somebody's heart rate is beating 60 times per minute. They're,
01:27:14.860
they're at rest. The length of time between those R waves, because the spike of the R wave is the most
01:27:20.900
obvious place to measure the beat to beat time would be one second, right? 60 beats per minute.
01:27:26.700
If you're beating 120 beats per minute, it would be half a second or 500 milliseconds.
01:27:33.080
So what heart rate variability is doing is asking the question, how much variability is there between
01:27:39.460
those beats? And you might think, well, if you're just sitting there at rest, how much variability can
01:27:44.160
there be? And the answer is it depends on what time scale you're using to measure it. If you're just
01:27:49.040
measuring it in seconds, not much at all, but if you're measuring it in one thousandths of a second
01:27:53.780
or milliseconds, there could be quite a bit. So somebody who's EKG or, you know, heart rate
01:27:59.000
measurement looks like it's chugging along at 60 beats per minute. It might still be, you know,
01:28:03.720
970 milliseconds, 1030 milliseconds, 1005 milliseconds, 970 milliseconds, et cetera.
01:28:12.260
There's a mathematical algorithm that you applied that you apply to that called the root mean square
01:28:17.400
of the standard deviation that basically our MSSD that basically turns that number. It's a
01:28:24.880
transformation. So it's, it's in mathematics, we call these things transformations where you
01:28:28.500
basically compress these numbers and you can then now measure how much variability there's going on.
01:28:35.360
Okay. I don't want to get much more into the math on that in large part. Cause I actually don't,
01:28:38.780
I'm not, I'm, you know, like I'm not an expert on this topic.
01:28:41.680
There's a little bit of this on the, the Lustig podcast.
01:28:43.900
That's right. Yeah. We talked about the high, the high frequency versus the low frequency.
01:28:47.080
That's right. And we included that in the show notes. So that's, that's helpful.
01:28:49.860
Looking at the difference between the RR intervals or something like that.
01:28:53.180
Well, the RR interval is the raw data. Like, so I'll back up for a moment. So when I got really
01:28:57.640
into this, there were basically only two companies that were doing the analysis, heart math and
01:29:01.640
first beat. I chose to work with first beat, even though I would say at the time,
01:29:05.980
both of their algorithms were excellent. But the first beat was a, you actually,
01:29:11.420
it came with its own like little EKG thing. So it came with a, you would put a sticker here
01:29:16.000
and you'd put a sticker here. And then basically you hung this little battery packed wire across
01:29:21.340
your chest. Like a couple of leads under. You had a couple of leads. Yeah. And it was actually
01:29:25.760
funny because the stickiness of their leads was so profound. I have like leather skin, like nothing
01:29:31.260
can hurt me. I was like completely tore my skin off. I was like for a year or two years after I
01:29:38.160
started using it, I was depigmented where I had those leads. It was like, so we ended up like
01:29:43.220
realizing, well, this is gonna be really hard to do with patients. So they came out with like a less
01:29:47.420
sticky lead and you know, we got away with it, but it would capture the data. Then you would
01:29:51.600
actually have to send the device. You know, you'd have to plug the device in your computer and it
01:29:56.360
would, you know, sort of do the analysis before I get to what I do today. The more important
01:30:00.520
point is what did that data tell us? What were we looking for? So we were looking for
01:30:03.760
several things. So the device could measure heart rate, heart rate variability and respiratory rate.
01:30:09.740
Obviously it has the, it's an, it has the sensitivity to measure the thoracic movement.
01:30:14.740
It would use an algorithm. First beat had an algorithm and I'm sure heart math has its own
01:30:19.120
algorithm and they're both proprietary to impute from that, whether they believed that the user was in
01:30:26.660
a more parasympathetic or sympathetic state or under a period of profound stress, like exercise.
01:30:33.300
So if heart rate variability became very low and heart rate and respiratory rate were high,
01:30:39.240
it would basically impute that to be, you are exercising and it would graphically represent that
01:30:43.780
one way. If heart rate were low, heart rate variability were high. It would interpret that as low sympathetic
01:30:53.320
tone, low fight or flight tone, high parasympathetic tone. It would represent that a certain way. And
01:30:59.680
you can, you know, extrapolate from there. So the advantage of this is you could get really cool data
01:31:05.460
and you would typically have the patient wear this for three days, taking it off only to shower. So they
01:31:10.600
would exercise with it. They would sleep with it. They would change the lead once a day. It became a
01:31:14.640
really helpful way for us to try to look at sleep patterns. The problem is the compliance was very low.
01:31:21.460
Most patients didn't want to do it. And it took so long to get the data. You know, if a patient was
01:31:25.220
in New York doing this, they'd have to mail the thing back to, you know, Mary and San Diego. And
01:31:29.680
it was just kind of a pain in the ass. So the products like Aura Ring or, you know, there's others
01:31:36.620
like, you know, Whoop tries to do this. Motive tries to do this. I can't speak to their technology
01:31:40.740
as well, but nevertheless, now we can basically get those data every day when we wake up, just looking
01:31:48.300
at the data from our wearable. So as a general rule, you want to see higher heart rate variability
01:31:52.940
because that's a marker of more parasympathetic flow provided again, that's being measured
01:31:58.000
correctly. So, so the things that I've observed, so, so when you, when you look at the recovery
01:32:02.240
index on the Aura Ring, which is one of its menus, what it's basically doing is using a lot
01:32:06.040
of data, but one of them is the parasympathetic, the, the heart rate variability. So as you over
01:32:10.800
train, your heart rate variability will go down. Your resting heart rate will go up.
01:32:14.400
I think I've talked about this in the past, but alcohol and shitty food close to bedtime
01:32:20.140
will absolutely tank my resting heart rate, meaning it will drive it way up and will drive
01:32:25.560
my heart rate variability down. And it's not subtle. It's not like, well, that's on the edge.
01:32:29.420
No, no, no. Like it's because you see the tracing of the data overnight. It's only reporting the
01:32:34.240
average and the max, but you can just look at the raw data and it's pretty clear that, you
01:32:39.180
know, those things, you know, really diminish those parameters. And by extension, then your,
01:32:43.720
your recovery and your sleep quality. So heart rate variability then becomes one of the parameters
01:32:49.740
along with temperature movement, et cetera, that then feeds into the algorithms that predict sleep
01:32:54.980
quality and recovery. Again, I've kind of forgot the question, but I know it had to do with heart
01:32:59.660
rate variability. How you use it in the practice and personally, and I'm wondering, is it actionable?
01:33:05.480
You've talked about doing deadlifts and saying, I forget the number, but it's, it's not small where
01:33:10.220
you say you'll, you're doing deadlifts. You'll warm up. You're going to be warming up to a heavy
01:33:13.600
and then you actually, you walk away cause you're not feeling it that day. Is there anything that
01:33:17.140
you look at it with the HRV, the readiness or things like that and say, absolutely, I'm feeling
01:33:21.120
great, but this thing is telling me. Absolutely. I, I, I, so there's two things that are really
01:33:25.640
valuable. The first is, and this gets to the point we made with the CGM, which is real time
01:33:30.180
feedback is awesome. Take away real time feedback. It's hard to do anything. I mean, everybody's
01:33:35.040
heard the famous experiments when you put on a headphone that delays your voice, you hearing
01:33:41.300
your voice by a few seconds, you can't carry on for more than a sentence. Oh yeah. Right.
01:33:45.640
I've experienced that. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So that's actually, that's horrible. That's like
01:33:48.660
negative feedback. That's not just taking away the feedback. That's like actually inserting
01:33:52.040
negative feedback, which is incredibly destructive. So the first thing is when I wake up in the morning
01:33:56.800
and I see that my HRV or my heart rate or my temperature or my respiratory rate is off. And again,
01:34:02.280
I have my parameters. I know what I want to be. I immediately can say, what did you do different?
01:34:07.300
I mean, that's how I sort of figured out what my tolerance for alcohol was. You can have one drink,
01:34:12.960
don't have two. And by the way, one's not even good. Like one gives you slight hit two is a brick
01:34:18.740
over the head. And probably what time are you drinking? Yeah. Like when are you drinking that?
01:34:22.540
And then like, that's how I've certainly figured out like meal timing, like, Oh boy, you're eating a
01:34:26.580
little too close to bed. Like that's not good. Room temperature. Like all, you know, all of the,
01:34:30.960
the crap that I do is largely based on this empirical iterative tinkering approach,
01:34:37.780
which allows me to have data. And then of course, by giving patients, these devices,
01:34:42.000
you can figure out what's true for a patient because it might necessarily be true for me.
01:34:46.100
So in many ways, I'm trying to help a patient understand how they can do the tinkering so that
01:34:50.960
they can figure out their optimal state. I mean, I, for example, I like a room to be as cold as is
01:34:55.280
humanly possible. I mean, if it's like, if I don't get under the covers and feel incredibly
01:35:00.800
uncomfortable, I'm going to be too hot by, by my standards, but that, you know, that might be
01:35:05.580
not at all your standard. Right. So that's that. And then to your point, yeah, the readiness score
01:35:09.480
for me, especially when I'm starting to feel a little sick, sometimes that readiness score
01:35:14.480
becomes the harbinger of that. And also it also gives me some inclination. You'll, you'll often see
01:35:20.480
it dip after you've had two consecutive days of really hard workouts. Now I will say this,
01:35:25.100
I don't think it's as sensitive to lifting workouts. So it doesn't seem to possess the
01:35:30.900
ability to distinguish between like you did deadlifts until you puked versus you, you know,
01:35:36.260
you're at the hotel gym and you did leg press. Like it can't, but what it sure as hell knows is like
01:35:42.120
you went out and, you know, expended 1500 kilojoules yesterday on a bike or a thousand kilojoules
01:35:49.600
in a run where you ran at, you know, seven minute miles. Like it knows that. And it, you,
01:35:54.760
you, you stack a couple of those days on top of each other and it says that's, that's serious
01:35:59.620
illness. I'd love to see the data on, you know, cause I, I think a couple of teams in the Tour de
01:36:05.560
France wore the aura ring this year. I'd love to see what those data were like. Their recovery
01:36:10.040
scores must've been the lowest numbers imaginable because of the physiologic stress they're under.
01:36:14.280
So despite the fact that they're so fit and like, you know, the most remarkable physical
01:36:18.860
specimens, you know, I mean, look at the sort of the trend over the course of the three weeks
01:36:23.800
and see the dip. Yeah. Yeah. Really interesting. Oh, I, I, I, I need to make a note to, cause I,
01:36:30.180
I I'd like to follow up and see if they've, if anyone's ever been willing to share those data.
01:36:34.040
And you mentioned, you may have mentioned this before, but on your, when you fasted,
01:36:37.940
you did a week long fast, you said your sleep was remarkable. Yes. Did the aura ring, did that,
01:36:42.520
did it corroborate it in any way when you looked at the data from the aura ring that it tells you
01:36:46.900
anything? Rem sleep, deep sleep. Yeah. Uh, the biggest, the deep sleep is what went up the most.
01:36:52.600
So the deep sleep went up the most. The light sleep went down the least, went down the most.
01:36:56.760
So lights. So stage one and two went down stage three and four went up. Rem was about unchanged.
01:37:01.820
HRV was higher. Resting heart rate was on par with what it is. If you're not eating and drinking
01:37:06.340
before bed, I'm trying to think what else I have to go back and look. I think respiratory rate went
01:37:10.880
down, which I, I think is a VCO2 thing. I think that the shittier and more carby a meal is before
01:37:20.080
bed, the higher your VCO2, you're really trying to blow off more of that CO2. Yeah. We know that
01:37:24.720
your respiratory quotient is higher. So unless your VO2 is going up, your VCO2 has to be the thing that's
01:37:31.560
going up more. That would, wouldn't surprise me to see respiratory rate go up a little bit.
01:37:36.100
But anecdotally, that's at least what I think I'm seeing. Interesting.
01:37:46.700
What are we at? We're at an hour 45? God damn. I, I freaking talk too much, man.
01:37:56.140
I have a bonus round. We've got through like five questions. Yeah. Yeah. We could get through
01:37:59.880
more questions if we, if we do a gimmick. I mean, you love gimmicks. You love bumper. You know,
01:38:04.680
I love gimmicks. Bumper sticker. Love it. Yeah. Wallpaper your cars with, with bumper stickers.
01:38:10.820
I was thinking we could do like a speed round or I used to watch pardon the interruption where it
01:38:15.440
was, I think they had different segments, but probably like 90 seconds. Nick doesn't have a
01:38:19.800
bell that he can ring with the 90 seconds, but maybe he can, he's got a timer. He's got a speed
01:38:24.740
master professional is what he's got. I'm not wearing my, uh, my Casio calculator watch, but
01:38:30.080
I'm pretty sure it's better than the speed master. I could be wrong. I don't know. The moon watch,
01:38:36.780
man, it might be the single most special watch ever made. So do you want to give this a shot?
01:38:41.580
I basically will. I got one minute to answer a question. Yeah. 60 seconds to 90 seconds.
01:38:46.540
All right. So why don't we just say 90 seconds? Nick'll bludgeon you with a club. If you don't,
01:38:50.440
if you go over, yeah, 90 seconds. So here we go with the emergence of the coconut oil is pure.
01:38:58.260
Does he start timing after you finish the question? I was thinking about that as I was
01:39:02.000
reading. Yeah. After the question, after the question, 90 seconds, he'll scream out every
01:39:06.140
five seconds, how much time you have left. Cause I know that that would really be, that'll help.
01:39:09.300
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. That'll be good. With the emergence of the coconut oil is pure poison article.
01:39:13.960
Can you shed some light on saturated fat in the literature and the types of studies done
01:39:17.680
specifically on coconut oil? It's a great question for 90 seconds and go. I'm going to time it on
01:39:23.420
here too, just so I can keep you honest. Um, 85 seconds. I think that that whole coconut oil
01:39:30.520
literature stuff is sort of ridiculous because I don't even want to get started on nutritional
01:39:34.940
epidemiology. I've already alluded to it a bunch of times. I think it is the lowest form of human
01:39:40.700
inference imaginable, which is not to say it provides zero benefit, but it's at the hazard ratios that
01:39:47.220
these things typically come up coupled with the reliance on food frequency questionnaires,
01:39:52.940
something I've even filled out myself just to prove how ridiculously useless they are. Like
01:39:57.100
ask me what I ate two days ago, not a chance. I'm going to be able to give you anything within an
01:40:02.640
order of magnitude of reality. All that said, I actually think the case for saturated fat may be
01:40:09.540
overstated. Meaning I think that the view that saturated fat is never harmful and we should be able
01:40:15.260
to ingest it at the tune of 90% of our calories. Uh, I think we have to accept the reality that
01:40:20.540
that, that can't be healthy for everyone. Certainly clinically, I don't see that to be the case. Uh,
01:40:25.600
I know I've only got 24 seconds left. So what I would say is rather than rely on some knucklehead
01:40:32.060
study put out by some bottom feeding group of, you know, information providers learn to understand
01:40:39.140
what the biomarkers are that change as a result of it, both inflammatory lipoprotein lipid wise,
01:40:45.260
time go done. Would you discuss the recent meta studies that claim moderate carbohydrate intake
01:40:52.500
may be best for health? You might be able to cite your previous question. So citing my previous answer.
01:40:58.560
Yeah. That study that in particular you're referring to, I'm sure we'll link to it. I don't even
01:41:02.380
remember. It must've come out of the Harvard school of public health, right? Yes. Okay. Yeah.
01:41:05.460
So the bottom line is, look, it suffers from all of the usual problems of epidemiology. Uh, and this,
01:41:12.540
by the way, Zoe Harcum actually wrote a great piece on this. So I, I, she will just point people
01:41:16.800
to that because I think she did a better job explaining this, all the usual epi nonsense.
01:41:21.120
Then on top of that layer in the, like the nutritional epi nonsense, which is like, again,
01:41:25.840
nutritional epi is like its own brand of really bad epi, which is in and of itself a horrible
01:41:32.180
brand of science. And then on top of that, there were some really, you know, systemic issues.
01:41:36.920
They, you know, she points out they didn't correct for alcohol consumption. They had some other really
01:41:41.140
odd confounders in there. The hazard ratios were themselves quite low. And they, you know, again,
01:41:46.340
this is more of a reporting issue than it was an issue of the actual survey. But again, all of these
01:41:52.860
risks always seem to be discussed in absolute terms, in relative terms, when in absolute terms,
01:41:57.200
they're not, I mean, people have heard me rail on the women's health initiative for the same reason
01:42:00.480
in terms of the hormone replacement therapy component of that, you know, talking about a 24% increase in
01:42:06.420
breast cancer in a relative sense when the absolute increase was 0.1%. These things to me are an
01:42:11.560
abomination and I'm going to just time out at a minute 26. Yeah. And I think anytime you look at
01:42:17.180
relative risk, it doesn't really tell you anything unless you also know they tell you what absolute
01:42:21.820
risk is too. You should always look at those two things together. Yes. You have to know, look at,
01:42:26.400
notice how I'm using a little bonus time here. We're outside of the time and he's asking me a
01:42:30.280
question. So I'm just going to take it. That's right. You have to know absolute risk. You have to know
01:42:34.220
relative risk and you have to know the period over time under which the condition was studied
01:42:38.600
relative to the natural course of the illness. It's that third part that doesn't get enough
01:42:43.000
attention. So anyway, I'll off the soapbox. What is the number one recommendation habit you
01:42:50.000
would suggest every person add to their daily regimen besides physical activity in parentheses
01:42:55.300
for wholesome health? Okay. That's exactly the kind of question. Like I never want to talk
01:42:59.040
about it. I don't know. I mean, again, you can't answer this question without sounding glib. Like
01:43:04.700
get a lot of sleep. Do something physical every day. Don't eat for a long period of time. When you
01:43:11.900
do eat, don't eat crap. Meditate. I'm going to leave it at that. Number one. Was there a number one?
01:43:19.560
The number one? You know, I know we could probably work it in somehow to say like the number one,
01:43:24.660
the number one habit or the number one habit that you could get into is to, is to, it's almost like
01:43:29.460
Feynman's first principle. You could say that like, don't just, don't take someone's number one
01:43:33.140
recommendation. Okay. So that would be the elegant thing to say. The one thing I would say on this
01:43:38.520
that's important to understand is probably sleep is the one we are going to be most sensitive to.
01:43:43.780
In other words, if I said to you, don't eat for this many days or don't eat well for this many days,
01:43:49.380
I mean, you could get away with that for a long time. I think an average person could probably go 30
01:43:53.660
days without eating. They could go years without eating well and still make a recovery. How long
01:43:59.560
could you go without sleeping before you're completely off the rails? I mean, it's days.
01:44:05.700
So in many ways, you know, we say sleep might be the single most important, but that's probably not
01:44:10.920
accurate information. That's probably not the correct way to say it. The right way to say it is
01:44:14.620
probably sleep is the one that you will suffer from the quickest. Yeah. That was close. That was like
01:44:19.600
129. What does it mean if your body has a harder time getting into ketosis via fasting
01:44:24.580
than it used to testing using a precision extra? Oh, that's an interesting question. So the
01:44:30.360
implication is that at one point, this person was fasting, getting into nutritional ketosis,
01:44:35.240
uh, or getting into starvation ketosis, presumably. Is this filler filibustering right now?
01:44:39.560
Yeah. Is this the timer going? Yeah. Yeah. I think it would be similar to, to like people talking,
01:44:44.740
like I went on an Atkins diet and I, you know, the, the weight melted off. And then 10 years later,
01:44:49.200
I went on an Atkins diet and I was like, I could, my weight wasn't really. So I don't know if I infer
01:44:52.740
that from the question. See, to me, they're talking about the numerical values of the BHB level.
01:44:56.980
Yeah. Um, well not, no, yes. Yeah. Yeah. So it's different. It could be a different interpretation.
01:45:00.940
So, so the, those are two entirely different questions. So we should just pick one and answer it.
01:45:04.660
If we, if the question is, I don't get to the same levels of BHB using a precision extra,
01:45:09.120
because they went out of their way to explain how they were measuring it. I think that's what they're asking.
01:45:12.900
It could be a number of things. It could be that they are more efficiently utilizing their ketones
01:45:16.780
now. So you're accumulating fewer of them because you are drawing them off. You are utilizing them
01:45:22.240
more. They have become a more preferred substrate. It could be that they're actually just producing
01:45:26.100
less of them. In other words, they're doing something different that they didn't realize
01:45:29.220
they were doing in the past. Maybe they've changed their composition of fatty acids.
01:45:32.840
Maybe they're eating more protein. Maybe they have more carbohydrate in their diet,
01:45:35.860
things like that. Hard to know without knowing a lot more detail, but those would be the
01:45:39.920
directionally the two things I would explore. Yeah. The first one being impossible to really
01:45:45.320
demonstrate outside of a laboratory. Yeah. I think it's a great point. Yeah. The, a lot of,
01:45:50.680
some of the pee strips is another way to look at ketones. Is it a acetoacetate? Is that the way
01:45:55.340
they look? Yeah. When they're looking at that and you think, well, my ketones are through the roof
01:45:59.080
because I'm peeing out tons of ketones. Like, is that necessarily optimal to be?
01:46:03.360
Yeah. Anecdotally, it seems to go down over time. The more adapted a person gets because their body
01:46:10.260
realizes, Hey, look, I mean, I'm not going to waste this fuel here. I'm going to utilize it.
01:46:13.920
Yeah. Can you give a 90 second reasoning for why you are, uh, why you are taking Zetia and
01:46:18.980
Lipitor? Are you mitigating risk based on your ApoE4 or is there something else going on?
01:46:24.000
So actually I'm not taking them anymore, which speaks to my point of I'm always changing meds in
01:46:28.240
flux, but why I was taking Lipitor and Zetia at the time, and we'll always continue to vacillate
01:46:33.820
into and out of lipid lowering medications is I'm trying to live as long as I can. And for me,
01:46:39.540
that means delaying the onset of atherosclerotic disease as greatly as possible. So, you know,
01:46:45.400
why you wouldn't want to take an all hands on deck approach to that, which is reducing the burden of
01:46:50.120
lipoproteins, maximally inflammation, endothelial health, insulin, all these things. We want them to be
01:46:55.580
all as low as possible. As for the choices of those two agents, Lipitor, it's all empirically
01:47:01.220
derived. So, so through trial and error, I have figured out that, you know, I synthesize a
01:47:05.440
reasonable amount of cholesterol and taking 10 of Lipitor three times a week was actually able to,
01:47:11.040
um, when coupled with ezetimibe, which is a, works via a different mechanism, but I could measure my
01:47:15.660
phytosterols. They were quite high. I knew I'd be a pretty strong responder to it. So by, you know,
01:47:20.660
so the 10 plus 10 stack of those two was a minimum effective dose that produced, you know, very good
01:47:26.920
results in me, meaning it got me to below the 20th percentile, typically to the 10th or 15th
01:47:31.000
percentile. And, you know, so 30 milligrams of atorvastatin a week is almost a placebo dose when
01:47:38.180
you consider what the drug can be given at 80 milligrams daily. But today I'm doing something
01:47:43.880
different time. Okay. You have mentioned a few times on your podcast that you are currently
01:47:48.580
working on writing a book. What will the book be about and what is the expected release date?
01:47:53.580
So the book will be about my experience as a shepherd. What a lot of people don't know about me
01:47:58.280
is prior to, you know, the stuff I do now, I was a shepherd and, you know, I just, I think there's
01:48:05.760
not a, not, there are not, there are not a lot of, you know, pop culture references to shepherds.
01:48:10.300
We don't, you know, there aren't really sitcoms about shepherds. I mean, most people just don't
01:48:13.860
know much about what the day in and day out life of a shepherd is like. And so I thought that would
01:48:20.260
be a good story to tell, to just talk about my experiences doing that. And, um, so, you know,
01:48:26.880
it's been a tough book to write because obviously I have to go back through all of my shepherd journals,
01:48:31.600
um, which are all bound in leather sheepskin, uh, bindings. They're beautiful.
01:48:38.140
And I hope to have the manuscript completed by the end of this year, which would mean, uh, probably
01:48:46.060
a release date in early 2020. Now the drawback of having an early 2020 release is I suspect virtually
01:48:55.380
everyone in this country will be hyper fixated on politics at that time as we'll be spinning up to
01:49:01.160
an election cycle. And if your choice is trying to understand if someone's going to challenge the
01:49:06.940
incumbent president from his own party and who the opposition will be versus the life and times of a
01:49:12.420
shepherd, I think it's going to be an uphill slog to try to get the attention of the masses. But
01:49:17.420
you know, I think one of the other drawbacks of a 2020 release date is people are probably dying
01:49:22.500
for that book to be released and they have to wait a couple of years. That's right. Yeah. I think
01:49:27.440
there's anything that you can do to expedite this process. We'd all be grateful. Believe me. I wish I,
01:49:33.860
I wish I, I wish I could, I wish I could get to this quicker. What are your thoughts on nicotinamide
01:49:39.460
riboside supplementation for longevity? Oh boy. There's no freaking way I get to do this in 90
01:49:44.920
seconds. Well, first of all, the good news is I just had an awesome discussion with David Sinclair
01:49:49.100
about this a week ago. So in the next two months or whatever that, again, I keep saying that like I
01:49:54.060
know when this is going to come out sometime in October, November, the interview with David will come
01:49:57.420
out. Actually, since that interview, a really interesting paper has come to my attention written by one of my
01:50:02.720
medical school classmates, Josh Rabinowitz. So I actually read both of these papers on the plane
01:50:07.140
yesterday. They're freaking phenomenal and emailed Josh a whole bunch of questions to which he
01:50:12.820
responded. I would say the long and short of it is this, and this is not going to make me very popular
01:50:16.940
with anybody. I am completely unconvinced that taking supplemental NR or even NMN by mouth is doing
01:50:25.760
anything other than enriching the companies that make those things. Let me repeat that NAD,
01:50:31.620
which you need in a cell. You could argue having more NAD in a cell is a better thing. That's a
01:50:36.380
second order question. I'm asking for an exemption to my 90 second rule. This is such an important
01:50:40.940
question. Nick is nodding, by the way, just so you guys know. I'm getting the okay.
01:50:44.720
So you could say it like a heavyset, a heavyset judge. I'll allow it, but it better be good.
01:50:49.940
Oh, and then just finding out David Sinclair is going up on November 5th. So you'll,
01:50:52.920
we'll go into much more detail around sirtuins and NAD, but nevertheless.
01:50:57.180
Yeah. What the hell was that shitty ass font? Calibri.
01:51:01.000
Calibri. No, no, we should do that. You shouldn't be allowed to have that on your computer.
01:51:05.960
Avenir, Times, there's lots of options, but not Calibri, please. That's unacceptable.
01:51:12.980
I think he did that on purpose. There's no way.
01:51:19.420
So cells cannot take up NAD. So a cell has to be able to make its own NAD. So the idea of giving
01:51:28.340
precursors has become obviously the most interesting idea. Now what Rabinowitz's paper showed, and we
01:51:33.760
should link to this. So this was in cell metabolism. It just came out like if, I mean, in the last few
01:51:38.860
weeks, it's a 32 page paper. It took me a while to get through, but basically Josh, who was, like I
01:51:45.060
said, was one of my med school classmates and is still pissed off at me that I didn't invite him
01:51:49.760
to Easter Island two years ago, to which I feel horrible. And I, it's only, and it's a terrible
01:51:54.880
omission. And he has already received an invitation to our next trip to Easter Island next year. He
01:52:00.560
developed, his lab developed a tracer to track all of the intermediaries of NAD and all the precursors.
01:52:06.520
So you can give NR, NMN, and these things can be taken into a cell and then converted into NAD in
01:52:15.060
the cytoplasm. And it appears that according to another paper of Josh's that we could link to if
01:52:19.460
people are interested, it appears that NAD is formed entirely in the cytoplasm and then imported
01:52:24.980
wholly as NAD into the mitochondria, where in theory you would want to have that higher concentration.
01:52:30.020
Here's what the study showed. When you gave oral NR or NMN, the two popular precursors,
01:52:38.000
only the liver could take them up and make NAD using cryptophan. No other cell in the body could
01:52:45.000
take it up. So that would suggest to me that if you're taking oral NR or NMN, you're pretty much
01:52:51.100
just giving it to your liver, which is not exactly the place you want it to be. This would not be
01:52:56.120
changed by using terastilbene. That wouldn't impact it at all. Similarly, all those clinics that are
01:53:02.000
out there giving NAD infusions, which is very popular, that's always struck me as quackery.
01:53:07.400
And it just seems even more quackery today because none of those cells are able to take up NAD.
01:53:12.380
So it would seem to me, and I actually emailed Josh about this last night and he emailed me back today
01:53:17.160
and agreed with my assessment. Based on all of these data, it would seem that the only way to increase
01:53:22.760
cellular NAD would be to use intravenous doses of NR or NMN. And unfortunately, I just hadn't seen
01:53:30.400
that paper because I would have loved to have had that discussion with David because he might have
01:53:33.320
a counterpoint to it. He might be unaware of it. I'm not really sure, but that to me is very
01:53:38.040
important. And I've actually already spoken with a number of our patients who take supplemental NAD
01:53:42.500
and I've, or take supplemental NR and I've already said to them, you know, look, I think you're sort of
01:53:46.620
flushing money down the toilet. Again, I don't think it's harmful. You know, this isn't like a four alarm fire,
01:53:50.140
but I think based on these data, I would have a hard time recommending that anybody take those
01:53:53.440
products. I really went over on that one. I think I heard four hours and four, four minutes and 40
01:53:59.440
seconds. I think Dave Asprey mentioned IV NR. He had Charles Brenner on his podcast. Charles Brenner,
01:54:06.280
I think is involved with, I think it's Niagen, Chromadex, that company. And then there's the other
01:54:10.320
company, Elysium. Elysium spaces. Yeah. But I think they, they talked about it, but I think Charles was
01:54:15.400
making the argument that you got to take NR or NMN, not NAD. Oral, I think it's just NR for Niagen.
01:54:22.620
And then basis is NRPT, terostilbene, which is like a, it's like a methylated resveratrol,
01:54:28.980
more bioavailable supposedly than resveratrol. Although as we learned from David, very, very fat
01:54:34.380
soluble. So if you're not taking it with a boatload of bile, probably not doing a hell of a lot.
01:54:39.620
Yeah. Which brand of supplements have you found effective?
01:54:43.060
Well, I mean, the problem is the whole supplement world's kind of a shit show,
01:54:46.420
so unregulated. So at some point, maybe we can talk about branch chain amino acids because I know
01:54:51.960
that they're, I use them, many of my patients use them. And I've learned that most brands out there
01:54:58.660
are not doing anything. But if you talk about like kind of the go-to supplement, my, the companies that
01:55:03.780
I rely on and rely on their products are basically Gero, J-A-R-R-O-W, pure encapsulations.
01:55:11.040
I'm not going to spell that because I can't, I'm like dyslexic when it comes to spelling. Like I
01:55:15.840
can't spell to save my life. Oh, we got spell check. Yeah, I know. But like as I was at the
01:55:21.260
spelling bee, I was always the kid that like got out first. Okay. Spell the T-E-H-T. No,
01:55:28.400
sit down at you. So pure encapsulations, Gero are probably the two companies that I would be my go-to
01:55:34.500
for virtually anything. I'm sure there are a couple of other companies that we will intermittently use
01:55:39.720
depending on the product. Yeah. But those are DHA or EPA, it's Carlson's or Nordic Naturals.
01:55:45.000
Yeah. Yeah. Nordic Naturals and Carlson's I like for EPA, DHA, if not going down the
01:55:50.360
pharmaceutical route, those are also available pharmaceutical. And you alluded to this point
01:55:53.620
with metformin versus berberine that there's different regulation going on for those two,
01:55:58.880
two products. And that's partly why you, you would go to metformin if berberine was a
01:56:03.860
pharmacological agent. I know it's, you know, big pharma. Yes. But the, the scrutiny that they're
01:56:08.560
under is a lot more than a supplement. And I think for berberine, when we do suggest patients
01:56:14.120
take it, I think we use Thorn as the brand that we recommend. I know we went a little over there,
01:56:19.400
Nick. I could see you flailing, but I figured I spent, I wasted part of my time explaining how
01:56:24.540
poorly my spelling was. So. Are you currently accepting new patients?
01:56:28.100
Probably not for the remainder of this year. And I don't manage that. Uh, so Mary who runs sort of
01:56:35.320
the operations of the practice manages the flow of patients. And, uh, she gave me an earful a couple
01:56:41.060
of days ago that we are not accepting any new patients just based on how overworked the team
01:56:46.480
is at the moment. And the followup question probably as unsatisfying as the answer maybe is
01:56:50.820
like, how do I find a Peter Atiyah clone in my area other than maybe your brother?
01:56:55.600
Yeah. My brother is probably the best Peter Atiyah clone. Although it's funny. I don't really
01:56:59.380
think we look that much alike, but everybody says we look so much alike. I mean, he's so much bigger
01:57:03.220
than me. You know, we just don't look alike. Did I send you guys the video of him in the grocery
01:57:08.000
store pretending to be Borat? Yes. Yeah. You thought that was me? Yeah. You're just saying that
01:57:12.980
because of the point I'm making. No, that was Paul. All right. I guess the point is, yeah,
01:57:19.940
we look, we look a lot like, so, so you could, so my brother lives in Toronto. Got a Tom Morello
01:57:25.680
and have him give you medical advice. That's right. So Tom Morello or, and who, I guess I'm
01:57:30.400
guessing he lives in LA. I don't, I have no idea where Tom would live or my brother lives in Toronto.
01:57:34.680
So that'd probably be the best way to get a clone of me. And then otherwise, I think it, I think it
01:57:39.960
would be a great thing if there's, there would be some way that you could endorse other doctors,
01:57:43.520
but it's not something that is easily done. It is something we talked about actually when we
01:57:47.480
started Nerd Safari and, and I don't, I mean, I think it is something that would be an awesome
01:57:51.280
service is to create kind of like a, I was going to say Tumblr and then I was going to say Grindr
01:57:59.080
to connect doctors and patients, but I'm like, I'm not even going to make the joke, but like a
01:58:03.680
matchmaking service between doctors and patients where you could sort of say, look, without providing
01:58:08.680
an endorsement, cause I don't think I can be in the business of endorsing people. I know there are a
01:58:13.060
ton of docs who think the way I think. And if there are patients out there who want those docs,
01:58:18.600
we, I don't know why we can't have a play, a forum where they can sort of coexist because
01:58:22.520
you know, the, the first hurdle is just the geography of it. Right. It's like, look,
01:58:26.620
if you live in Kansas city, you're not going to want to see some doctor in New York. Even if,
01:58:30.900
even if I had the room in the practice, it just wouldn't be practical. So we just have too many
01:58:35.140
things on our plate right now. And I feel kind of bad cause we've talked about doing that and we
01:58:38.320
haven't done anything about it yet, but, but maybe at some point, you know, we can, cause it's
01:58:42.980
probably one of the questions we get asked consistently more than anything else. I certainly
01:58:45.920
feel like I get a lot of that over Twitter and it would, it would be a great thing to do is to be
01:58:48.940
able to say, look, uh, if you're a doctor who adheres to a certain set of principles, I just don't
01:58:53.480
know how to do it without being kind of hokey and cheesy. Cause like, I don't know what we're
01:58:56.740
advocating. I don't know what, when people say they want a clone of Peter, what do they mean? Like
01:59:02.160
a bald guy? Like, I don't know what they actually want of me. I think that my experience
01:59:08.300
from the people that I know and from, you know, the stuff on the interwebs, the Twitter sphere and
01:59:16.500
Facebook, but like the, the honest response, I think that I, that resonates with me the most is
01:59:23.820
that they, they hear, they'll read what you wrote. They'll hear what you have to say. You'll talk about
01:59:28.600
your strategy with a patient, the objective, the strategy, the tactics, the things that you're doing,
01:59:33.680
the things that you're thinking about. And then they think to themselves, why the fuck is my
01:59:39.160
doctor not doing any of that stuff? And I bet if I asked my doctor, they wouldn't know, they would
01:59:43.820
barely even know, or they would say either like, it's not important or I haven't heard of it or
01:59:48.300
whatever the case is. But I think it's like the level of deliberate care that you put into each
01:59:52.840
patient, at least as my personal experience being a part of this. And so I think part of it's like,
01:59:57.820
they're frustrated and they think like, I want to find somebody who can be this comprehensive and
02:00:02.740
deliberate and thoughtful. So what we should do is just have patients come up with a, maybe,
02:00:07.540
maybe we could figure out a way to have patients generate like kind of a questionnaire of things
02:00:11.280
that they want in a doc. And we could, we could be like a central clearinghouse of that where,
02:00:16.640
you know, the, the patients would input and vote on questions that they want asked. And then
02:00:22.540
doctors basically would post their answers to those questions along with where they are.
02:00:28.280
If they're taking patients, do they take insurance? If so, which ones, like, are you Medicare? You
02:00:32.440
know, like there's a whole, there's like 10 things you'd want to know. And again, I don't want to make
02:00:36.520
more work for us because I can see Nick, like giving me the eyes right now. That's like, shut the
02:00:40.700
fuck up. But that sort of puts the onus, I think on the patients and the physicians who are willing to do
02:00:45.560
the work, I'm sure. Cause I know there are docs out there who are doing the type of work I'm doing.
02:00:49.800
And this would give them an opportunity to sort of explain what they're doing and say, yeah. And
02:00:53.980
like, you know, I I'm in San Diego or I'm in Kansas city or I'm wherever. So maybe let's put
02:00:59.120
that on the list for our call later today. When we talk with Andrew, we can figure that out.
02:01:02.820
And my personal experience too, if I don't get emotional about it, but thank you. My dad was
02:01:06.560
in the ICU for like 30 days. I think it was like 30 days at MGH. Lazarus. Yeah. Like a Phoenix
02:01:13.600
rising from the ashes. He was in rough shape and I would, I would report back to Peter and
02:01:19.780
some other people and my family. And so I think Peter probably appreciated more than my family
02:01:24.240
that we're getting a bunch of numbers spit back and not, you know, you know how he was
02:01:28.180
doing otherwise. Although I was reporting that too. But I mean, I learned a few things, learned
02:01:33.100
how much you know about this stuff, obviously. And that MGH, they, I think they'd like validate
02:01:37.780
your parking after 30 days. So they booted them into the respiratory unit, the rack you.
02:01:42.720
So he went down there for a little while. But one of the things I learned too, as well,
02:01:46.500
is that I would, I would bring back the stuff and the vitals and whatever. And Peter would
02:01:50.500
say, this is, you know, this is sort of what I'm thinking. And then at MGH, I would be doing
02:01:55.140
the rounds with the, with the team over there and everything and being a fly in the wall and
02:01:59.660
adding my two cents and some of the notes that I'd taken and things like that. They're, they're
02:02:03.920
damn good at there at the MGH. And I also thought that that, what a learning experience. Like
02:02:09.420
I don't, I didn't go to medical school, but my advice would be like, if you want to be
02:02:12.780
immersed in medicine and just the real deal where people are dying and just fast forward,
02:02:19.500
you're learning. Holy shit. Those, those people like the, the ICU is incredible experience.
02:02:24.240
The ICU is incredible. Yeah. Yeah. And, and, and we joked about it at the time,
02:02:28.960
which was you basically did an ICU mini fellowship because by the end of those 30 days,
02:02:33.440
we'd have our call every morning and you would, you know, we would review in systems because in
02:02:37.680
an ICU, you review everything by systems. You start with the neurosystem, you go to the respiratory
02:02:40.860
system, cardiovascular system, renal system, boom, boom, boom, boom. You know, it only took like a
02:02:44.620
week for you to learn how to gather data and then, you know, how to report it. And, uh, I'm convinced
02:02:51.820
like if you had one year of sitting in there, you would know 80% of what a critical care doc knows.
02:02:57.780
I mean, it's just reps, you know, it's just that kind of exposure. Yeah. And you're right. It is,
02:03:03.540
again, it speaks to this point of feedback that we, this theme keeps coming up today. I like how it
02:03:07.240
keeps coming up. The reason I think critical care is so interesting. And at the same time,
02:03:13.280
so teachable is the cycle time between intervention and feedback is so short.
02:03:18.640
You want to know what happens to the pH on the blood and the VCO2 and the bicarb. When you change
02:03:25.740
the ventilator rate, you're going to find out in about 12 minutes, do it. You want to find out what
02:03:29.580
happens when you tweak this amount of norepinephrine and this much of vasopressin and this much of this
02:03:33.280
and the IV fluids and boom, boom, boom, look at the Swan Gans catheter. Like you're going to see
02:03:37.240
it in a minute. Very few things in life offer you the amount of feedback you get in a critical care
02:03:42.200
unit. It's definitely a cool field of medicine. Yeah. The few patients that you have, I would say
02:03:46.880
that what you do in a sense is critical care, that the level of care that they're providing at the MGH
02:03:52.660
and the ICU. And then I, I see what you do in your practices. I see similarities that you're
02:03:58.380
the, your involvement with the patient. Well, I mean, I mean, I said, I don't want my head to
02:04:04.900
swell too much. I want to be, but I want to point something out, which is, it's really
02:04:07.520
what the patients don't see is what's more impressive. The patients generally just interact
02:04:11.880
with me, but what they don't see is, you know, Ralph and Nicole and Mary and Heather. Like they
02:04:16.740
don't see the whole team behind, they don't see the research team. So, and I was talking about this
02:04:21.860
with Ralph this morning. So, so we saw a patient and spent 90 minutes with him and it was awesome.
02:04:27.160
And he had come in and looked at everything in his labs. So we finished reviewing all of his labs
02:04:33.380
and he goes, Oh, by the way, I noticed you checked my ESR level and it was really low. And I was like,
02:04:39.340
that is so funny. Like, yeah, I checked his ESR cause his CRP was 6.6 last time. And I just wanted
02:04:44.400
to make sure he didn't have something stupid going on. And his ESR came back low and his CRP
02:04:47.760
returned. And I was like, so after he left, I was like, Ralph, that, how awesome was that? Like
02:04:52.400
that patient had read every single one of the 87 numbers that we checked and was, was asked about
02:04:58.180
the one that I forgot to bring up when we were talking. And I was like, like, I love that. You
02:05:03.400
know, I wish every patient could be that obsessed with their numbers because those are the patients
02:05:08.120
that get the most out of us that extract the most value from us. Um, I find the patients who
02:05:13.240
are least probably engaged with us are the ones that are also getting the least out of us and
02:05:18.280
probably, frankly, don't appreciate the potential. I think that we have as a team to kind of, to,
02:05:24.180
you know, move the needle. You're asking, I think you're asking a lot of your patients,
02:05:27.760
like the be your own advocate. It's really, it's the patient that has the most control over
02:05:32.680
their destiny in many ways. Yes. You, you have to put as much effort and emphasis into this as you
02:05:38.000
would any other thing that you care deeply about. So if you want to, if you want to take your golf
02:05:42.240
seriously, like you can't just think about it three, you know, 30 minutes, four times a year.
02:05:48.000
If you really, really want to be a thoughtful investor, like, yes, you will have professionals
02:05:52.380
help you invest, but you still have to interact with those advocates constantly.
02:06:04.200
Okay. Are we done? I think we, this has been way too long, right? I think we're, we've,
02:06:08.340
we've, we've exhausted our couple more questions. Who would do 10? The short ones.
02:06:11.900
Oh my God. I can't do any more, dude. Oh, one more question. One question.
02:06:18.100
Oh, okay. Let's see. Can make this one short. So Bob and Peter, you two are awesome and I'm
02:06:26.340
learning. So I'm learning a lot from the AMA. So thanks. Tell us more about the latest and best
02:06:31.620
on ApoE4. Oh, cause you can, you can punt this. Oh, that's a pure punt baby. Tomorrow evening,
02:06:39.000
same bat time, different bat channel. Cause we're not going to record it. Unfortunately,
02:06:43.520
I'm going to sit right at this table and interview my really good friend, Richard Isaacson,
02:06:48.880
DJ rush. That's right. Is he going to spin anything? Is he bringing the techniques 1200s?
02:06:53.120
I don't know. I've met him a few times and every time I met him, he was, he's, he's spinning.
02:06:58.280
Yeah. So, so Richard Isaacson is a neurologist at Cornell, just a few feet from here. And he runs
02:07:05.640
the largest preventative clinic for Alzheimer's disease or Alzheimer's prevention clinic in the
02:07:09.480
country. We have collaborated for several years now, and we are going to have a deep dive nerd on
02:07:16.280
about all things pertaining to Alzheimer's inclusive of ApoE. So I suspect this podcast will be released
02:07:23.560
before that podcast, but please do look for it. Richard Isaacson. Cool. So on that note,
02:07:29.040
is there anything else you'd like to say, Bob, before we disband? I have nothing to add.
02:07:34.340
Nick, do you have anything to add behind the camera laughing at us? Very well. Thanks everyone. I hope
02:07:40.840
people think this was fun and worthwhile and we'll continue our, uh, up vote, down vote,
02:07:45.800
to take a question in AMA style. Bye-bye. You can find all of this information and more at
02:07:54.020
peteratiamd.com forward slash podcast. There you'll find the show notes, readings, and links related to
02:08:00.140
this episode. You can also find my blog and the nerd safari at peteratiamd.com. What's a nerd safari,
02:08:06.760
you ask? Just click on the link at the top of the site to learn more. Maybe the simplest thing to do
02:08:11.220
is to sign up for my subjectively non-lame once a week email, where I'll update you on what I've
02:08:15.820
been up to, the most interesting papers I've read, and all things related to longevity, science,
02:08:20.840
performance, sleep, et cetera. On social, you can find me on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook,
02:08:26.000
all with the ID peteratiamd. But usually Twitter is the best way to reach me to share your questions
02:08:30.980
and comments. Now for the obligatory disclaimer, this podcast is for general informational purposes
02:08:35.940
only and does not constitute the practice of medicine, nursing, or other professional healthcare
02:08:40.440
services, including the giving of medical advice. And note, no doctor-patient relationship
02:08:45.700
is formed. The use of this information and the materials linked to the podcast is at the user's
02:08:51.060
own risk. The content of this podcast is not intended to be a substitute for professional
02:08:55.220
medical advice, diagnoses, or treatment. Users should not disregard or delay in obtaining medical
02:09:00.720
advice for any medical condition they have and should seek the assistance of their healthcare
02:09:04.880
professionals for any such conditions. Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, I take
02:09:10.100
conflicts of interest very seriously. For all of my disclosures, the companies I invest
02:09:14.540
in and or advise, please visit peteratiamd.com forward slash about.