People are upset because this person has the means to effect real altruistic change but instead is pretending to do science in a purely selfish effort.
I hope that explains it. I have no horse in this race.
His methodology is a joke. Throw everything against the wall and hope something sticks. He has no way of telling which of the many experiments is successful, he’s a walking collection of confounding factors.
Also, if he were somehow able to find something that outperforms the null hypothesis, and against all odds, find out which treatment it actually is, he could just go drop the performative altruism, go private on it and try to monetize it.
Well yeah he’s trying many things at once because he wants to extend his life and live the greatest lifestyle. It’s not 100% an experiment. Some of it is just trying to live a longer life through healthy options.
He can read the results for different areas. Ie sleep, how long, when and how that affects his well being.
He’s trying to do a good thing and ask you guys can do is bitterly try and tear it down. I think you guys have an agenda.
You’re just trying to be antagonistic now. It’s the data sets. He shows what is beneficial, what’s increasing his longevity. It’s not that hard to comprehend. What decreases issues, what increase years a live on this planet.
Why would you attack someone who’s trying to help find what helps people live longer?
Longer? And it’s not just him, his son also participates and yes you can change your lifestyle and try results and see if it’s affective for him. That’s still data.
"He shows what is beneficial, what’s increasing his longevity. "
How?
How would we know his longevity has increased and not decreased?
How would we know which of the myriad of variables, or which combination of variables,
was responsible for the increase (or decrease)?
Not following the scientific method, won’t produce useful data. As someone said, anecdotes.
It’s not an option though. It’s an attack. They’re just attacking his personality, or calling him names. That’s not opinion, that’s just trying to smear the guy.
They’re bad faith arguments.
Calling him a rich ar*ehole isn’t an opinion. It’s just being rude.
Why are you so confused by this? It’s not at all as difficult as you’re trying to make it seem.
You’re literally in a public forum trying to project your assertions about another person merely because you don’t agree with them. It’s perplexing, really.
You fail to understand one of the simplest characteristics of the human species, and that is they’re not actually required to behave as you believe they should, and many understandably won’t.
I reassert my original advice to you to broaden your horizons to endeavor to interact with others more and more meaningfully, so as to familiarize yourself with, and become much better accustomed to, the plethora of human personalities. You’ll thank me, I assure you.
I reassert my original advice to you to broaden your horizons to endeavor to interact with others more and more meaningfully, so as to familiarize yourself with, and become much better accustomed to, the plethora of human personalities. You’ll thank me, I assure you.
Bots, by their very nature, usually have some kind of agenda, and that agenda may be to pretend that they have no agenda at all.
If bots are what worries you, you are voluntarily on a platform that you know has bots that you cannot trust, so you’re going to need to decide whether to remain on a platform you’ve determined that you cannot inherently trust, or leave, and by doing so, not need to be paranoid about the bots on this platform.
Which, of course, is to say that there are similar such bots on other platforms you may choose to visit…
He may think it helps others to publish his results. Or maybe it’s just a publicity stunt. But neither of those motivations mean that the results will be worth a shit.
You’re assuming his actual intentions are what he declares them to be. Hey, maybe they are. But there’s no way of knowing that.
But I try a lot of things and fail. So does everyone else. What matters is not his intention, but the quality of the results. And the way he’s collecting and reporting his results is undisciplined and unscientific.
But you don’t seem all that able to understand either science or the human character, so I’m going to cut my losses and stop trying to explain it to you. Maybe some day, when I’m bored, I’ll come up with a doggy-doggy horsey-horsey version and try again.
Why are you so angry at him?
He’s literally trying to make people live longer.
I don’t see why you’re calling him vulgar names.
He’s trying many things to see what works and what doesn’t.
Your vitriol seems misplaced and I don’t understand your aggression towards someone trying to be helpful to society in general. It’s bizarre.
People are upset because this person has the means to effect real altruistic change but instead is pretending to do science in a purely selfish effort.
I hope that explains it. I have no horse in this race.
It’s the opposite of selfish, he’s publishing all of this findings to the internet for everyone to see and use.
It’s not pretend, he’s actually carrying out methodology, posting results and showing what’s effective
His methodology is a joke. Throw everything against the wall and hope something sticks. He has no way of telling which of the many experiments is successful, he’s a walking collection of confounding factors.
Also, if he were somehow able to find something that outperforms the null hypothesis, and against all odds, find out which treatment it actually is, he could just go drop the performative altruism, go private on it and try to monetize it.
Well yeah he’s trying many things at once because he wants to extend his life and live the greatest lifestyle. It’s not 100% an experiment. Some of it is just trying to live a longer life through healthy options.
He can read the results for different areas. Ie sleep, how long, when and how that affects his well being.
He’s trying to do a good thing and ask you guys can do is bitterly try and tear it down. I think you guys have an agenda.
He is posting shitty anecdotes.
No it’s the actual data sets
No, you don’t understand science.
“But worthless data is still data!”
On the plus side, we now have at least some evidence that Bryan Johnson is on Lemmy! 🤣
You’re just trying to be antagonistic now. It’s the data sets. He shows what is beneficial, what’s increasing his longevity. It’s not that hard to comprehend. What decreases issues, what increase years a live on this planet.
Why would you attack someone who’s trying to help find what helps people live longer?
Can’t do that with a sample size of one, because there isn’t a comparison to know if it is longer or not.
Longer? And it’s not just him, his son also participates and yes you can change your lifestyle and try results and see if it’s affective for him. That’s still data.
"He shows what is beneficial, what’s increasing his longevity. " How?
How would we know his longevity has increased and not decreased? How would we know which of the myriad of variables, or which combination of variables, was responsible for the increase (or decrease)? Not following the scientific method, won’t produce useful data. As someone said, anecdotes.
By taking readings and measurements of the human body. Seeing if your in an increased healthy state.
There are markers which shows the health of the body.
Removed by mod
Ha, and now you’re attacking me. So you don’t really have an argument, you’re just slandering people.
It’s pretty telling that many comments on here are just attacking this guy. I wonder if bots are being used to try and smear this guy.
Fast food companies don’t want people to stop eating fast food.
Does getting healthy offend you?
You can simplify all of this just by saying you’re a big fan of the guy.
Literally everything in your reply is some extremely weird projection trying to invalidate another person’s opinion, and it’s incredibly strange.
Honestly, you come across as a person who hasn’t had much interaction with different opinions, perspectives, and personalities.
It’s not an option though. It’s an attack. They’re just attacking his personality, or calling him names. That’s not opinion, that’s just trying to smear the guy.
They’re bad faith arguments.
Calling him a rich ar*ehole isn’t an opinion. It’s just being rude.
Why are you so confused by this? It’s not at all as difficult as you’re trying to make it seem.
You’re literally in a public forum trying to project your assertions about another person merely because you don’t agree with them. It’s perplexing, really.
You fail to understand one of the simplest characteristics of the human species, and that is they’re not actually required to behave as you believe they should, and many understandably won’t.
I reassert my original advice to you to broaden your horizons to endeavor to interact with others more and more meaningfully, so as to familiarize yourself with, and become much better accustomed to, the plethora of human personalities. You’ll thank me, I assure you.
Because it seems they’re just trying to smear him. They’re attacking him for no logical reason.
I reassert my original advice to you to broaden your horizons to endeavor to interact with others more and more meaningfully, so as to familiarize yourself with, and become much better accustomed to, the plethora of human personalities. You’ll thank me, I assure you.
You really will.
If they’re even real. So many bots around these days. And they don’t seem to want to listen so it seems like they have an agenda.
But your advice is cogent, if it’s a real person without an agenda
Bots, by their very nature, usually have some kind of agenda, and that agenda may be to pretend that they have no agenda at all.
If bots are what worries you, you are voluntarily on a platform that you know has bots that you cannot trust, so you’re going to need to decide whether to remain on a platform you’ve determined that you cannot inherently trust, or leave, and by doing so, not need to be paranoid about the bots on this platform.
Which, of course, is to say that there are similar such bots on other platforms you may choose to visit…
Exhausting, no?
Which people is he “trying to help”?
Anyone and everyone that is interested in longevity.
Ooohh I’m sorry. “Himself” was the answer. Good game, thanks for playing.
He’s helping himself by publishing the results for everyone? That doesn’t even make sense.
You’re being obtuse and and I question your intentions in have a good faith argument.
He may think it helps others to publish his results. Or maybe it’s just a publicity stunt. But neither of those motivations mean that the results will be worth a shit.
So without knowing any of the results, they’re invalid? That makes no sense
Multiple people have already told why that “data” is useless. Why are you defending this guy so hard?
Because he’s trying to do something good. Why are you attacking him so hard?
You’re assuming his actual intentions are what he declares them to be. Hey, maybe they are. But there’s no way of knowing that.
But I try a lot of things and fail. So does everyone else. What matters is not his intention, but the quality of the results. And the way he’s collecting and reporting his results is undisciplined and unscientific.
But you don’t seem all that able to understand either science or the human character, so I’m going to cut my losses and stop trying to explain it to you. Maybe some day, when I’m bored, I’ll come up with a doggy-doggy horsey-horsey version and try again.
Publicly giving out information about the erections of his 19-year-old son is doing something good?
You’ve got a lot of self reflection to do, friend.
I don’t know about that but it’s funny you focus only on that.
What about the sleep data, food data, exercise data?
You’re only focusing on a small part of the research. Which makes me think you’re buying have this discussion in good faith