Glenn sends us searching for the fountain of youth:
FASTER, PLEASE: Anti-aging formula slated to begin human trials.
And from the link:
A regular metabolic compound that has been administered to mice has been shown to not just boost muscle function, but actually reverse the affects of aging. The research was led by David Sinclair of the University of New South Wales and the results have been published in the journal Cell.
...
A regular metabolic coenzyme known as nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NAD+) was administered to mice in hopes that it would slow the aging of skeletal muscle. The researchers were shocked to find that it didn’t slow aging; it dramatically reversed it. In under a week, the mice who had previously been suffering from a variety of age-related impairments experienced an increase in muscle tone, as if they had been exercising and following a healthy diet. In some regards, the compound acted like the proverbial fountain of youth.
So what is this "regular metabolic coenzyme" and how was it administered? From the paper, we glean this:
Here we evaluated whether similar effects could be achieved by increasing the supply of nicotinamide riboside (NR), a recently described natural NAD + precursor with the ability to increase NAD + levels, Sir2-dependent gene silencing, and replicative life span in yeast.
Their discussion includes this:
In conclusion, our work shows that NR is a powerful supplement to boost NAD+ levels, activate sirtuin signaling, and improve mitochondrial function, suggesting that this vitamin could be used to prevent and treat the mitochondrial decline that is a hallmark of many diseases associated with aging. Very recent work, showing that intraperitoneal administration of NMN could improve the metabolic damage induced by high-fat feeding (Yoshino et al., 2011), further supports this concept. To date, however, only NR has been identified as a naturally occurring component of the human diet (Bieganowski and Brenner, 2004).
Furthermore, NR protects against metabolic dysfunction at lower concentrations than those reported for NMN, and we proved that it is effective after oral administration when mixed with food, in contrast to NMN, which is injected intraperitoneally (Yoshino et al., 2011).
Hmm. While we await their human trials, let's note this press release from last summer:
Jun 27, 2013 (ACCESSWIRE via COMTEX) -- New Ingredient Backed by Scientific Evidence May Have Wide Appeal as a Dietary Supplement and Food Additive
...
There is, however, a genuinely innovative ingredient that has the promise to deliver pronounced results without invasive procedures or significant expense. It is NIAGEN™ from ChromaDex (otcqb:CDXC), which was introduced this month as the first and only commercially available form of nicotinamide riboside. Also called NR, nicotinamide riboside is a metabolic booster found in milk and whey. Often referred to as a "miracle molecule", NR shows promise in research studies to help address many of the symptoms associated with aging and health care in general: obesity, cholesterol, muscle loss, energy decline, insulin sensitivity and more.
So that's what you want, but can you buy it? Yes and no. Swanson Helath Products offers it, but don't worry about Christmas delivery - it is currently on back order.
Well, I've made it this long; I should be good for a few more weeks. Which leaves time to read about other means of manipulating these things.
And please - don't blow up your liver.
Janet. Kevin Jennings is probably SHAKING "HIS FIST" in ANGER.
Posted by: Gus | December 23, 2013 at 01:49 AM
Daddy, would it be out of line to call HER.........
CLIENT #10?
Posted by: Gus | December 23, 2013 at 01:58 AM
Great links Janet.
Posted by: Stephanie looking forward to the bowl games | December 23, 2013 at 02:16 AM
Who are you to criticize??? Just because Wein Spritzer has LIED and CHEATED and LIED and HIRED HOOKERS, and LIED and CHEATED.....DOES NOT MEAN, that Elliot Wein-Spritzer!!! Is NOT TRUSTWORTHY!!!! He's a Democrat!!
Posted by: Gus | December 23, 2013 at 02:18 AM
CLIENT #10?
LOL Gus!
Posted by: daddy | December 23, 2013 at 03:31 AM
Henry,
If you previously posted this news, I'm sorry I missed it:
Some Unions Collapse in Historic Wisconsin Vote
Over 5,500 union workers quit unions in Milwaukee, Dane and other counties
Posted by: daddy | December 23, 2013 at 03:38 AM
Daddy, I saw that but didn't link it. Happily the school district I pay taxes to decertified its unions.
Posted by: henry | December 23, 2013 at 06:09 AM
Hmmmm, I seem to recall being told what a dumbass I was for not understanding why Silda would stick around with Client 9 the whoremongering creep; that she was just in it for the benjamins and it was a strategically smart thing for her to do. Welp, it's time for every damn one of you to admit that maybe, just maybe, she's a mentally ill bint who loves being humiliated by human garbage.
Posted by: Captain Hate | December 23, 2013 at 08:10 AM
Trying, not too successfully, to catch up. I see Jack Fowler of NRO is speaking up for Mark Steyn. More at NRO need to do so. (I am sure Jane and Caro are not surprised at Mr. Fowler's position.)
Posted by: centralcal | December 23, 2013 at 08:28 AM
"maybe, just maybe, she's a mentally ill bint"
Or maybe it's the Benjamins.
I love watching the Lions lose.
Posted by: Danube on iPad | December 23, 2013 at 08:29 AM
I vote for the benjamins.
Posted by: Extraneus | December 23, 2013 at 08:37 AM
Its come to this.
British Grocery Store Chain Tells Muslim Employees They Can Refuse to Serve Shoppers who Buy Alcohol or Pork
Mark's and Spencer (natch)
Posted by: JIB | December 23, 2013 at 08:38 AM
Click for full size.
Posted by: Extraneus | December 23, 2013 at 08:40 AM
As Rupert does his best to ruin the WSJ and make it the mouthpiece of crony capitalists shilling for amnesty, Mary Anastasia O'Grady still does outstanding work to let us know what is going on in South America; in this case Columbia and the meddling of underaged hooker aficionado Bob Menendez in its internal affairs.
Posted by: Captain Hate | December 23, 2013 at 08:40 AM
Ramirez missed a few, Obama did not know about Fast and Furious or that Shovel ready did not mean that.
Posted by: boricuafudd | December 23, 2013 at 08:42 AM
CH-the book that I finished yesterday had quite a few fibs in it and one of them was insisting that economies in South America are shifting from the historic state control emphasis. Right.
Here's my new and 2013 ending post. http://www.invisibleserfscollar.com/gratitude-over-the-timely-official-admissions-that-now-leave-2014-intentions-beyond-dispute/
clarice-I have finally definitively resolved our ingoing ib dispute. It 2002 it officially became aggressive in its transformative ed policies because it says it serves as the "Task Manager under Chapter 36 of Agenda 21" globally.
Posted by: rse | December 23, 2013 at 08:47 AM
http://prettyflyforajerseyguy.wordpress.com/2013/12/20/oops-obamacare-is-sending-unusable-data-to-nj-medicaid/
Unbelievable!
Posted by: pagarnow | December 23, 2013 at 08:55 AM
CaptH-- sorry, in my opinion you've been off the mark twice today. I don't know the Silda woman personally, but I can assure you whatever her personality quirks, she has been and will continue to be paid one way or another by the family Spitzer for her time. Second, the I've been a WSJ reader for 23 years, and the 'open borders' view has prevailed there the entire time, including during Robert Bartley's editorial page time. Murdoch is completely about the Benjamins, but he did not create that viewpoint at WSJ.In fact, I've been pleasantly surprised that since Murdoch the WSJ news pages has been more skeptical of conventional Leftwing mythology, peak oil, AGW, The 'Palestian Question', Dem Party 'compassion' than pre-Murdoch.Pre-Murdoch politics at the WSJ was NPRish; worse in fact, because WSJ actually recruited smart Lefty Journos.
Posted by: NK(withnewsoftware) | December 23, 2013 at 09:01 AM
CH-
>>>seem to recall being told what a dumbass I was for not understanding why Silda would stick around with Client 9<<<
don't think I said it but yea if she was sticking around just to be humiliated again she cant be too bright. I would think that she would make more money with a book deal that shives Client #9. Figure he's got a cemetery he'd like to keep hidden.
Posted by: rich@gmu | December 23, 2013 at 09:05 AM
morning all...raining here.
Posted by: rich@gmu | December 23, 2013 at 09:08 AM
"politics at the Journal" I was refering to the News departments. I stopped reading the NYT in 2002, and one of the NYT 'stories' that made me stop reading was about the civil war at the WSJ between Bartley and the Editorial page editors and the News editors over the respective Left v. Right slants. The NYT wrote a bemused 'news story' about the fight. I wrote to the NYT that those fights should be normal and Pinch's Leftwing Hegemony was abonormal and that was the REAL story. No response, I cancelled my subscription. If I've bought the thing 5 times in the past 12 years it's alot.
Posted by: NK(withnewsoftware) | December 23, 2013 at 09:10 AM
Why isn't respecting employees' religious beliefs a good idea?
PS: The Marks & Spencer in St Paul's square (City of London) is complete electronic SELF-checkout at this point. I would bet virtually all M&S outlets with significant Muslim employees are predominantly self-checkout.
Posted by: NK(withnewsoftware) | December 23, 2013 at 09:18 AM
Well it's still a better paper, but one sees how the news section, re Wessel and his economic understanding or lack there of, Seib and his candide like view of foreign affairs, Bravin typified by a similar view on Gitmo, just are woefully inadequate,
Posted by: narciso, | December 23, 2013 at 09:19 AM
The WSJ has long had a sort of Jack Kemp-style conservatism. It is still a rare light of sanity in the MSM darkness, so I'm not inclined to rage against them, even if I don't always agree. And at least Al Hunt is gone.
Posted by: jimmyk | December 23, 2013 at 09:23 AM
Why isn't respecting employees' religious beliefs a good idea?
Why isn't insisting employees respect their customers' beliefs an even better idea? Don't take a job if you can't do it.
Contrast with the idiot judges forcing a baker or photographer to take a job they would rather not accept.
Posted by: jimmyk | December 23, 2013 at 09:25 AM
or what about the customers right to, you know, buy their booze and bacon without a muslim giving them the stink eye for it.
or for M&S to have employees who work...
Posted by: rich@gmu | December 23, 2013 at 09:28 AM
Al Hunt-- I forgot about Al frikkin' Hunt at WSJ. At least Dow Jones put him on op-ed didn't they?
Posted by: NK(withnewsoftware) | December 23, 2013 at 09:30 AM
I am second to none in my appreciation of booze and bacon.... but is buying them a religious statement?
Posted by: NK(withnewsoftware) | December 23, 2013 at 09:31 AM
slow, need coffee...morning jimmyk.
last grade of the term posted...another A (all As for the term and a 3.5 gpa overall, not too shabby). twisted my shoulder a bit for patting myself on the back.
Posted by: rich@gmu | December 23, 2013 at 09:32 AM
congrats on the grades rich. keep up the good work!
Posted by: NK(withnewsoftware) | December 23, 2013 at 09:34 AM
Congrats, rich;
He is one of Stay Puft's Top Men, so he doesn't under why this is happening.
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303773704579269990020773098?mod=Opinion_newsreel_1
Posted by: narciso, | December 23, 2013 at 09:35 AM
but not allowing someone to buy them is not a religious statement?
Posted by: rich@gmu | December 23, 2013 at 09:35 AM
The WSJ has predominantly conventional Lib-'Centrist' news columnists, no doubt. But Murdoch has definitely mixed it up with a few Righty editors he's brought in from his Aussie and Brit papers. I mean under Dow Jones, John Harwood was the politics/DC writer... John Frikkin' Harwood, Bill Clinton's BFF. It was worse under Dow Jones.
Posted by: NK(withnewsoftware) | December 23, 2013 at 09:37 AM
The WSJ has had a token lefty spot as long as I can remember, including Alexander Cockburn (who was entertaining in a madcap don't-take-serious way) and the dull Thomas Frank. Hunt was a disgusting name dropping glad hander who never had anything interesting to say. Kind of like Rove.
JiB left the Cleveland Rams off his list.
Posted by: Captain Hate on the iPhone | December 23, 2013 at 09:37 AM
Why is someone not allowed to buy them? use self checkout or a different cashier.
Posted by: NK(withnewsoftware) | December 23, 2013 at 09:39 AM
I've subsribed to the WSJ since the mid 70s and I can't remember their editorials diverging from conservatism as much as now.
Posted by: Captain Hate on the iPhone | December 23, 2013 at 09:41 AM
When did the Rams move to LA?
wasn't there an NFL merger that brought in the Browns and Rams in the late 40s?
Posted by: NK(withnewsoftware) | December 23, 2013 at 09:41 AM
Or maybe the definition of 'conservatism' has changed.
Posted by: NK(withnewsoftware) | December 23, 2013 at 09:42 AM
Hunt made look askance at Wake Forest just because, although in retrospect, he's Walter Lippman compared to the current pundit class,
Entous, who along with Gorman, did some decent reporting on Libya, had one of the 'eyes glaze over' on the Southern Sudan fustercluck, we're getting involved in this, that's like getting in between the Crowder and Givens clans, Btw, Justified back next month,
Posted by: narciso, | December 23, 2013 at 09:42 AM
I love the term "stink eye".
Posted by: Janet - the districts lie fallow, while the Capitol gorges itself | December 23, 2013 at 09:42 AM
The Browns and the Colts were part of the All America Conference which merged with the NFL. I think the Rams moved to LA before all that.
Posted by: Captain Hate on the iPhone | December 23, 2013 at 09:44 AM
I guess it was always thus,
http://www.the-american-interest.com/blog/2013/12/21/another-shia-sunni-fault-line-opens-up/
Posted by: narciso, | December 23, 2013 at 09:47 AM
CH, I don't read the WSJ editorials religiously, but my recollection from the 70s and 80s is that they always favored relatively open immigration, and they were "centrist" on abortion, meaning they thought Roe v Wade was bad law, but they didn't favor banning abortion either.
I don't think the immigration stance is just pro-business. They've always been free trade and anti-corporate welfare.
Posted by: jimmyk | December 23, 2013 at 09:48 AM
Yes, and the 1980 GOP platform was for Amnesty, there is such a thing as a learning curve,
Isn't the quality of tech bubble fraudster's Blodgett's hires, just great;
https://twitter.com/DannyVinik/status/414915565837647872
Posted by: narciso, | December 23, 2013 at 09:51 AM
New thread!
Posted by: jimmyk | December 23, 2013 at 09:52 AM
The All America Conference, that was it.
Posted by: NK(withnewsoftware) | December 23, 2013 at 09:52 AM
WSJ and 'immigration'. The editors call it 'progrowth' immigration. It's open borders, and it's always pissed off this son of immigrants, legal immigrants. Since mid 80s the WSJ editorial bias has been consistently 'pro growth' through low marginal tax rates and reducing regulations, as they hurt small business. The 'liberty' and social issues, has been a a much smaller focus.
Posted by: NK(withnewsoftware) | December 23, 2013 at 09:55 AM
Janet-
the stink eye, just for you;)
nk-
isn't it the other way around though, the employees are forcing their religious values on their employer and employer's customers? What would be next-not serving a Jewish customer with a kosher cart? Prayer rooms...Adhan over the squawkbox with handy "this way to Mecca" signs? I'd just shop somewhere else...one would think a trip to the grocery store could be untainted by political correctness!
Posted by: rich@gmu | December 23, 2013 at 10:11 AM
-- Welp, it's time for every damn one of you to admit that maybe, just maybe, she's a mentally ill bint who loves being humiliated by human garbage.--
I'm with CH on this one. If she was really in it for the money she'd take him to the cleaners via divorce court.
If she signed a pre-nup before marrying as transparent a snake as the reptilian Spitzer that is merely more evidence of her illness.
Posted by: Ignatz | December 23, 2013 at 10:26 AM
rich@GMU-- M&S is quoted by the UK Mail story, saying that they try to avoid putting religious Muslims in food/beverage checkout where they have religious objections. M&S is about the most posh food store in the UK, and clearly amongst the most politically correct. Althought the Daily Mail story said a low end chain based in Muslim Bradford explicily doesn't force Muslim workers to check out pork/booze. In the old center cities of the UK, there are virtually Muslim only areas, and retailers have to account for them or lose a large amount of business-- so it's not just political correctness. Here's what M&S said to the Daily Mail:
An M&S spokesman said: 'Customer service is our priority. Where we have an employee whose religious beliefs restrict food or drink they can handle, we work closely with our member of staff to place them in a suitable role, such as in our clothing department or bakery."
Posted by: NK(withnewsoftware) | December 23, 2013 at 11:08 AM
I'm with CH on this one
I think the reason "our side" keeps getting smoked in elections is we fail to acknowledge that sometimes large numbers of people do things for irrational and illogical reasons. And that throwing money at it isn't a magic panacea. And that Richie Rich Romney wasn't even close to being electable.
Posted by: Captain Hate | December 23, 2013 at 11:43 AM
Okay, all you lazy-boy referees, please feel free to explain the Steelers v. Packers ruling on the blocked FG and resultant loss of the ball which gives the Pack the ball back and then they score.
No one cares about the game so they introduced some excitement?
Posted by: Charlie Martin | December 23, 2013 at 02:16 PM
NK,
Marks and Spencer is basically a small vewrsion of Walmart in that it carries clothes, shoes, housewares, etc. as well as groceries. It can't hold a candle to Waitrose, which is the posh grocer in the UK. Down the line is Sainsbury and Tesco for pure grocery chains but not the same as Waitrose.
Posted by: JIB | December 23, 2013 at 03:11 PM