Anti-Aging
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-02-2014, 08:00 PM
RE: Anti-Aging
(30-01-2014 07:28 PM)BrokenQuill92 Wrote:  Am I too young to start using anti-aging treatments? And do they even work?

I would say, "No! and I've got the perfect 'cream' for ya right here on tap Evil_monster "
...but that would be just awful.... Tongue

Seriously, though.
Yes! You are too young to worry with anti-aging treatments. AND too cute Shy

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheGulegon's post
06-02-2014, 08:38 PM
RE: Anti-Aging
(06-02-2014 07:46 PM)Cephalotus Wrote:  (Not to sound passive aggressive, but I know this because it is *my job* to know it and not because I quickly use google to try to prove people on forums wrong.)

You don't "know this" and you don't even appear to understand the abstracts you are citing. The very paper that you cited reports only a minority of experts disagree with the Hayflick limit. The concept of the Hayflick limit is the consensus view.

[Image: v8k4eh.png]

The above is taken from p.182 of Skin Aging by Gilchrest and Krutmann (2006). If you think that I obtained this from Google then find the excerpted text and post the link.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chippy's post
06-02-2014, 08:41 PM
RE: Anti-Aging
Cephalotus, did you even read the papers that you posted? Seems to me that you just did a 5 second google search and posted some scholarly articles that popped up. Just because there is a paper doesn't make its content true. Critical thinking still applies. And this paper doesn't even support your point to the extent that you wished it would. *head shake...*

Also, your stupid comment about Hayflick Limit is just that. Stupid. I was impressed that Chippy knew what the Hayflick limit is. I didn't want to mention it in order to avoid subject specific terms. But the Hayflick limit applies to ALL eukaryotic cells. The reason is because of the linear chromosomes, shortening after each and every cell division. Saying that Hayflick limit is a discussed topic amongs scientists is DUMB.

Thank you for demonstrating again how pretentious you really are.

And thank you for diverting the thread from being initially scientific to hear-say gullible stupidity.

Fun "paradox": The higher the selection pressure, the slower evolution takes place.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2014, 08:57 PM
RE: Anti-Aging
In essence, people are giving examples on how to avoid aging, which perfectly align with my initial post (yoga, spa, avoid sunlight, don't drink alcohol, and so on). Creams - including the Vitamin C based cream - and anti-aging treatments don't have a truly visible effect on the skin. And as somebody pointed out, people who used creams or other things applied on the skin most of the times have a more aged looking skin than those who stayed away. But of course, this kind of observation also depends on a lot of other factors, therefore it can't possibly be conclusive.

And that is all there is to it. Understand what aging is. Try to avoid things that accellerate the aging process (see initial post again, from which Cephalotus managed to divert attention so perfectly). And learn to deal with the inevitability.

Fun "paradox": The higher the selection pressure, the slower evolution takes place.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2014, 09:05 PM
RE: Anti-Aging
(06-02-2014 08:41 PM)Youkay Wrote:  Cephalotus, did you even read the papers that you posted? Seems to me that you just did a 5 second google search and posted some scholarly articles that popped up. Just because there is a paper doesn't make its content true. Critical thinking still applies. And this paper doesn't even support your point to the extent that you wished it would. *head shake...*

Also, your stupid comment about Hayflick Limit is just that. Stupid. I was impressed that Chippy knew what the Hayflick limit is. I didn't want to mention it in order to avoid subject specific terms. But the Hayflick limit applies to ALL eukaryotic cells. The reason is because of the linear chromosomes, shortening after each and every cell division. Saying that Hayflick limit is a discussed topic amongs scientists is DUMB.

Thank you for demonstrating again how pretentious you really are.

And thank you for diverting the thread from being initially scientific to hear-say gullible stupidity.

The Hayflick limit has been hypothesized and observed in a closed system (a petri dish...do you even know what that is?) It's *exact* effects as observed therein do not apply to basal skin cells in living tissue that is supplied with fresh oxygen, antioxidants, phytonutrients, etc. We're discovering new things about this phenomenon even now, and finding out we were wrong about it's quirks (not to dumb it down too badly, but it actually reminds me a bit of how trans fats were assumed to be safe because of how they interacted with living cells in vitro.) This has already been discussed at length among people who do this sort of thing *for a living,* and I am very lucky to have access their expertise. The things you are saying sound exactly (exactly) like the sorts of conclusions that a teenager would reach after quickly googling key terms without any real knowledge of how to put those tidbits into context.

You're "impressed" that Chippy knew what the hayflick limit is? XD XD XD I suppose I should have specifically mentioned photodamage or glycation or any other contributing factor to skin again and it would have had the same effect? Again, I discuss matters such as this AT LENGTH with amateurs and experts alike. I know the in's and out's far better than the layman, and I enjoy helping people with problems such as this.

As a matter of fact, the two links in my side bookmark (the ones you have a problem with, for some strange reason) I was saving to put into an already lengthy document for my boss. The two estheticians and one cosmetic chemist she asked could not fade the stretch marks from her pregnancy, but my advise has helped "wonders." I'm reminded of an old saying regarding the proof and it being in the pudding, but I guess getting desired results doesn't matter. Fighting over the internet is more your style. Drinking Beverage

THIS USER IS NO LONGER ACTIVE. THANK YOU, AND HAVE A GREAT DAY! http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...a-few-days
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2014, 09:13 PM
RE: Anti-Aging
(06-02-2014 09:05 PM)Cephalotus Wrote:  The Hayflick limit has been hypothesized and observed in a closed system (a petri dish...do you even know what that is?) It's *exact* effects as observed therein do not apply to basal skin cells in living tissue that is supplied with fresh oxygen, antioxidants, phytonutrients, etc.

Bollocks, just like everything else you care to post about.

You sell skin-care products and this is how you try to blind naive customers with (pseudo-)science. No amount of "oxygen, antioxidants, phytonutrients, etc." is going to alter the Hayflick limit. You sell "antioxidants, phytonutrients, etc." and that is why you push this pseudoscience.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2014, 09:38 PM
RE: Anti-Aging
I was impressed that he knew what it is. You, on the other hand, are using the term and at the same time you are muttering so much bull shit. Don't you even read the explanation I gave to you as to WHY there is a Hayflick limit? It is completely reasonable, and it should have triggered a "aha" response, but you are far too stubborn and ignorant for that.

I am working on the structural and mechanistical characterisation of telomerase for future targeted cancer therapy. That is the diference between us. I am doing proper, significant and relevant science for a living. Dermatology, on the other hand, must be one of the least respected scientific fields out there.

If you are taking those papers to put together a report for your boss, you are either crap at what you are doing or you are intentionally misleading.

Fun "paradox": The higher the selection pressure, the slower evolution takes place.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2014, 09:49 PM
RE: Anti-Aging
......When did I say I was a dermatologist? I have a paid internship at my college. What the....what?! Are you high right now? XD XD XD XD

You've been making assumptions this entire thread, in every post you make responding to me. I'm reading every word you are typing but you are completely grazing over everything I say and cherry picking whatever points you wish to argue. If you took in the entirety of what I was saying, it would make perfect sense. Especially to someone who is supposedly working on cancer therapy. *stiffles a sharp laugh* I totally believe you, btw. Thumbsup Your language and overall behavior are *so totally* congruent with a professional of said caliber and importance.

Anyway, it's obvious I'm having about as much "luck" with you as I had with Chippy and Brownshirt. Are you going to keep up this stupid internet back-and-forth, or should one of us just block the other and be done with it?

BrokenQuill: At least you have plenty of information to look over and make a decision. <3 If you need to know anything that you aren't comfortable posting in this thread for fear of backlash, you can always PM me.

THIS USER IS NO LONGER ACTIVE. THANK YOU, AND HAVE A GREAT DAY! http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...a-few-days
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2014, 09:51 PM
RE: Anti-Aging
(06-02-2014 09:38 PM)Youkay Wrote:  Dermatology, on the other hand, must be one of the least respected scientific fields out there.

If you are taking those papers to put together a report for your boss, you are either crap at what you are doing or you are intentionally misleading.

She isn't a research scientist and doesn't even have an undergraduate degree in the biological sciences. The "report" she is preparing for her manager is just pseudoscientific bunkum that will be used to help sell skincare products. The citations are just pseudoscientific decoration, intended to give the report an air of scientific credibility. Her "report" will be consumed by people that know even less about the biology of aging than she does.

The Hayflick limit has been the bane of the existence of anti-aging charlatans since it was proposed. It effectively pours cold water on the hype of skincare product manufacturers so they have been doing their utmost to obfuscate and obscure it.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2014, 09:55 PM
RE: Anti-Aging
I can't believe what a pretentious, misleading, disingenuous and poorly informed jerk you are. I don't seem to be able to raise my hand from my brow while reading your posts. The face palm is permanent. I don't know if Chippy wants to continue putting up with the likes of you... but for me it is the end of "discussion".

Fun "paradox": The higher the selection pressure, the slower evolution takes place.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Youkay's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: