Just to be clear I’m in no way endorsing smoking, and think smoking is good for you. All I’m saying is the rate of cancer and lung problems went down significantly after the removal of asbestos (and other dangerous chemicals)from the filters, and people over 100 tend to be smokers (the ones that didn’t die from cancer, but for the benefits from nicotine)
That actually is really interesting, thanks for sharing that article. It is of note that this study is in mice, so who knows if it translates to humans in the same way, but the results are encouraging. Without more info it is hard to say if centenarians got to that age because of the nicotine or if it was some other lifestyle choice/genetic trait or even dumb luck. Im more hesitant to say it’s definitely the nicotine based off of these results.
https://www.nmn.com/news/can-nicotine-combat-aging-study-links-it-to-higher-nad-and-better-motor-function
Just to be clear I’m in no way endorsing smoking, and think smoking is good for you. All I’m saying is the rate of cancer and lung problems went down significantly after the removal of asbestos (and other dangerous chemicals)from the filters, and people over 100 tend to be smokers (the ones that didn’t die from cancer, but for the benefits from nicotine)
That actually is really interesting, thanks for sharing that article. It is of note that this study is in mice, so who knows if it translates to humans in the same way, but the results are encouraging. Without more info it is hard to say if centenarians got to that age because of the nicotine or if it was some other lifestyle choice/genetic trait or even dumb luck. Im more hesitant to say it’s definitely the nicotine based off of these results.
But I dont want higher nads
Im 43, i could use some higher nads. They are quite low right now