(July 24, 2015 at 1:38 am)Cato Wrote:

(July 24, 2015 at 1:20 am)Arrogant Christian Wrote: Retirement age was mostly a moot point, but I almost wonder since retirement age seems to correlate loosely with average life-span, and of course it should depending on your time-frame.

Incoherence seems to be your specialty.

Perhaps, if trolling is yours, haha

(July 24, 2015 at 1:40 am)Arrogant Christian Wrote:

(July 24, 2015 at 1:38 am)Cato Wrote: Incoherence seems to be your specialty.

Perhaps, if trolling is yours, haha

It's been over 23 years since I was forced to take organic chemistry as a degree requirement. Until now I have always considered the experience a waste of time. Biochemist my ass. You have no idea what your'e pushing. NAD+, what a fucking joke.

(July 24, 2015 at 1:52 am)Cato Wrote:

(July 24, 2015 at 1:40 am)Arrogant Christian Wrote: Perhaps, if trolling is yours, haha

It's been over 23 years since I was forced to take organic chemistry as a degree requirement. Until now I have always considered the experience a waste of time. Biochemist my ass. You have no idea what your'e pushing. NAD+, what a fucking joke.

Hmm, it seems I'm finally getting on topic with you. I would first clarify I neither am for or against this potential treatment. I only chose this article because it was interesting and fairly basic, so that I could gauge the members reading the science sections. Furthermore, I can hardly see why this is a joke, or even how organic chemistry is even actually relevant to this conversation. Besides potentially nomenclature and basic reaction principles, its not actually needed for understanding the content of this article or the potential mechanism of of the treatment action.

(July 24, 2015 at 2:05 am)Arrogant Christian Wrote: Furthermore, I can hardly see why this is a joke, or even how organic chemistry is even actually relevant to this conversation.

Fucking hell. You proclaim to be a biochemist pushing NAD+ and don't know what organic chemistry has to do with it? Okay clown; whatever you say.

(July 24, 2015 at 2:11 am)Cato Wrote:

(July 24, 2015 at 2:05 am)Arrogant Christian Wrote: Furthermore, I can hardly see why this is a joke, or even how organic chemistry is even actually relevant to this conversation.

Fucking hell. You proclaim to be a biochemist pushing NAD+ and don't know what organic chemistry has to do with it? Okay clown; whatever you say.

Considering that first I'm not pushing anything? The reactions that use NAD+ and NADH resemble more closely reactions of physics than organic chemistry. Even in the reactions forming them they are a co-factor, simply receiving an electron rather than actually participating in the reaction more identifiable as organic chemistry. Perhaps you have confused the nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NAD+) that I am referring to with something else, cause I'm quite aware what that NAD+ is, how it is formed, and the reactions in which it participates. In the hopes that this thread might survive, I'll ask you to not post further unless you have something actually pertaining to the original post.

(July 24, 2015 at 2:27 am)Arrogant Christian Wrote: Considering that first I'm not pushing anything? The reactions that use NAD+ and NADH resemble more closely reactions of physics than organic chemistry. Even in the reactions forming them they are a co-factor, simply receiving an electron rather than actually participating in the reaction more identifiable as organic chemistry. Perhaps you have confused the nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NAD+) that I am referring to with something else, cause I'm quite aware what that NAD+ is, how it is formed, and the reactions in which it participates. In the hopes that this thread might survive, I'll ask you to not post further unless you have something actually pertaining to the original post.

Are you seriously going to double down on the stupid? There is absolutely no way in hell you are a biochemist at this point.

Just to prove my point, how precisely do you inject NAD?

Care to elaborate on what is going on here, Cato?

My curiosity is piqued.

(July 24, 2015 at 12:38 am)Arrogant Christian Wrote: Hello, I am a new member here, so beware! Anyway, I'd like to discuss this article:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24360282
(Dear mods, I promise pubmed is legitimate, haha)

Anyway the implication of this article is that simple injectons of NAD+, or perhaps even niacin in some cases, would allowed aged musculature to preform in a matter similar to young adult, which is absolutely astounding to me, since, if niacin is efficacious, then the treatment would be fairly cheap, and allow a quality of life in the elderly previously unseen. Anyway, to the points of discussion: first, has anyone heard of any follow-up on this article, clinical trials, etc., second, the implications of this treatment if it translates to humans. The first point I don't actually expect many answers on, unless someone gets bored, and decides to be a google detective/still has access to journal search engines. The second point actually the point I expect to discuss. Would this treatment potentially affect the retirement age, seeing that the infirmity of old age is no longer? Will it give way to newer disorders? Will it actually promote death in the elderly since this has no impact on the mind, from the promotion of more dangerous activity? I'm just providing food for thought and trying to incite conversation, by no means do I feel this is some inherent slippery slope. If anyone needs any background info on the theory of aging musculature, let me know and I'll edit my post with a summary. Thanks ahead of time!

Injection (or oral for niacin/nicotinamide/... and its cohorts) would increase extracellular concentrations, not necessarily intracellular. High doses of oral niacin et al have been taken for years. I'd think that even anecdotal evidence would have been reported if there was an observable change in muscle function. If high intracellular concentrations are achieved, how will that effect the homeostasis of the cell? Will the cell simply metabolize the excess leaving no net gain? Additional reading:

http://molpharm.aspetjournals.org/conten.../1136.full

http://www.jbc.org/content/283/10/6367.full

http://www.life-enhancement.com/magazine...-nad-world

http://cshperspectives.cshlp.org/content...13102.full

(July 24, 2015 at 10:48 am)Faith No More Wrote: Care to elaborate on what is going on here, Cato?

My curiosity is piqued.

Just miffed. I don't mind the discussion of the study, I just don't care for the misrepresentation. I find it difficult to believe that a biochemist would make the mistake of claiming that someone can take 'simple injections' of NAD+. NAD+ is a sub-cellular coenzyme. We can influence its production to some extent as mh.brewer has already discussed, but NAD+ cannot be injected.

(July 24, 2015 at 2:33 pm)Cato Wrote:

(July 24, 2015 at 10:48 am)Faith No More Wrote: Care to elaborate on what is going on here, Cato?

My curiosity is piqued.

Just miffed. I don't mind the discussion of the study, I just don't care for the misrepresentation. I find it difficult to believe that a biochemist would make the mistake of claiming that someone can take 'simple injections' of NAD+. NAD+ is a sub-cellular coenzyme. We can influence its production to some extent as mh.brewer has already discussed, but NAD+ cannot be injected.

Please, mh.brewer is so formal, just mh will do.