For 4+ years, I tried to shed my stubborn last 10lbs. I tried it all: calorie counting, intermittent fasting, long fasts, keto, gym grinding, you name it. I’d lose 1-2 lbs, then gain them back. This is despite working out every day and eating clean. I thought the problem was that I wasn’t restricting calories enough.

Then I got pregnant. I obviously wasn’t going to try and lose weight during this period. So I decided to let go. I ate whatever I wanted, whenever I wanted. I would finish tubs of honey ice-cream and packets of honey chocolate on some days. The caveat was that I’ve never enjoyed junk food much, so my diet was still 95% clean. But I had zero self-imposed restrictions. I enjoyed my chocolate and ice-cream guilt-free.

I noticed that my relationship with food started to change. Despite having unrestricted access to sweets in the refrigerator, most days I simply didn’t want it. I started eating naturally based on hunger cues. I wasn’t bound to the clock by crazy fasting schedules.

I had a healthy pregnancy, gained ~27lbs, and delivered a healthy chubby baby. I lost all my pregnancy weight in the first 3 months and miraculously in the next 6 months, I lost those stubborn 10lbs that I’d been trying to lose for 4 years. And I didn’t even try this time.

I re-established my power over food

While sunlight and other factors played a massive role in my weight loss, I realized that a big part of it was changing my relationship with food. Pre-pregnancy, I lived in fear of eating too much. Food had more power over me. This fear caused me to eat artificially: gorge on cheat days, eat less even when I’m truly hungry, eat more when I’m not hungry to follow my diet plan, and eat foods that I didn’t want to. I was living in a scarcity mindset, worried about food.

In pregnancy, I let go of this fear. I had power over food. One thinks that without any willpower or restrictions, you’d eat junk food all the time. Quite the opposite. I started to live in a state of food abundance. Because I knew I had access to food whenever I wanted, I didn’t worry about overeating.

Why calorie counting apps make weight loss harder

Those who struggle with overeating and/or eating junk food have a tenuous relationship with food, that I described above. The irony is that calorie counting and weight loss apps perpetuate this fearful negative relationship with food. By making you log every calorie, they make you live in constant fear of food. The very fear that was stalling me from losing weight. These apps want you to be loyal customers, not ones who fix the problem and leave.

Losing weight is not so simple as “eat less and move more.” It’s not a matter of willpower and counting calories. It’s a psychological game. It’s about you having power over food.

The answer to weight loss lies not in calorie counting but in changing your relationship with food.

How to regain your control over food

If you want to change your dynamic with food, try this experiment for a few days: eat as much as you want, whatever you want. Guilt-free. The first couple of days you might eat more. But then you might begin to notice how your fear over food changes. You begin to control food, food does not control you. You might begin to eat naturally, more intuitively. In this fearless state, controlling your food choices will become easier.

Subscribe now

Weight loss is not about calories

Contrary to popular belief, calories are the least important metric when it comes to food regulation. Your appetite is heavily regulated by protein intake, circadian timing, light exposure, and hormones, not calories.

Below, I share the exact 10 things I changed to help me lose 10lbs without trying. No calorie counting. No willpower needed.

1. Morning protein breakfast: I used to do intermittent fasting and skip breakfast. My first meal of the day was around 11am. This shifted my gut clock to start the day later, which naturally pushed my dinner time later too. We have a master circadian clock in the brain and local clocks at every organ and cell. My master clock would get its cue from morning sunlight upon waking up. But my gut clock was getting its morning cue only much later in the day. This creates a desynchrony in our body clocks, disrupting circadian and hormonal signaling. Losing weight and optimal health requires your body to work in synchrony. Morning breakfast is key for proper circadian alignment. Aim for 30-40g of protein at breakfast. Eggs, meat, or Greek yogurt. This anchors your gut clock to your wake time and keeps you full until lunch without snacking.

2. Eat dinner by sunset: This was one of the biggest levers in me losing weight. I ran a simple experiment for a few days: eating the same dinner but finishing before sunset vs. after. I noticed that whenever I ate post sunset, I felt more bloated and had worse sleep. I also effortlessly started losing some weight after only a few days of eating by sunset. Eating after sundown not only delays the onset of melatonin which helps you wind down, but it also desynchronizes your body clocks which I discussed above. Eating late also tends to make you hungrier the next day and shifts your body toward fat storage. Your metabolism is highest earlier in the day and winds down as the sun sets. Eat with the sun, not against it.

Read more

Dermatologists have spent decades telling us to avoid the sun. Wear sunscreen. Cover up. The fear is skin cancer. But one of the most thorough studies ever conducted on sun exposure and mortality found the opposite. Women who got the most sun lived the longest. Women who avoided the sun died at the same rate as smokers. And the most surprising finding of all? The women who lived the longest in the entire 20-year study1 got skin cancer AND were most sun-exposed.

And it wasn’t just about living longer. The study showed that women who got more sunlight were protected from:

• Cardiovascular disease

• Cancer (including skin cancer!)

• Type 2 diabetes

• Venous blood clots

• Death from all causes

And the more the sun, the better the outcomes. In this post, I break down the study and what it means for how you think about the sun.

Basics of the study:

Researchers recruited 29,518 Swedish women between 25 and 64 years of age starting in 1990. They asked four simple questions about sun exposure:

1. Do you sunbathe during the summer?

2. Do you sunbathe during winter holidays?

3. Do you use tanning beds?

4. Do you go abroad on holiday to swim and sunbathe?

No to everything = low sun exposure. Yes to one or two = moderate. Yes to three or four = high. They also recorded smoking status, exercise habits, BMI, education level, marital status, disposable income, and whether the women were on medication for diabetes, blood clotting, or cardiovascular disease, all of which were used to adjust the results. Then they followed these women for 20 years and tracked what happened.

Results: Risk of disease & death increased by avoiding the sun

• Not getting sun was as dangerous as smoking. Nonsmokers who avoided sun exposure had a life expectancy similar to smokers who got the most sun. Even among smokers, those around age 60 who actively sought the sun lived ~2 years longer than smokers who avoided it.

• Heart disease: The highest sun exposure group had ~60% lower risk of cardiovascular death.

• Cancer: The highest sun exposure group had ~40% lower risk of cancer death, including melanoma. In fact, women with the most sun exposure who developed non-melanoma skin cancer had the lowest mortality of anyone in the entire 20-year study. Lower than cancer-free women. Lower than every other group. More on skin cancer and melanoma findings below.

  • Melanoma: Melanoma incidence was slightly higher in the high sun exposure group (0.81% vs 1.1%), but the increase wasn't statistically significant. And when they did get melanoma, their risk of dying was essentially the same as sun avoiders who never got cancer at all. Meanwhile, sun avoiders who got melanoma had 4x the risk of death. And within the melanoma group specifically, sun avoiders had 8x the death rate of sun-seekers.

• Diabetes: Women who avoided the sun were at nearly 2.5x the risk of type 2 diabetes compared to those with the highest sun exposure. The relationship was dose-dependent: moderate sun exposure carried 47% higher risk, and low sun exposure carried 147% higher risk. The effect was even more dramatic in normal-weight women, where sun avoiders had nearly 4x the diabetes risk.2

• Other non-cancer deaths: The highest sun exposure group had over double (110%) the reduction in non-cancer, non-cardiovascular death (things like diabetes, multiple sclerosis, pulmonary diseases). Combined with the cardiovascular disease reduction, this is where the biggest increase in lifespan came from.

• Dying from anything: Women who avoided the sun had double the risk of death over the next 20 years compared to those with the highest sun exposure. This translated to 0.6 to 2.1 fewer years of life for sun avoiders.

• Blood clots: For every “yes” answer to sun exposure, women were at ~30% lower risk of venous thromboembolism. Blood clot risk was also 50% higher in winter compared to summer.

But is it really the sun? You might wonder: do sun-seekers just live longer because they're wealthier, more active, and healthier to begin with? The researchers tested this. They adjusted for age, smoking, education, marital status, income, pre-existing conditions, BMI and physical exercise. The results held. The survival benefit of sun exposure wasn't explained by lifestyle differences.

This study is not a one-off. A 2024 analysis3 of 376,000 UK Biobank participants found the same pattern: higher UV exposure was associated with lower all-cause, cardiovascular, and cancer mortality. A separate Swedish cohort study4 of women followed for three decades found sunbathing vacations were linked to 30% lower risk of death. The data pointing to sun exposure as protective against the leading causes of death is consistent across multiple large cohorts and countries.

But what about skin cancer risk?

Here's where it gets really counterintuitive. The women who lived the longest in the entire 20-year study weren't the ones who avoided skin cancer. They were the ones who got skin cancer and had the most sun exposure. They outlived everyone, including cancer-free women.

I couldn't believe this when I first saw it. For paid subscribers, I break down exactly what's going on:

• How women with skin cancer outlived every other group in the study, including women who never got cancer.

• The 8x death gap: why getting melanoma while avoiding the sun was the deadliest combination in the study, while getting melanoma with high sun exposure barely affected mortality.

• The vitamin D connection: why the same cancer can kill one woman and barely affect another.

• What no one tells you about the sun vs. skin cancer tradeoff: the risk of dying from skin cancer vs. the risk of dying from avoiding the sun.

Subscribe now

Read more

Hi, I’m Aastha and thanks for joining Live Longer World as I parse through the snake-oil in longevity. On Health on Easy Mode, you can see my exact collection of non-toxic health products I use (15+ categories including clean water, lighting, air quality, non-toxic kitchen).

I threw away my polyester clothing. And switched to organic cotton.

Polyester clothing is literally wearable plastic. It’s not just a skin irritant, it might be contributing to the fertility crisis, hormonal imbalance, and reduced energy levels.

Roughly 60% of clothing is made from polyester and other synthetic fibers. Lululemon, Under Armour, Zara, Calvin Klein are all predominantly polyester. Testing on popular sports bras from Nike, Athleta, The North Face, and others found BPA levels up to 40x the safe limit under California law!1 These brands are great for the booty bump and coolness factor. Not so great for your health.

This is what the modern human looks like. We eat plastic, drink plastic, breathe plastic, and now wear plastic too!

What’s the big deal with polyester clothing?

• Poor sperm health: Polyester traps heat. Tighter underwear and more heat are linked to worse sperm markers. In one study2, 14 men who wore a polyester scrotal sling had zero sperm(!) within 5 months. And a 2024 study3 found microplastics in 100% of human semen samples tested. Enough for me to not want my husband to wear plastic down there.

• Disrupted hormone health: Polyester clothing carries phthalates, PFAS (forever chemicals)4, BPA5 and other finishing chemicals. These are endocrine disruptors - they mimic or block estrogen, testosterone, and thyroid hormones.6 A study of children's school uniforms found PFAS in 100% of products tested.7

• Loaded with PFAS and heavy metals: Water-resistant, stain-resistant, wrinkle-free, and performance finishes mean added chemicals like PFAS. Polyester is also commonly made using antimony (heavy metal) as a catalyst, and antimony can migrate from polyester textiles into sweat. Antimony is a possible carcinogen. What’s worse is that the antimony keeps leaching even after repeated washes.8

• Microplastics contribute to heart disease: A 2024 study9 found micro and nanoplastics in the carotid artery plaque of 58% of heart patients. Those with plastics in their plaque had a 4.5x higher risk of heart attack, stroke, or death over the following 3 years.

• Increased inflammation: Synthetic textiles are the dominant source of indoor airborne microplastics. It is estimated that you may shed up to a billion polyester microfibers into the air each year just by moving around. Indoor air contains roughly 6x more microplastic fibers than outdoor air, resulting in oxidative stress and inflammation.10 Investing in an air filter and opening your windows is worthwhile.

• Skin irritation: Polyester traps heat, sweat, and oils against your skin. Textile dyes and finishes, including formaldehyde (a Group 1 carcinogen used for wrinkle-free finishes), add chemical irritation on top of the physical discomfort.11

So what did I do about it?

• For my undergarments, I only do organic cotton.

• For the rest of my clothing, I do organic cotton or cotton 99.9% of the time. Pact is my favorite - they are affordable and fashionable.

  • Cotton is a natural fiber so it doesn’t come with the same plastic problem. The catch with cotton is that it is the world’s dirtiest crop. It is loaded with pesticides and accounts for 16% of the world’s insecticide use. These chemicals get absorbed into the cotton and don’t necessarily get off your clothes by washing them. Organic cotton is worth the extra money if you can get it.

• Our bedding, blanket, pillows, mattress are all organic cotton or organic wool. Never sleep on polyester sheets. Sleep is when your body is repairing itself, and polyester can even hinder the charge of the mitochondria.

The rest of the post is for paid subscribers. I discuss:

• Other materials that are safe (bamboo is not as safe as you think)

• Why to never wear polyester while working out

• More tips I practice to reduce clothing toxicity

• How to mitigate risk from textile dyes and carcinogenic wrinkle-free finishes. It’s not just the materials that matter, dyes too contain chemicals.

• Safe certifications when picking clothes

Read more

Then, I gave birth to an angel in April 2025. Postpartum, I obviously couldn’t grind at the gym and go on a diet. I started living more naturally, more in tune with our environment, and how we evolved.

• I got a lot more sun.

• I learned about the impact of artificial lights on our metabolism and sleep, and switched to red incandescent only at night.

• I threw out all the toxic everyday products from our house. I wanted our house to be as non-toxic as possible for our daughter.

• I reduced our EMF exposure through hacks I’ll discuss later.

• I spent more time in fresh air.

• I started sleeping earlier and waking up with the sunrise.

In short, I fixed my environment to make it more in tune with nature. I noticed how great I felt.

What happened when I stopped grinding and fixed my environment

• I lost the baby weight in 2.5 months and in the next 5 months after that, I lost that stubborn 10lbs that I’d been trying to lose for 4 years!

• My deep sleep doubled to over 2 hours, despite waking up 2+ times a night to nurse my baby.

• I felt higher energy and happier, with few to zero afternoon slumps.

• Snack cravings and food thoughts throughout the day vanished. I didn’t need to use willpower.

I achieved better results in under 1 year than I did with grinding for 5+ years. This is why I keep saying: Environment over effort and Health on Easy Mode. Not because it sounds nice. But because I lived both ways.

What surprised me most

Along the way, a few things genuinely shocked me:

• Avoiding the sun can be as bad as smoking (in terms of all‑cause mortality).

• Artificial light isn’t just about eye strain - it impacts metabolism, stress, and sleep.

• CO₂ buildup indoors impairs decision‑making, learning, and sleep.

• Our clothing and furniture shed microplastics and chemicals onto our skin and air.

• Non‑native EMF exposure is likely more important than mainstream messaging suggests (especially at night and near the head).

I realized: diet, exercise, and sleep matter, but your environment is the substrate all of that rests on.

Why I built Live Longer World

I’m not a “theory only” person.

• I test things on myself first.

• I talk to scientists directly (Live Longer World Podcast).

• I dig through old papers and mechanisms.

• Then I try to turn that into something you can actually use.

This newsletter, Live Longer World, is where I:

• Share the protocols and experiments that actually moved the needle for me.

• Explain the biophysics of health (light, air, toxins, environment) in plain English.

• Help you avoid the years of “hard mode” I put myself through.

And because so many products are toxic:

I built Health on Easy Mode as my curated collection of low‑toxin, PFAS‑screened, lower‑plastic products I actually use at home (light, air, water, kitchen, diagnostics, etc.). Inclusion is 100% merit‑based. Brands don’t pay to place.

Health on Easy Mode is where I list the tools.
This newsletter Live Longer World is where I share the protocols and research.

What paid subscribers get (first time I’m sharing this)

Up to now, all my posts have been 100% free. That’s not changing.

• The philosophy, the big levers, and a lot of tactics will stay free.

• But the deep protocol breakdowns (step‑by‑step, with research) are going to live behind a light paywall for members.

Think of it like this:

• Free: “Fix your evening light if you want better sleep. Here’s why it matters and what to aim for.”

• Paid: “Here’s exactly how I set it up (room by room), more under-the-radar protocols, and deeper research.”

If you become a paid subscriber, here’s what you get:

• Detailed playbooks on:

  • Light & circadian rhythm (day and night).

  • Sleep environment (light, air, bedding, EMF).

  • EMF basics and practical mitigation.

  • Non‑toxic living (materials, kitchen, water, personal care).

• Deep‑dive research behind each tactic.

• Early access to my Health on Easy Mode guides and experiments.

I’m not promising a $2M/year Bryan Johnson protocol. He spends millions and built a full‑time operation around his health.

My goal is the opposite:

Live Longer World through Environment over Effort
No grind. No $2M/year budget.
Simple, low‑cost environment tweaks that stack over time.

~$100 per year gets you the deep playbooks and research that took me years (and a lot of mistakes) to assemble.

Upgrade to Paid

Who this is (and isn’t) for

This is for you if:

• You care about energy and healthspan, but don’t want to live in a lab.

• You’re willing to change your environment, not just add another pill.

• You like understanding the “why,” not just copying checklists.

• You’d rather pay a little to save dozens of hours of your own research.

This is not for you if:

• You want a $2M/year Bryan Johnson protocol.

• You only care about macros and macros alone.

• You’re hoping I’ll sell you a miracle supplement stack.

Thank you + what to do next

The best ways to support my work:

1. Share Live Longer World with someone who cares about health & longevity but doesn’t want to live on hard mode.

2. Become a paid subscriber if you want access to the deeper protocols and research.

This Friday, I’ll publish my first paid breakdown, where:

• The first half (free) covers the philosophy and main levers

• The second half (paid) walks through detailed protocols and supporting research

Upgrade to Paid

Share

Thank you for following along as I parse through the snake‑oil in longevity and practice Health on Easy Mode.

Environment over effort,
Aastha

Follow me on X @aasthajs and Instagram @aasthajs.

Browse my Health on Easy Mode setup across 15+ categories (non-toxic kitchen, clean water, skincare, diagnostics, lighting).

Two major contributing factors: protein and sunlight.1

Animals in the wild don’t calorie count. Yet they’re never fat in an unhealthy manner. Humans obsess over calories. We struggle, suffer, use willpower. And still gain weight.

What do wild animals know about eating that we don’t?

May the Protein Be With You

The answer lies in the "Protein Leverage Hypothesis." It was developed by David Raubenheimer and Stephen Simpson, authors of "Eat Like the Animals: What Nature Teaches Us About the Science of Healthy Eating."

Animals, including humans, have evolved separate appetites for protein, carbs, fat, sodium, and calcium. This is the big five that signals a nutritionally balanced diet.

But one nutrient sits above the rest: protein.

Protein is the primary lever for appetite regulation.

Our body prioritizes eating a target amount of protein. It’s our gauge for recognizing whether we’re full or not. Here’s how it works:

• If we under consume our protein target, we don’t feel full. So, our body goes searching for protein in the other nutrients, mainly carbs and fats.

• But carbs and fats are low in protein. So we have to eat a lot of them to make up the difference. That means overshooting on calories.

• For example, if your protein target is 15%, but you only consume 10%, your body will try to find that missing 5% in carbs and fat. Since those are protein-poor, you'll overconsume them trying to close the gap. That's how overeating happens: not from a lack of willpower, but from a protein shortfall.

When protein is high in the diet, the opposite happens. We naturally eat less because our appetite is satisfied sooner.

This applies to herbivores as well. Horses and cows don’t just eat any grass, they seek forage that is protein-rich.

Why eat carbs and fats at all then? Because they are the primary fuels for energy.

Why does our body index on protein?

Because we don’t store it. We can store energy from carbs and fats. But protein? We need to refuel it almost every day. Indexing on protein is our body’s way of making sure we get what we can’t bank.

What is your target protein?

Protein requirements vary by age, gender, muscle, and activity level. But the general pattern:

• Children and adolescents: ~15% protein from daily calories. Essential for growth.

• Young adults: ~18% protein. To support growth and reproduction.

• Pregnant and breastfeeding: ~20% protein. More protein to support the baby.

• Mature adults (30s): ~17% protein.

• Middle age (40-60s): ~15% protein. Protein targets can fall, which may promote healthy aging and potentially slow aging. This is where the association between low protein and longer lifespan fits in.

• Older age (65+): ~20% protein. Protein needs rise again because the body becomes less efficient at retaining it. The drain gets increasingly leaky.

How Small Protein Shortfalls Drive Obesity

Ultra-processed foods are a protein leverage trap. They’re low in protein, high in carbs and fats. So you need to eat a lot of them to hit your protein target, massively overshooting on calories in the process.

Even a 2% protein shortfall can set off a vicious cycle. Your body hunts for that missing protein in carbs and fats. But since those are protein-poor, you eat more of them to compensate. More calories → weight gain → now your larger body needs even more food → and if you’re still eating the same low-protein diet, the cycle repeats.

Practical take-away to lose weight

I’ve tried calorie counting and fad diets and they didn’t work for me. When it comes to food, this is what I did that helped me lose 10lbs:

• Make protein your lever: If you’re craving carbs, eat protein first. When I do this, I notice that I’m fuller and my hunger for sugary carbs goes away. It’s our body telling us to meet our protein target.

• Don't skip carbs and fats entirely: You need them for energy. Just make sure protein comes first.

Do Health on Easy Mode.

May the Protein be with you,

Aastha

Browse my Health on Easy Mode setup across 15+ categories (non-toxic kitchen, clean water, skincare, diagnostics, lighting).

Follow me on X @aasthajs & Instagram @aasthajs as I parse through the snake-oil in longevity.

Support My Work

Share

Related Posts:

You can’t see flicker with the naked eye, but your brain can detect it.

This is a 10 second video that shows the flicker in your bulb.

Most indoor lights/LEDs rapidly pulse on and off 100 to 120 times a second. This is what causes them to invisibly flicker.1 Your computer and phone screens flicker too.

Even though flicker is invisible, it creates rapid light fluctuations that can stress the brain and visual system. Our eyes have to keep adapting to tiny changes in brightness. This is why low-quality lighting and screens can leave one feeling tired and cause headaches.

How to remove flicker from Computer screens:

Screens flicker when brightness is not at 100%. Instead of actually dimming the light, the screen flashes on and off very quickly to fake a lower brightness. (This technique is called Pulse Width Modulation or PWM).

The lower your brightness, the longer the off gaps are, making the flicker more aggressive and harder on your brain. I used to keep the brightness low to reduce the screen glare, till I learned about flicker.

Here is what I do and it significantly reduced my eye strain:

• Increase the brightness to 100%: This keeps the backlight always on and eliminates the flicker / PWM flashing.

• Use a software dimmer like Iris: Since 100% brightness is harsh on the eyes, you need a way to lower the brightness without the flicker. Iris is the best tool for this.

How to remove flicker from Phone screens:

iPhone:

• iPhone 16 and older: Keep your hardware brightness at 100%. Go to Settings > Accessibility > Display & Text Size. Turn on Reduce White Point and slide it to 80-90% to dim the screen safely.

  • Pro Tip: When in the sun, you will have to toggle off White Point so you can actually see your screen. You can set this to a triple click shortcut in your Accessibility settings.

• iPhone 17: Apple added a native setting to reduce flicker, but there is a catch: it only works if your hardware brightness is below 25%. Above 25%, the screen still flickers. Because of this, I highly recommend keeping your brightness at 100% and using the “Reduce White Point” method from the bullet above.

  • If you still want to use the native setting: Go to Settings > Accessibility > Display & Text Size and toggle on Display Pulse Smoothing. (Note: iOS will not let you use this at the same time as Reduce White Point).

Android:

• Just like the iPhone, keep your hardware brightness slider at 100%. Then, go to Settings > Accessibility > Vision Enhancements (or Display) and turn on Extra Dim. This applies a software shadow, allowing you to dim the screen safely without triggering the hardware strobe.

  • Pro Tip: You can add the “Extra Dim” toggle directly to your Quick Settings pull-down menu so you can easily turn it off when you walk out into the sun.

How to remove flicker from Home lights:

• Use Incandescents: While they aren’t always 100% flicker-free, they drastically reduce it. Because they create light using a physical filament that stays glowing hot even as the AC power cycles, the light output remains smooth instead of harshly flashing. The bulbs I use are flicker-free.

  • Additionally, at night, I only use red incandescent bulbs to protect my melatonin and prepare for sleep.

• Check your LEDs: Most cheap LEDs aggressively flicker 120 times per second. If you use LEDs, specifically look for and buy bulbs labeled “Flicker-Free.”

• Ditch the dimmers: Avoid using wall dimmer switches. Dimmers work by chopping up the electrical current, constantly pulsing the power on and off. This creates a harsh, aggressive flicker, even if you are using good bulbs.

These seemingly innocuous 60 second fixes to your home and display lighting will significantly reduce your eye strain. Do Health on Easy Mode.

See all my lighting and blue-light blocking products on Health on Easy Mode. Inclusion is 100% merit-based. Brands do not pay to place.

Environment over effort,

Aastha

Browse my Health on Easy Mode setup across 15+ categories (non-toxic kitchen, clean water, skincare, diagnostics, lighting).

Follow me on X @aasthajs & Instagram @aasthajs as I parse through the snake-oil in longevity.

Subscribe now

Share

Related Posts:

My phone is red too.

Blue-rich LEDs in your house are ruining your sleep.

Blue LEDs are not just in your house lighting. They are hiding in all your device screens as well: computers, TVs, and phones.

At night, blue light signals “alertness” to the brain and suppresses melatonin, the hormone that helps you wind down. Blue light can also cause overeating and alter our metabolism. This is why I only use red incandescent bulbs after sunset.

But changing my lights wasn’t enough. If your house is red but your phone and devices are blue, you are still signaling daytime to your brain.

Here is exactly how I stripped blue light from my devices:

1. iPhone: The “Red Light” Trick

Most people use “Night Shift,” but that only warms the screen slightly. To fully protect your melatonin, you want to eliminate blue pixels entirely and turn your screen monochrome / entirely red.

I set my phone so a simple triple-click of the side button switches it to red mode.

Set it up in 60 seconds:

1. Go to Settings > Accessibility > Display & Text Size.

2. Tap Color Filters and toggle it ON.

3. Select Color Tint (the last option).

4. Scroll down to the sliders: Slide Intensity and Hue all the way to the right (Max).

5. Go back to the main Accessibility menu.

6. Scroll to the very bottom and tap Accessibility Shortcut.

7. Check Color Filters.

Now, simply triple-click your power button after sunset and your screen will turn pure red.1

2. Android: The Red Mode

If you are on Android, you have two options depending on your model.

Option A: Native Settings (Samsung/Newer Phones)

• Go to Settings > Accessibility > Visibility Enhancements (or “Display”).

• Look for Color Correction or Color Filter.

• Turn it on and select Red or Grayscale with a red tint.

• Like the iPhone, you can often set an “Accessibility Shortcut” to toggle this with a button press.

Option B: The App Solution If your phone doesn’t have a deep red filter built-in, you can try the free app Twilight. It allows you to overlay a red filter on your screen automatically at sunset, far more aggressively than the standard Android “Night Light.”

3. Computer: F.lux

I’ve been using F.lux for over 5 years. It is a free software that syncs with your local sunset time to remove the blue light from your monitor.

While Windows and Mac now have native “Night Light” modes, I find F.lux is much better at getting the screen to a deep, campfire orange/red color rather than just a pale yellow.

4. Blue-Light Free Tablet: Daylight Computer

This tablet has been one of my favorite purchases of the past year.

Unlike an iPad or Kindle, the Daylight Computer is naturally free of blue light and flicker.

I use it primarily for reading. It is a calming experience which makes you realize how aggressive the flicker and glare of traditional screens are.

Use code livelongerworld for $25 off.

5. Blue-light blockers

As evening approaches, I occasionally swap my regular glasses for blue-light blockers. Even though my home is lit by red bulbs, occasional blue light seeps in from the fridge light, the microwave clock, or streetlights outside. These are also very useful when you’re away from home in blue-light rich places or for watching TV at night.

Summary of my stack:

• iPhone: Triple-click for Red Color Filter after sunset.

• Computer: F.lux (all day, but aggressive at night).

• Reading/Browsing: Daylight Tablet.

• Glasses: Blue-light blockers.

See all my lighting and blue-light blocking products on Health on Easy Mode. Inclusion is 100% merit-based. Brands do not pay to place.

Environment over effort,

Aastha

Browse my Health on Easy Mode setup across 15+ categories (non-toxic kitchen, clean water, skincare, diagnostics, lighting).

Follow me on X @aasthajs & Instagram @aasthajs as I parse through the snake-oil in longevity. Practical tips on how light, water, emf, environment affect your health more than you think.

Subscribe now

Share

Related Posts:

Bryan Johnson1 uses a sunlight lamp in the mornings to “regulate his circadian rhythm.”

When I first learned about this, I jumped to buy it. I thought I’d use it on cloudy mornings, or while drinking my coffee before heading out for a walk.

Now, this lamp is buried in my attic.

Sunlight lamps are a gimmick and come nowhere close to replicating morning sunlight, even on cloudy days.

I watch the sunrise almost everyday and get over 2 hours of morning sunlight. I’ve lost 9lbs, have higher energy, and an elevated mood. Any amount of sunlight beats a fake sunlamp hands down.

Nothing compares to Sunlight for Circadian Rhythm regulation

Light intensity is an important cue to tell our biological clocks to wake up. Sunlight has 3-5x more light intensity than Bryan Johnson’s sunlamp. Without sunlight’s intensity, your brain’s master clock does not get the same alert cue.

But intensity is just one piece. Health influencers miss the other irreplaceable benefits conferred by morning sunlight. Morning sunlight is irreplaceable in its unique benefits. No sunlamp or LED/artificial light comes close.

Sun vs. Sunlight lamp

Unique benefits of Morning Sunlight

Watching the sunrise and spending time in the morning sun helps with energy production, repair signals, cognitive performance and blood flow. Each wavelength of sunlight is important.2

Morning light is particularly rich in beneficial red & infrared, UVA, and blue light.

Red & infrared: Mitochondrial fuel

• Boosts mitochondria: Recharges your cells’ batteries for higher energy.3

• Balances Blood Sugar: Helps smooth out glucose spikes after meals.

• Lowers inflammation: Soothes musculoskeletal pain and speeds up recovery.

• Blood Circulation: Delivers more oxygen to your body by improving blood flow.

• Repairs Skin: Stimulates collagen to repair damage and reduce wrinkles.

• Sharpens Vision: Revitalizes aging eyes to see clearly for longer.4

UVA: The Morning Repair signal

UVA and UVB have been demonized with little care for nuance and the benefits they confer.5 Morning UVA significantly improves cardiovascular health, among its many benefits.6

• Lowers Blood Pressure: Widens blood vessels to improve flow and heart health.

• Signals Repair: Tells your cells and mitochondria to start fixing damage.

• Boosts Mood: Triggers natural feel-good chemicals for a morning high.

• Fixes Sleep: Sets your internal clock for deeper rest at night.

• Builds Melatonin: Triggers production of melatonin in the morning so it’s ready for release at night. Melatonin is the hormone that lets you sleep better.

Blue light: Cognition boost

Morning sunlight contains blue light balanced with red and infrared. This signals your body to increase cortisol, helping you to wake up and feel alert.

Blue light from the sun also:

• Boosts Serotonin: Triggers your body’s happy hormone to elevate your mood.

• Sharpens Focus: Enhances brain power to keep you alert and dialed in all day.

• Sets Your Clock: Signals daytime to every cell to keep your daily rhythm on track.7

The problem is artificial blue light at night and isolated blue light without the other wavelengths that come from the sun.

If you don’t get morning sunlight, you’re doing health on hard mode. You rely on grinding and 100 pills like Bryan Johnson ;)

Without sunlight you miss out on energy production, deeper sleep, improved blood flow, higher cognition, cellular repair and so much more.

Be smarter. Do Health on Easy Mode.

Don’t be me 3 years ago. Don’t fall for Bryan Johnson’s sunlamp trap.

Go out and get the real deal: sunlight.

Environment over effort,

Aastha

Browse my Health on Easy Mode setup across 15+ categories (non-toxic kitchen, clean water, skincare, diagnostics, lighting).

Follow me on X @aasthajs & Instagram @aasthajs as I parse through the snake-oil in longevity.

Subscribe now

Share

A friend came over for dinner carrying this monitor with him:

“Oh boy, you need to open your windows right now.”

“Why, what happened?” I asked.

He pointed to the carbon dioxide monitor which read 1,032.

“The carbon dioxide buildup in your house is making us dumber.”

Clearly, he isn’t your typical dinner guest. But his advice helped. I bought the same Co2 monitor that night and started opening windows.

Co2 buildup kills work performance and impairs sleep:

• Decision making: Impaired by up to 50% in office workers with high Co2 levels.1

• Sleep quality: High Co2 ruins sleep2 and work performance the following day. Sleeping with no ventilation unwittingly destroys our rest.

• Headaches: High Co2 levels can cause headaches and raise blood pressure.3

• Children’s learning: High Co2 levels impairs their ability to learn4 and makes them sleepy. They are more vulnerable given their high metabolic rate.

What Co2 levels should you aim for?

I aim for Co2 levels below 600ppm5 in the house.

Protocols for managing high Co2 levels:

• Ventilate well: Open doors and windows.

• Monitor Co2 levels indoors: I frequently check my Co2 monitor and if the levels are higher than 600ppm, I open another window or my backyard door.

• Use exhaust fans: Turn on kitchen and bathroom exhausts to pull out indoor air.

• Air filters vs Ventilation: Air filters don’t reduce Co2. Only ventilation works. Worried about outdoor pollution? Use an air filter for that.

See my exact Clean Air setup for Health on Easy Mode. Inclusion is 100% merit-based. Brands do not pay to place.

99% of human life was spent breathing outside, not in locked boxes.

We evolved breathing fresh outdoor air in constant motion. Now we’re sealed in boxes re-breathing our own Co2. Open your windows and stop making yourself dumber.

This is Health on Easy Mode. No grinding. No pills. Fix your environment.

Environment over effort,

Aastha

Browse my Health on Easy Mode setup across 15+ categories (non-toxic kitchen, clean water, skincare, diagnostics, lighting).

Follow me on X @aasthajs & Instagram @aasthajs as I parse through the snake-oil in longevity.

Subscribe now

Share

Related Post:

This is what our house looks like after sunset.

And it’s how I increased my deep sleep by ~40% (~2 hrs) for under $20.

It looks ridiculous. But this one change has been the single biggest lever for my sleep.

I fall asleep faster, sleep deeper, and wake up earlier.

The change: after sunset, we only use red incandescent bulbs instead of normal LEDs.

It cost under $20 and has already given me hundreds of hours of better sleep.

You might think: “How can one change have such an impact? This sounds like a gimmick.”

The right change has trickle‑down effects. The red lights help me:

• Eat smaller dinners.

• Be in bed by 9:30pm.

• Fall asleep within ~10 minutes.

• No more 3am wake-ups to pee.

• Wake up at dawn or with sunrise.

Sleep advice typically focuses on routines, alcohol, meal timing, and exercise. Very few people talk about how indoor light quietly sabotages all of those.

For me, better sleep started with changing my night lights.

How Your Indoor Lights Quietly Wreck Your Sleep

Most homes are lit with bright, cool‑white LED bulbs. LED bulbs are:

• Blue‑heavy, red/infrared‑poor: Blue light signals daytime alertness to the brain and suppresses melatonin, the hormone that helps you wind down.1

• Linked to overeating at night: Evening blue‑rich light has been associated with later eating, higher calorie intake, and altered metabolism.23

• Mismatched to nature: As the sun sets, natural light shifts from blue to infrared. Our indoor LEDs at night do the opposite: bright and blue right when your brain expects the opposite.

• Flickery: Many LEDs have invisible flicker that can trigger headaches or strain for people.

Why I Use Red Incandescent Bulbs After Dark Instead of Normal LEDs

• No night alert signal: Red bulbs emit no blue light, so they don’t send the same “be alert” signal at night.

• No night-time cravings: Less blue light = less evening snacking and a stronger melatonin signal.4

• Better glucose regulation: Red/infrared light has beneficial effects on mitochondria and glucose regulation. LED bulbs lack near-infrared light compared to incandescent bulbs. (See my podcast with Glen Jeffery for using red lights to lower glucose).

• No eye strain: Incandescent bulbs emit a smooth, continuous glow similar to firelight. In contrast, LEDs produce a sharp “spike” of light that creates noise to the brain and eye strain.

Practically, this looks like: no LED lighting after sunset → a few red lamps on → phone in red light mode → bedroom as dark as possible.

Fixing night lights was just the start of cleaning up my environment.

My Journey to Health on Easy Mode: Parsing the snake-oil in longevity

My longevity protocol was a second job: supplements, calorie counting, gym grinding, willpower.

So I was shocked when a simple $20 change to my night lights achieved what years of traditional sleep advice couldn’t.

Once I fixed light, it was hard to ignore everything else in my environment: air, water, plastics, EMF.

Health on Easy Mode is a curated collection of the exact products I use to change my environment so health becomes “automatic.”

• 100+ exact products I use at home (and why).

• 15+ categories (light, water, air, emf, haircare, skincare, diagnostics).

• PFAS‑screened, plastic-free, non-toxic vetted picks.

Inclusion is 100% merit‑based. Brands don’t pay to place.

Health on Easy Mode thrived in my ultimate stress test: Life after my daughter was born.

My rigorous longevity protocol wasn’t an option, so I went all-in on “Easy Mode.” The result? Effortlessly lost the baby weight, better sleep, higher energy than before, and elevated mood.

This journey led me to two big realizations:

1. Controlling your environment makes health the default. No willpower required.

2. You can’t out-supplement a bad environment. Environment over effort.

The goal is simple: Less hype. Less junk. More health.

Copy My Sleep Setup (what I actually use at home)

• My Sleep Setup: The red bulbs, blue-light blockers, mattress, and blackout curtains I use.

• Browse all categories: Explore the full Health on Easy Mode collection.

If you start anywhere, start with light. Swap a few bulbs and see what happens to your sleep. Drop a comment if you try it!

I’m Aastha, and thanks for reading Live Longer World. I write about my Health on Easy Mode protocols and interview scientists at the frontiers of longevity. The goal is to parse through the snake-oil in longevity.

With the holiday season upon us, most of us will be indulging in some sweets with our families. Eating desserts as part of the holiday celebration is very different from eating treats mindlessly.

I have a hypothesis that If you generally eat clean, occasional desserts enjoyed with family won't hurt your health - the joy helps blunt the negative effects!

There is no better time than the holiday season to enjoy desserts in merriment. However, I do believe that many desserts can be made significantly healthier (to the point where they could be called “healthy1 snacks”) while still being delicious. I’ve long believed that healthy food should be yum. It’s the best way for people to avoid eating processed food.

I find store-bought desserts too sweet, so I make my own using almond flour and natural sweetness from berries or a tinge of honey. No added raw sugar.

Below are 4 of my favorite recipes. The best part is that they take under 15 minutes of cooking time.

Given how much I love these healthy home-made desserts, I thought I’ll share mine in case others enjoy them too. Feel free to tweak them or use AI to find healthier versions of your own favorite desserts. Hope these serve as some inspiration!

Almond flour Blueberry Muffins

My mother-in-law makes these delicious blueberry muffins with no sugar. I devour many at a time!

Ingredients

• 2 cups almond flour

• 3 eggs

• 3 tablespoons maple syrup (optional if you want more sweetness, we don’t add it)

• 1/2 teaspoon baking soda

• pinch of sea salt

• 1 teaspoon vanilla extract

• 5 tablespoon melted ghee (can use coconut oil instead)

• 1 cup fresh or frozen blueberries

Instructions

1. Preheat oven to 350 degrees F.

2. In a bowl, combine almond flour, baking soda and sea salt.

3. In a separate bowl, combine eggs, vanilla and coconut oil.

4. Combine both mixtures together. Once well incorporated, add blueberries and mix.

5. Fill a muffin pan with liners. Fill each liner with batter.

6. Bake in oven for 15–20 minutes.

Almond flour 5 ingredient cookies

These cookies take 5 minutes to make and it’s hard to believe how they taste so indulgent!

Ingredients and Instructions:

• 2 cups Almond flour

• Little bit of honey

• Dark chocolate chips

• 1 tsp Baking powder

• 1/2 tsp Vanilla essence

• Add some cream / butter if too dry

• Mix well, make them into cookie shapes with your hands

• Bake for 11 minutes at 350 degrees F

Olive Oil Nutty Berry Chocolate Cake

Nuts, berries, olive oil and cocoa..hard to go wrong with this one!

Dry Ingredients:

• 1 cup almond flour

• 1/4 cup ground flaxseed

• 1/4 cup ground hemp seeds

• 1/4 cup ground chia seeds

• 1/2 cup chopped nuts (such as walnuts or almonds)

• 1 teaspoon baking powder

• 1/2 teaspoon baking soda

• 1/4 teaspoon salt

• 1/4 cocoa powder (I forgot to add it in the cake in the picture!)

Wet Ingredients:

• 5 large eggs

• 1/2 cup olive oil

• 1/4 cup unsweetened almond milk or coconut milk

• 1 teaspoon vanilla extract

Berries:

• 1 cup or more mixed berries (such as blueberries, raspberries, or strawberries), fresh or frozen

Instructions:

1. Preheat the Oven: Preheat your oven to 350°F (175°C).

2. Mix Dry Ingredients in a bowl.

3. Prepare Wet Ingredients: In another bowl, whisk together eggs, olive oil, almond milk and vanilla extract.

4. Combine Wet and Dry Ingredients: Gradually add the wet ingredients to the dry ingredients, mixing until well combined.

5. Fold in Berries: Gently fold in the mixed berries into the batter.

6. Bake: Pour the batter into the prepared cake pan and spread it evenly. Bake for 25-30 minutes or until done.

Notes:

• To give you an idea of proportions, for the big glass tray displayed in the picture above, I made was 4x the proportions in this recipe.

• You can also drizzle some melted dark chocolate on top when eating!

Protein berry ice-cream

Homemade ice-cream sorbet with berries, vanilla protein powder, almond milk, macadamia nuts, and a touch of pomegranate juice! Topped with pecans.

I’m a sucker for ice-cream but the ones in stores are too sweet. So I bought a Ninja Creami ice-cream maker and decided to make my own yum healthy rendition of it.

It’s surprisingly delicious and now I get to relive my childhood days of eating tubs of ice-cream everyday.

Wishing everyone happy holidays! See you in the new year for some more health and happiness.

Aastha

Share

“About two-thirds of the human body is water.”

This is a statement we’ve grown up hearing. When you picture this, I imagine you view liquid water inside our bodies being mixed with cells, proteins and all the other fun stuff. But what if I told you that this water is not the liquid water you and I are most familiar with? And no, it’s not ice or vapor form either.

Water in our cells behaves in its own way. And this behavior of water dictates many important functions of cells, including our health and the manifestation of disease. So what I’m saying is:

1. Water in our cells is not just free-flowing liquid water - it behaves in special ways.

2. This special behavior of water dictates critical functions in our cells that determines our health, including potentially, cancer.

In today’s essay, I will introduce you to one forgotten theory in biology that explains how water in our cells plays a large role in bioelectricity. And if you’ve read my previous essay on bioelectricity or listened to any of my podcasts with Mike Levin, you will be familiar with how bioelectricity1 is critical in cancer, regeneration, and longevity.

Here is what I will discuss:

1. A theory on how the structure of water in cells effects bioelectricity (Association-Induction hypothesis or AIH)

2. Longevity Implications of taking AIH seriously

3. My water-bioelectric theory of cancer (hypothesis, but not crazy)

Association-Induction Hypothesis

Don’t be afraid of the textbook-like name of this hypothesis. The basics laid out simply, which I’ll do, will widen your perspective on understanding not just cells, but also disease and health.

In my bioelectricity essay, I wrote about the role of ion channels and ion pumps in enabling the flow of selective ions in and out of the cell, which thereby creates a charge difference inside and outside the cell. This results in bioelectricity when these charges flow.

Pertaining to ion pumps, I made a small footnote saying that the ion pump theory had come into question, critiqued by what is called the Association-Induction hypothesis proposed by Gilbert Ling. Over the past couple of weeks, I’ve taken some time to zoom in on this small footnote, and realized that this theory ought to be explained through more than a footnote.

Ion pumps don’t work - Membrane pump theory rejected

Ling rejected the membrane pump theory which was key in explaining how ions distribute inside and outside the cell. Briefly, the membrane pump theory states that ion pumps (proteins on the cell membrane) are responsible for pumping in and out certain ions - mostly pumping in potassium ions and keeping out sodium ions. This difference in ion concentration in and out of the cells creates a charge difference.

In addition to other critiques of the membrane pump theory2, Ling said that in order for the pump to work, it would require amounts of ATP that are larger than what is feasible for us to generate. So, there must be a different way in which cells create their ion distribution, and this different way was laid out through his AIH theory.

AIH states that there is a tight coupling between the proteins, ions, and water inside our cells, and it’s the nature and structure of this connection that gives rise to ion flow dynamics, and ultimately bioelectricity. Let me explain.

Water and AIH

As mentioned above, typically, it’s assumed that water in our cells behaves like the liquid water that is familiar to us. Ling said that water in our cells is in fact not in a free-flowing state - if you punctured a cell, you wouldn’t have water gushing out. Instead, water is bound in multiple layers to the proteins inside the cell in a structured way. The core concepts of AIH are as follows:

1. Proteins are central to cell structure and function. They have binding sites where other molecules, like ATP, can attach.

2. ATP (the energy currency of the cell) binds to proteins and polarizes them. What this means is that ATP shifts the protein’s electron distribution, thereby creating charge.

3. Polarized proteins generate tiny electric fields.

4. These electric fields of the protein in turn influence nearby water molecules, which get attracted to the protein and just like magnets, form ordered layers.

5. Each water layer in turn attracts other water layers. Thus, these water layers reinforce one another, creating what Ling called a “stacked dipole” structure.

6. The result is structured (or ordered) water bound to the protein surface.

   1. As mentioned, this water behaves very differently from normal liquid water — it’s more organized, stable, and selective.

7. Structured water and polarized proteins create an environment that attracts some ions and excludes others. Specifically, it favors potassium (K⁺) and excludes sodium (Na⁺). For why, see footnote3.

8. This natural preference for potassium helps maintain the electrical difference between the inside and outside of the cell, which is vital for processes like nerve impulses and muscle contractions.

If you glossed over the above points, here is the TLDR version of AIH that explains it.

TLDR:

ATP binds to protein and polarizes protein. Polarized protein attracts the nearby water molecules which get ordered in layers by the protein. This ordered water selectively adsorbs potassium ions, not sodium ions. Thus, the inside of the cell has higher potassium ions compared to sodium, which creates a charge difference. This charge difference leads to bioelectricity.

In the membrane pump theory version, the ATP pumps do work to push the sodium ions out of the cell, whereas in Ling’s version, the tight connection between ATP-protein-water creates an environment whereby potassium ions are naturally attracted to the inside of the cell, and sodium ions are not.

What this means is that in the AIH model, proteins, water, and ions work together as a coherent, self-organizing system.

1. The system remains stable without constant energy input, unlike traditional models that rely on membrane pumps and active transport.

2. This makes the living cell an electrically ordered environment, not just a bag of chemicals.

Before I can state my cancer theory, I have to explain how researchers have taken Gilbert Ling’s AIH ideas forward. Again, these are relevant to understanding how we age.

AIH extended: Coherence, Microtubules, and Mitochondria

As explained, AIH implies a tight connection between proteins-water-ions. This connection creates a stable configuration in the cell, providing organization to other molecules and structures in the cell and allowing them to work smoothly. At the same time as these structures benefit from the protein-water-ion stability, they also contribute to adding stability to the cell.

Microtubules are one such structure, I want to highlight. They are long, cylindrical protein filaments that form part of the cytoskeleton, the cell’s internal framework. Microtubules are traditionally known for roles in cell division, transport, and structural support, but emerging theories suggest they might even play a key role in consciousness. Because of their highly ordered and polar structure, microtubules may help maintain and transmit coherence across the cell by acting like biological cables — organizing electric fields, guiding molecular traffic, and possibly coordinating long-range order among proteins and water. They may even support subtle vibrational or electromagnetic signaling that helps preserve the polarized state described in AIH.

The below is how the connection between AIH, mitochondria, ATP, and microtubules likely plays out:

1. AIH maintains order in cells by organizing proteins, water, and ions into a stable, polarized matrix that functions without constant energy input.

2. This ordered matrix helps stabilize the surrounding intracellular environment, influencing the behavior of organelles, cytoskeletal elements, and signaling molecules.

3. Other structures contribute to maintaining cellular stability as well — most notably, the microtubules.

4. Microtubules are known to generate coherence / stability in cells by providing cell’s internal timing, communication, and spatial organization. They are like the conductors of a biochemical orchestra. For example, microtubule oscillations can help synchronize timing for ion channel openings, vesicle transport, gene expression timing, cell cycle transitions etc.

   1. The oscillations also generate EM fields which might be how microtubules coordinate these activities mentioned above

   2. So any dysfunction in these oscillations could result in internal EM field collapse, coordination across cells breaks down, and might lead to cellular incoherence (which could be a marker for disease and death)

5. There is a 2-way feedback loop between AIH and microtubules. Any disturbance in stability created by AIH may affect microtubule oscillations. And any disturbance in microtubule oscillations may affect AIH or in general the cell’s stability

6. There is also a 2-way feedback loop between microtubules and mitochondria.

   1. Microtubules guide mitochondria to areas where ATP is needed. Mitochondria frequently travel along or anchor to microtubules. Given AIH needs ATP, microtubules play a role in guiding ATP to AIH.

   2. Microtubules depend on mitochondrial ATP to maintain their own polarized state and structural integrity.

7. So any disruption in microtubules might cause mitochondria guidance to collapse. And any disruption in ATP might cause microtubules to not perform leading to incoherence.

Implications of AIH

If the Association-Induction Hypothesis (AIH) is correct, it challenges many foundational assumptions in modern biology and medicine. It suggests that the cell is not primarily driven by random molecular collisions or by membrane pumps using constant energy, but rather by a stable, structured network of polarized proteins, ordered water, and selectively adsorbed ions. This perspective radically elevates the role of water from passive solvent to active organizer of life. In terms of aging, it implies that cellular decline may not be caused solely by damage or mutation, but by the gradual loss of this internal coherence — the ability of proteins to maintain polarization and structure surrounding water. If that’s true, interventions aimed at preserving protein structure, ATP availability, and water ordering could become central strategies for extending healthspan. In medicine, this framework could lead to new diagnostic tools that detect early shifts in cellular order, and new treatments that restore the cell’s natural electrical balance. Overall, AIH reframes the cell as an organized, self-regulating system — and opens the door to rethinking aging, disease, and healing from the ground up.

My cancer theory based on AIH:

The ideas / inspiration are largely borrowed from a chapter titled A New Paradigm of Cancer: Loss of Coherence Precedes Mutation from Laurent Jaeken’s book The Coacervate-Coherence Nature of Life.

The common paradigm in the field is to think of cancer as being caused by genetic mutations. Due to damage, our DNA acquires mutations which turn cancerous - this is known as the somatic mutation theory of cancer. People like Dr. Seyfried have challenged this theory saying that it’s not genetic mutations that cause cancer, but in fact it’s damage to the mitochondria. In some cases, the mutation might be downstream of the mitochondrial damage, but it’s not the primary cause. Charley Lineweaver with his Atavistic theory of cancer says that the genetic mutations that cause cancer are not random as stated by the somatic mutation theory, but can be predicted using an evolutionary lens.

Based on AIH, another theory on cancer is that it’s caused by loss of coherence in the cell. According to AIH and AIH extended that I explained above, normal healthy cells are in a stable coherent state created by the coupling of proteins-water-ions, and the mitochondria-microtubule connection. A breakdown in any of these stages might lead to loss or order in the cell. What if cancer is this loss of order beyond repair? The theory of cancer I’m proposing is that cancer is a loss of order as maintained by AIH. So the question is what stage does this loss of order occur? There could be different levels of causation that creates loss of order in AIH. Similarly, there could be different levels at which to target cancer. Let’s start with looking at the different levels of causation in AIH that could cause disruption to the cell, and ultimately cancer.

1. ATP Deficiency -> Protein not polarized

   1. In AIH, ATP plays a critical role in polarizing the protein which leads to the protein-water-ion connection

   2. Any deficiency in ATP, might disrupt this coupling and hence the coherence in the cell

2. Protein dysfunction -> ATP can’t bind correctly

3. Water doesn’t polarize despite ATP + Protein being fine

   1. This could be due to the water structure itself breaking down

4. Water fails to adsorb the right ions, thereby disrupting the normal charge of the cell

5. Protein-Ion-Water connection is fine, but EMF field is still disrupted

6. Microtubule dysfunction -> Collapse of intracellular coherence

   1. Dysfunction in microtubules might mean that ATP is not guided to the right place or it might mean a general loss in coherence and EM fields given microtubules play a large role in being the cell’s conductor

7. Mitochondria dysfunction which not only disrupts ATP, but is also unable to guide microtubules to the right place

Based on AIH and AIH extended, these are the different levels which could get disrupted, potentially leading to cancer. I recognize that is a bit of a reductionist view, but it’s helpful in parsing out the details and figuring out what to investigate. Of course, given the feedback loop between these different levels, it could be the case that several of these levels fail and a failure in one level causes the other levels to fail. It’s not necessarily the case that in order to fix the problem, we have to fix the level that failed first. In other words, we may not have to address the root cause. We could make a fix at a different level which could restore order back to the cell (again due to the feedback loop and back-up mechanisms that our cells use). For example, if the cell’s coherent structure fails because of ATP deficiency, which in turn causes microtubules to fail as well, we don’t necessarily have to fix the ATP deficiency. We can perhaps fix the microtubule dysfunction without fixing the ATP deficiency which could be enough to restore the cell back to order.

Understanding AIH and its different levels gives us a starting point to investigate cancer from an AIH (loss of order) perspective.

Implications of Cancer theory

If cancer is due to a loss of order and coherence in the cell, and because of a breakdown in one or more of the factors I mentioned above, it implies that we should be looking at some of these levels to diagnose and solve cancer.

We could diagnose cancer by measuring a change in the water structure for example4. Some of these diagnostic methods have been tried, I haven’t gone deeper into them to know enough. Or we could solve cancer by restoring the normal EM field of the cell. Perhaps next time I’ll cover some of the different avenues we should explore to diagnose and solve cancer.

Deaths from cancer only keep rising. Clearly whatever we’re doing right now is not working. Maybe our current theory of cancer being a genetic disease is wrong. We need to test new cancer theories. And this cancer-AIH theory seems promising, yet very underexplored.

Follow me on X @aasthajs and Insta @aasthajs for more on longevity.

Share

Thanks to Benjamin, Cameron, and Glix for feedback on this essay.

The standard “wear and tear” story of aging may be incomplete. Dr. Peter Lidsky—a virologist and evolutionary biologist argues that aging is programmed. He says aging can be an adaptive strategy for controlling pathogens, a concept he calls the “pathogen control hypothesis.”

In this episode, we dig into the evidence behind this idea, the immune system in aging, and what his theory means for longevity interventions.

Timestamps below cover the topics discussed well.

Watch on YouTube. Listen on Spotify, or any other podcast platform.

Follow me on X @aasthajs for more on longevity. Hope you enjoy the conversation!

All other platforms: here

Timestamps:

0:00 — Aging ≠ Wear-and-Tear

3:44 — The Case for Programmed Aging

8:48 — Why Program Aging at All?

11:09 — The Pathogen-Control Hypothesis

14:26 — Why We Get “Sick Time”

24:37 — Rising Lifespans, Explained

27:36 — Bowhead Whales’ Longevity Edge

31:15 — Why Lone Animals Don’t Live Forever

34:00 — Planaria: The “Immortal” Worm

35:00 — Do Infections Speed Up Aging?

36:46 — When Immunity Starts to Slide

38:17 — Why Fertility Has a Deadline

42:49 — Extending Life via the Immune System

1:00:35 — How Honey Bees Rejuvenate

1:10:50 — Can We Tackle Aging? Healthspan to 90s+

Related:

If you’re enjoying the podcast, support my work, leave a rating on Apple podcasts, Spotify or elsewhere, subscribe on your platform of choice, and share with family and friends!

P.S. Check out the longevity products I use.

Share

“We can use the rule of evolution to optimize cancer therapy. The standard practice is that any therapy is given at maximum tolerated dose continuously until progression. It's almost a mantra that they have. Evolutionarily, you could hardly do it worse.” 

The current treatments on cancer do not account for how evolution works. Dr. Robert Gatenby has been studying evolutionary and game theory dynamics in the progression of cancer. He established the first cancer biology and evolutionary program in the U.S.

We can leverage this evolutionary information to provide more effective cancer treatment, which he discusses in this episode. Dr. Michael Levin is my co-host.

Timestamps below cover the topics discussed well.

Watch on YouTube. Listen on Spotify, or any other podcast platform.

Follow me on X @aasthajs for more on longevity. Hope you enjoy the conversation!

All other platforms: here

Timestamps:

0:00 – Cancer as Tissue Damage, Not Just Mutations

8:48 – How Evolution Supercharges Cancer Cell Fitness

11:04 – Debunking the “Primitive Cell” Myth

12:06 – The Herd Mentality of Cancer Cells

14:57 – Why Cancer Dynamics Go Beyond the Genome

22:27 – Networks and Information Flow Inside Cells

26:56 – Shared Goals: The Secret to Cellular Cooperation

29:55 – Genome = Hardware, Information = Software

36:26 – Healthy vs. Cancer Cells: Competing Information Systems

39:05 – Evolution Turns Harsh After Reproduction

41:03 – How Cancer Rewrites Its Own Information Playbook

43:07 – Adaptive Therapy: A Patient’s Guide

50:45 – The Limits of Adaptive Therapy

53:12 – Hunting for Better Cancer Biomarkers

55:11 – The Tumor Microenvironment’s Hidden Role

59:42 – Why We Must Look Beyond Genetic Data

Related:

If you’re enjoying the podcast, support my work, leave a rating on Apple podcasts, Spotify or elsewhere, subscribe on your platform of choice, and share with family and friends!

P.S. Check out the longevity products I use.

Mitochondria might be one of the most important organelles inside our cells. Best known as the cell’s powerhouse, they don’t just make energy; they regulate metabolism, control cell death, drive immune function, and may even be the reason multicellular life exists at all!

It’s no surprise they’re implicated in nearly every major disease, from heart disease and cancer to neurodegeneration, especially as they decline with age. What if we could slow or even reverse that decline by giving cells fresh, healthy mitochondria? That’s the promise of mitochondrial transplantation—a groundbreaking approach Mitrix Bio is pioneering.

In this episode, I talk with Mitrix Bio CEO Tom Benson about the science, the potential, and the early results from people already lining up for their trial.

Timestamps below cover the topics discussed well.

Watch on YouTube. Listen on Spotify, or any other podcast platform.

Follow me on X @aasthajs for more on longevity. Hope you enjoy the conversation!

All other platforms: here

Timestamps:

00:00 – Injecting new mitochondria into the body

01:39 – The evolutionary link between mitochondria & aging

04:35 – What happens when mitochondria grow old?

06:18 – Why do humans outlive most animals?

11:30 – The hidden role of mitochondria in heart disease

12:30 – Why the brain stays sharp even as we age

15:30 – The energy crash after 30 — mitochondria’s role

19:04 – Why doesn’t the body fix broken mitochondria?

22:42 – Mitochondrial defects in children explained

24:14 – How to test mitochondrial health

27:36 – Mitochondrial DNA: eternal or fragile?

33:18 – Where transplanted mitochondria actually come from

34:59 – Growing mitochondria in a bioreactor (sci-fi or real?)

39:07 – How neurons build their own mitochondria

40:52 – Mitochondria and the cancer puzzle

44:23 – The mind-body connection runs on mitochondria

48:32 – How chemo & radiation wreck mitochondria

50:38 – Proof mitochondrial transplantation works

56:06 – Sauna, fasting, sunlight — mitochondria hacks

1:00:01 – Do different races have different mitochondria?

1:02:57 – Why stop at 130 years?

1:04:48 – What could make this fail?

1:10:03 – How to volunteer for the Mitrix trial

Related:

If you’re enjoying the podcast, support my work, leave a rating on Apple podcasts, Spotify or elsewhere, subscribe on your platform of choice, and share with family and friends!

P.S. Check out the longevity products I use.

Many of the ideas presented in this essay are from Dr. Nick Lane’s (scientist and author of many popular prize-winning science books) book Vital Question: Energy, Evolution, and the Origins of Complex Life.

Alas, antioxidants don’t work

For years, popular media has told you that eating plenty of antioxidants is the secret to longevity. Stock up on those blueberries and Vitamin C. Yet, we haven’t cracked Methuselah’s code with this apparently neat hack. Antioxidants, so it was believed, can counter the accumulation of free radicals in our body, which over time cause damage and aging. The problem is that the science on this has been debunked, however, popular media has not reversed its stance. Luckily, it’s not a hefty crime as blueberries and Vitamin C in the right doses are healthy for you. However, the idea that large or even small doses will make you live longer by combating free radicals is dubious at best.

Free radical theory of aging

The myth of blueberries extending lifespan comes from the free radical theory of aging. Free radicals and reactive oxygen species are unstable molecules with unpaired electrons that are primarily produced in the mitochondria as a byproduct of cellular respiration. During cellular respiration, mitochondria produce energy (ATP) by transferring electrons through the electron transport chain. Some electrons "leak" and react with oxygen, forming free radicals. They are highly reactive and readily interact with nearby molecules like DNA, proteins, and lipids, causing “oxidative damage.”

It was believed that over time the damage from these free radicals surpasses the body’s ability to repair itself. This results in damage to DNA, proteins, tissue and organ functioning, all of which result in aging.

Debunk the free radical theory of aging or a new twist?

The free radical theory of aging has not withstood testing. While free radicals often rise with aging, the case for free radicals causing aging has not been established. Even better, there is no clear evidence to show that antioxidants increase lifespan. In fact, high doses of antioxidants might come with a level of risk for reasons we’ll discuss below. Dr. Nick Lane says in the book Vital Question “Many long-lived animals have low levels of antioxidant enzymes in their tissues, while short-lived animals have much higher levels.”

If all this is true, should the free radical theory of aging see the grave? Many gerontologists do consider it to have found its grave. However, Nick Lane has a more subtle version of the free radical theory of aging which is worth taking seriously. Instead of the graveyard, perhaps a different explanation is warranted.

A new spin to the free radical theory of aging

(If easier, I have a diagram flow chart below which easily summarizes and explains this theory)

The old theory said that free radicals are bad for us, and if we can reduce the number of free radicals using antioxidants, then we can slow aging. But biology is not as black and white as this theory makes it sound. Many biological reactions and molecules have a dual effect – they can be beneficial and harmful at the same time. For example, we know how Vitamin D is useful for us, but in large quantities it can be harmful.

It’s important to recognize that free radicals are not all bad. They serve 2 very important functions in the body:

1. Signaling to cells to optimize respiration (Free radicals are released when respiration is not optimal. Free radicals tell the mitochondria to make more copies of itself to increase mitochondrial capacity and allow for optimal respiration).

2. Apoptosis (cell death) of deficient cells.

What causes respiration to not be optimal?

Free radicals are released when respiration is not optimal. But what causes sub-optimal respiration?

1. When there is a respiratory deficit - demand for respirations exceeds supply.

2. Mitochondrial DNA is incompatible with the nuclear DNA - Mitochondria are the only organelles in human cells that have their own DNA outside the nucleus. As a result, there are sometimes compatibility issues between the nuclear DNA and mitochondrial DNA, both of which have to cooperate to carry out bodily functions.

When there is a respiratory deficit, free radicals signal to the cell to correct this deficit by increasing mitochondrial capacity. As a result, the mitochondria that release the most free radicals will make the most copies of themselves. Note how free radicals are not “bad” in this case - they are a signal to the body to make more mitochondria, which is great if the mitochondria are healthy.

Let’s look at the 2nd reason for sub-optimal respiration in more detail.

Mitochondria DNA incompatible with nuclear DNA

The reason for sub-optimal respiration could be the mitochondria’s incompatibility with the nucleus. In this case, the most incompatible mitochondria produce the most free radicals, and hence make more copies of themselves. (Remember: free radicals are a signal to fix sub-optimal respiration by making more copies of the mitochondria). This would result in an increase in incompatible mitochondria or mitochondria with a lot of mutations. An increase in mitochondrial mutations, could result in the cell dying by apoptosis (cell death). However, in some cases the cell might not die.

When a cell with mitochondrial mutations dies by apoptosis

If the cell dies by apoptosis, it may or may not be replaced. If the cell is replaced by a healthy cell, life is good. If the cell is not replaced, fewer cells remain to do the same job, and they have to bear more of the burden. This might result in them becoming physiologically stressed resulting in changes to gene regulation or loss of tissue, and hence aging.

When a cell with mitochondrial mutations does not die by apoptosis

In this case, even though the cell has a large presence of incompatible (damaged) mitochondria (each cell has hundreds of mitochondria), the cell does not die by apoptosis. If the energy needs of the cell are less, it can be met by deficient mitochondria. However, a large presence of deficient mitochondria might cause the cell to become senescent, leading to inflammation, and in extreme cases, cancer.

Summary: Aging when Mitochondrial DNA is incompatible with Nuclear DNA

To summarize, sub-optimal respiration might be due to the mitochondria being incompatible with the nucleus. Free radicals are released as a signal to the mitochondria to make respiration optimal by making copies of itself. However, more copies of incompatible mitochondria are not good. It means more copies of mitochondria with mutations.

A large presence of incompatible mitochondria might result in cell death. If cell death is replaced by new healthy cells, then it’s fine. But, for whatever reason, if new cells are not formed, then fewer cells remain in the body resulting in loss of tissue and aging.

According to this new spin, aging is because:

1. Damaged cells die and are not replaced by new healthy cells. It results in fewer cells, loss of tissue and more stress to the remaining cells.

2. Damaged cells don’t die. They cause inflammation and potentially cancer.

Free radicals are not the cause of aging. They merely signal damaged cells in some cases.

Conclusion

Note how this spin to the free radical theory of aging contrasts with what was previously thought. The conventional view is that free radicals cause oxidative damage leading to aging. However, this version of the free radical theory of aging does not invoke free radicals to be the causal factor in aging. It says that free radicals are a signal when there is an energy deficiency and that something could be wrong in the body. And this energy deficiency could be due to imbalance in supply and demand or due to existing damage to mitochondria. Free radicals play a role in apoptosis to kill the damaged cell, but this results in tissue loss which builds up over time and causes aging.

We conflated free radicals being a signal for poor health with free radicals being the culprit of poor health. In fact, as noted above, free radicals are helpful in signaling to the body to make respiration more optimal and to kill cells when they are unhealthy.

This is why targeting free radicals with antioxidants does not work. Free radicals are not the cause of the problem, they are signals that there could be a problem.

If you have any thoughts on this post, I’m curious to know - please write to me or comment!

To living longer,

Aastha

Related: This post ties in to the metabolic theory of cancer which states that cancer is caused damage to the mitochondria. See my interview with Dr. Thomas Seyfried to learn more.

The most prevalent cancer theory is known as the somatic mutation theory (SMT). The theory states that cancer arises due to random genetic mutations which lead to uncontrolled cell growth.

SMT was first proposed in the early 1900s and it gained traction with the discovery of oncogenes and the genetic revolution in the 1970s. Since then, it has been the dominant paradigm for cancer. However, it doesn't lack criticism. Critics have pointed out that many cancers lack driver mutations, some cancer mutations occur in non-cancerous cells as well, and tumors with similar mutations behave differently depending on context pointing to the role of the tissue environment in cancer as opposed to just mutation.

In 1971, Richard Nixon declared war on cancer. Since then, we’ve unfortunately made little progress in solving deaths from cancer. 1,700 people a day continue to die from cancer in the U.S. And if someone were to have a stage 4 glioblastoma today, the outcome is no different than what it was 100 years ago.

It’s possible that these outcomes look so poor because the underlying theory of cancer is incorrect. We can’t solve cancer on the basis of an incorrect or incomplete theory. This also implies that we should be open to new alternative theories that might have better explanatory reach.

Over the past year, I’ve interviewed researchers who’ve offered new theories to explain cancer. Many of them are promising and worth exploring. This post summarizes some of the alternative cancer theories. I discuss:

1. The Bioelectric theory of cancer

2. The Atavistic (evolutionary) theory of cancer

3. The Metabolic theory of cancer

4. The Germ theory of cancer

5. Upcoming: The Water-bioelectric theory of cancer

The Bioelectric Theory of Cancer

The bioelectric theory of cancer says that cancer is a disruption in the bioelectric signals of cells and tissues. Every cell has its own resting membrane potential. In cancer, this resting membrane potential is disrupted when compared to a healthy cell. Researchers also speculate that these bioelectric signals act as a glue to coordinate cell behavior. Imagine a single cell has its own goals and motivations, just like how you as an individual have goals. But say you’re part of a sports team, as a team you have your own team goals, and the coach is the glue that coordinates behavior. Similarly, bioelectricity is the glue that coordinates cells to work in tandem. A disruption in this bioelectric signal can cause some of the cells to go rogue and not coordinate with the rest of the cellular group. This is what leads to cancer. In other words, bioelectricity is the language cells use to communicate with each other, and a breakdown in this communication results in some cells going astray from the group, resulting in cancer.

For more on the bioelectric theory of cancer, see:

X posts here and here

The Atavistic Theory of Cancer

Paul Davies and Charley Lineweaver popularized the Atavistic theory of cancer as they began to study it from an evolutionary lens.

The atavistic theory of cancer states that cancer cells revert to an old memory they have from billions of years, but forget the new memory. The old memory pertains to constant cell proliferation, which happened as single-celled creatures, and in fact in embryogenesis as well. The new memory pertains to regulating cell proliferation and cells knowing when to stop cellular division. In cancer, it seems like cells forget this new memory and revert to the old memory.

The atavistic theory also states that cancer mutations are not random, they can be predicted from an evolutionary lens. According to the theory, cancer is reversion to primitive cellular forms and by mapping the evolutionary genetic tree, we can predict the ‘newer’ genes from the ‘older’ ones, and determine which older primitive genes will be turned on in cancer. This prediction has important implications since by knowing cancer’s pattern of reversion, we can begin to target some of it’s weaknesses.

Find out more:

X posts here and here

The Metabolic Theory of Cancer

The Metabolic Theory of Cancer proposes that cancer is caused by damage to the mitochondria. It is primarily a disease of defective cellular energy metabolism, particularly due to mitochondrial dysfunction, not a disease of genetic mutations.

This theory contrasts sharply with the Somatic Mutation Theory (SMT) by claiming that genetic mutations are secondary — a downstream consequence of metabolic breakdown, not the root cause.

Cancer starts when cells lose the ability to efficiently generate energy via oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS) in the mitochondria. To survive, cells shift to primitive fermentation pathways — especially aerobic glycolysis (i.e., the Warburg effect).

Thomas Seyfried, researcher who has driven forward this theory states that you can see mitochondrial dysfunction in every cancer cell. Find out more:

X posts here and here

The Germ Theory of Cancer

This is probably one of the least well-known theories, but very promising. The proposition is that cancer and other chronic diseases might be caused by latent viruses and infections. We already know that Human Papillomavirus (HPV) causes cervical cancer. And research indicates how the EBV virus shows up in Multiple sclerosis, and chlamydia pneumonia shows in Alzheimer’s. Similarly, HBV and HCV viruses are strongly associated with lung cancer and Helicobacter pylori is associated with stomach cancer.

Paul Ewald, popularizer of this theory, states how genes cannot explain the full reason for chronic diseases, and even if some viruses don’t cause cancer, they certainly seem to be a role. We see that treating glioblastoma patients with antiviral treatment is a promising therapy. Even breast cancer is associated with viruses.

X posts here and here

Note that none of these cancer theories proclaim to the be the only way that cancer arises. The theories are open to the idea that there could be multiple different reasons and hallmarks of cancer, including the ones mentioned above. We should be more open to the idea of incorporating some of these theories when studying cancer, and not solely be fixate on the somatic mutation theory of cancer.

In an upcoming post, I’ll be writing my conjectures on what I call the Water-bioelectric theory of cancer. If you want to nerd out on it, stay tuned! And let me know of other cancer theories on your radar.

To beating cancer,

Aastha

Share

"The fundamental unit of life is not the cell, nor the individual, but the lineage of information propagating across space and time." "We need to focus not on what life is made of, but on how the universe acquires the information to make it." - Sara Imari Walker

The origin of life is one of the most exciting and perplexing questions to ponder. Darwin gave us answers to the evolution of life. But how did life begin in the first place?

Sara Imari Walker attempts to answer this question by looking at the physics behind life’s emergence. She says that in order to understand life we need a new physics. This is a bold hypothesis which involves the creation of a new branch of physics, and theories at the intersection of biology, physics, and astrobiology.

This has lent her to collaborate across disciplines with top minds like David Deutsch, Michael Levin, Lee Cronin, Paul Davies, and Chiara Marletto.

Understanding the origin of life is not merely a theoretical problem - it can have vast implications involving the creation of new life, and our regeneration capabilities for longevity.

Below are some notes from her book, Life As No One Knows It - The Physics of Life’s Emergence. You can also watch her interview with Joe Rogan should these notes pique your interest.

For the practical longevity folks out there, heads up that this post is more on the side of the frontiers of biology.

These notes were first posted on X as a thread. I’ve kept the thread format below given it makes for an easier read.

1. What is life? Philosophers and scientists have been asking this question for aeons. Schrodinger’s famous book What is life has inspired many others to explore this question. Yet we have no answer.

2. “We cannot derive life from the known laws of physics, even if we are pretty sure it must be consistent with them.” Perhaps we need to reframe the question from What is life to Life is what??

3. Three hard problems: Origin of life is not the only hard problem. There are 2 more that plague both scientists and philosophers. The three are origins of mind, origins of matter, origins of life.

4. “The hard problem of consciousness: that existing feels like something (at least for us). The hard problem of matter: that nothing can be observed to exist outside of interactions. The hard problem of life: that abstractions (information) matter in determining what can exist.”

5. All 3 hard problems are linked to one fundamental question: “Why do some things exist (or experience existence) and not others?"

6. We need a new physics to understand life. To do so, Sara Imari had to narrow in on the key problem of life. “Which aspects of life will prove too stubborn in our attempts for reduction to known physics and chemistry. That is, we wanted to identify the property that constitutes a candidate for the hard problem of life.” And that question is: “How is it that information can cause things?”

7. “The challenge is how to make the concept of information physical, such that we can recognize how it matters to matter.” “This is a key feature of information – it can be copied between very different things. This is why we call information “abstract”: it seems not to depend on the physics of the substrates you store it in or access it from.” Genes are the prototypical example of this in biology. This concept of information is inspired by David Deutsch and Chiara Marletto's constructor theory.

8. "Focusing on the problem of what can exist and when resolves much of the ambiguity about the causal power of information – that information can cause things to happen. Saying information is causal merely points to the fact that some things that come to exist require something that already exists to assemble them. Some require longer chains of causation and thus are more “informational”.

9. Assembly theory: “With our work on assembly theory, we are not attempting to define life. Instead our aim is to provide a formalism for unifying life and the inanimate. How can we uncover the physics that gives rise to life and allows the transition from nonlife to life to even happen?”

10. “The new physics needed to explain life starts with understanding what exists and why. That is, it starts with selection of, and for, what gets to exist as physical objects.”

11. “Life is the only thing in the universe that can make objects that are composed of many unique, recursively constructed parts. Assembly theory – theory of physics that considers life’s objects as fundamental.”

12. “To get to a testable theory, we are doing something unusual: we are working backwards. We’re asking what we can measure about molecules in the lab that would indicate when they are objects that can emerge only via selection and evolution.”

13. Origin of life scam: "The fundamental unit of life is not the cell, nor the individual, but the lineage of information propagating across space and time." "We need to focus not on what life is made of, but on how the universe acquires the information to make it."

14. "Our aim was to shift the focus of approaches to the origins of life from traditional prebiotic chemistry to how the combination of theoretical advances, artificial life, messy chemistry, and new ideas about information and matter could energize progress."

15. Universal constructor: Lee Cronin's company Chemputer is working on a universal constructor for all chemical spaces they have explored so far in the chemistry lab. The hope is to scale this up to search large volumes of chemical space all at once.

16. Summarizing: Sara Imari is working on a new theory of physics known as Assembly theory to understand the emergence of life. It hinges on the problem of what can exist and the information that can cause things to happen.

I’ll admit that it’s hard to summarize such a book or understand the depth of it through notes and quotes, so if you’re interested pick it up.

I’ll be back with some writing on understanding cancer soon.

To living longer,

Aastha

Share

Can we detect cancer so early such that we find the very first cell of cancer? Not just stage 1 cancer, but the first cell of cancer.

In this episode, Dr. Michael Levin and I speak with Dr. Azra Raza:

• She is an oncologist pioneering early detection of cancer using electric signals. So far, our best solution to curing cancer has been to detect it early, and she wants to take this further, by nipping cancer at the very first cell.

• Her story with cancer is also deeply personal as she lost her husband to the disease.

• You can see in the episode how much she cares about solving cancer through early detection, and how aggrieved she is about the fact that not only have we made zero progress on cancer in the last 100 years, but doctors are also not focused on cancer prevention.

Dr. Raza is also the author of the book The First Cell: And the Human Costs of Pursuing Cancer to the Last.

Timestamps below cover the topics discussed well.

Watch on YouTube. Listen on Spotify, or any other podcast platform.

Follow me on X @aasthajs for more on longevity. Hope you enjoy the conversation!

All other platforms: here

Timestamps:

0:00 New theory of cancer

1:45 What causes cancer?

5:39 Hybrid cells in cancer

11:16 Why do cancer cells become immortal?

14:14 Detecting the first cell of cancer

17:09 Stress causes cancer cells to fuse

21:40 Cancer drugs don’t work universally

25:54 Personalization of early cancer detection

29:29 Detect cancer early using electrics

35:46 Anguish of cancer patients

39:06 Cancer progress hasn’t moved in 100 years

44:04 Doctors don’t think of cancer prevention

46:54 First Cell Therapeutics - Azra’s company

50:55 What is the first cell stage of cancer?

54:55 Advice for cancer patients

If you’re enjoying the podcast, support my work, leave a rating on Apple podcasts, Spotify or elsewhere, subscribe on your platform of choice, and share with family and friends!

P.S. Check out the longevity products I use.

Share

Support My Work

What if chronic diseases like cancer and Alzheimer’s are caused by infections we’ve overlooked?

We assume chronic disease is caused by genetics and / or lifestyle. However, evolutionary biologist Dr. Paul Ewald says latent viruses and pathogens play a critical hidden role in many diseases.

For example, we already know that Human Papillomavirus (HPV) causes cervical cancer. And research indicates how the EBV virus shows up in Multiple sclerosis, and chlamydia pneumonia shows in Alzheimer’s. Deeper investigation into viruses and disease is warranted and will help with better diagnosis and treatment.

We discuss:

• Genes cannot explain the full reason for disease

• Role of viruses in cancer, Alzheimer’s, heart disease, diabetes

• Strong associations between certain viruses & disease

• Glioblastoma and antiviral treatment

Dr. Paul Ewald is also the author of Plague Time: The New Germ Theory of Disease, and Evolution of Infectious diseases.

Watch on YouTube. Listen on Spotify, or any other podcast platform.

Follow me on X @aasthajs for more on longevity. Hope you enjoy the conversation!

All other platforms: here

Timestamps:

0:00 Role of infection in chronic disease is neglected

2:40 Role of viruses in Alzheimer’s

10:50 Connections between Alzheimer’s, diabetes, cardiovascular disease

15:57 Genes cannot explain the full reason for disease

20:47 Strong association between Alzheimer’s, chlamydia pneumonia, and APOE4

28:16 Multiple sclerosis and EBV virus

35:08 Latent viruses may in fact be active & cause cancer

41:41 Sexually- transmitted pathogens correlated with cancer

46:50 Viruses that cause cancer (EBV & breast cancer)

53:09 Hodgkin’s lymphoma and virus

57:15 Stanford study showing EBV as leading cause of MS

1:00:19 Do viruses attack the mitochondria and cause cancer?

1:01:38 Glioblastoma and virus / antiviral treatment

1:07:07 Virus vs. oncogenes causing cancer

1:14:17 Breast cancer BRAC1 mutations & virus association

1:15:59 Vaccines against viruses

1:17:56 Practical steps if you test positive for infectious viruses

1:24:57 Could cancer relapse be due to persistent virus?

1:27:48 Protect the immune system

1:29:38 Areas Dr. Ewald is excited about

If you’re enjoying the podcast, support my work, leave a rating on Apple podcasts, Spotify or elsewhere, subscribe on your platform of choice, and share with family and friends! You can also check out the longevity products I use.

Share

Support My Work