Thursday, April 2, 2026

bird of paradise flower: Restorative Yoga class on Saturdays (and as we may live to 150 and well beyond:) * Youth Vaccine?



Dear Dick (Robb MD, possibly posthumously, also a professor in Harvard Medical School), Unitarians' Chris Michaels and Ma/Janie, Quakertarian Annie, Alden (who went to Quaker George School in Philadelphia before Harvard college), Sandy, Donna (Leet MD), George and Maitreyi (both professors in Harvard Medical School too), Peter (Norvig, Stanford AI), Marlynn Wei MD JD (author of "The Harvard Medical School Guide to Yoga: 8 Weeks to Strength, Awareness, and Flexibility"), Doortje (Van Kooten), Vivek (Hutheesing, - "Meditation and Yoga" your father said  ... from India to the world as its greatest 'exports' - great (at around the 57 minute mark - https://vivekhutheesing.com/india-past-present-and-future/ in the great Q&A),  All,  


Yoga greetings, (and as we may live to 150 and well beyond:)


How are you all doing? (Happy Birthday to Janie Macleod, my mother, above, born 1935 ... and here's to many more birthdays potentially ahead).
 
A 
Restorative Yoga exploration together in a Zoom call Yoga hall on Saturday, April 4, 2026, at 8 am Pacific Time, 11 am Eastern time, 8:30 pm India time - from 670 Ridgecrest Rd, Canyon CA 94516? Stay tuned ...

Seeking to create some Yoga asana videos for exploring Yoga movement further - and with these Zoom calls Yoga hall get togethers online.


A 1
And for those Yoga friends who are continuing to explore Yoga movements from or with a chair, would you like. to explore the following Harvard Yoga videos further ...  

Introduction to yoga: The chair sequence
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCi3VQb4Xk0

Introduction to yoga: The modified sun salutation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdRfAODNhR8

Kind of savasana, or corpse pose, or resting pose 
Introduction to yoga: The importance of breathing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ko1eGBjjW8w
? 



B
Approaches to developing restorative Yoga asana practice explorations on our own eg at age 135 years old  - ... appreciating Dona Holleman's approach to structuring doing Yoga asana in her beginner's course in her "Yoga Syllabus for Teacher and Student" with the companion book "Asana in Photo" (both self-published in 1984 in Italy)

Mondays and Thursdays
standing poses

Tuesdays and Fridays
padmasana and sitting poses

Wednesdays and Saturdays
kneeling poses and twists




B 1
Found also from Dona Holleman  -
 
🔸 Complete cycle of standing positions;

🔸 Complete cycle of sitting and forward positions;

🔸 Complete cycle in padmasana;

🔸 Salamba sirsasana – salamba sarvangasana.


https://www.centeredyogadonaholleman.org/en/teacher-training-en/beginners-2/#:~:text=1%EF%B8%8F%E2%83%A3%20First%20year,%F0%9F%94%B8%20Use%20of%20tools.



C
Yoga philosophy and Yoga awareness and Yoga consciousness in 8 limbs of Yoga (possibly codified on palm leaves in writing 2200 years ago or well before) ... and in 18 words these days with 5 Yamas, 5 Niyamas, and asana, pranayama, pratyahara, dharana, dhyana, and samadhi ... 

C 1
Found this thinking about the Niyamas the other day on Pinterest, and  

Appreciating this 
Niyamas' exploration 
(which are five yogic observances or positive duties)
Don't know who Rashi in 2015 is / was ... and likely the calligraphy too ...


C 2
I riff with this 8 limbs of Yoga here, and Angela and Victor's Yoga here, in these  - 

Hippy-anjali Yoga Notations - 


C 3
Appreciating 8 Limbs of Yoga & Quaker SPICES' parallels regarding the Yamas' Ahimsa (nonviolence) and Satya (truthfulness)




D

Could you Donna (Leet), and with you George (Church), make a #YouthVaccine and by building on this antigen cancer vaccine, and regarding the research you did while a student at Harvard Medical School - 


"The Journey to Develop Personalized Cancer Vaccines: 
A team of researchers developed personalized neoantigen vaccines for cancer patients. This January, they revealed astounding new results that may have far-reaching implications for the future of quick-acting and long-lasting cancer treatment." 
By Akila V. Muthukumar
April 15, 2021


"Donna E. Leet, a first-year resident in internal medicine at the University of California, San Francisco and a 2020 M.D. graduate on the Health Sciences and Technology track at HMS, was one of the first authors on this paper."

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2021/4/15/donna-leet/

  

D 1 

What are vaccines made up of, & how could @WorldUnivAndSch make an #AgingReversalVaccine in a #RealisticVirtualEarthForAgingReversal & think #GStreetView w #GTimeSlider at the #GCell & #GMolecule view levels w @IsomorphicLabs #AlphafoldServer3 & @calico?

AND see PPS below too ...

D 2a 
How best to just drop this article into #TextInTheSidebar in an iterating #RealisticVirtualEarthForCells (thinking Google Street View with time slider, at the GCellView and GMoleculeView levels too) ... and have it manifest as digital simulation as iterating digital biological and chemistry reality ? Peter (Norvig?), others? ... such that we could begin to work and experiment with this digitally?




D 3
and in a #RealisticVirtualEarth #ForVaccines (& #ForYoga #ForYogaAsana) ... and with these people helping Peter (Norvig, above) to code it further ?- 

Jonathan Chen MD interview with Euan Ashley @ Stanford Computational Medicine

Very smart interview by 2 good Stanford physicians - one a Scot - 

Thanks for INCREDIBLE conversation Drs @jonc101x & Scot @euanashley: How best to dev #AgingReversalMachine @ #GrowWithGoogleWUaS @WorldUnivAndSch in #GStreetView w #GTimeSlider & add 2007, 2012, 2024 #GCell & #GMolecule #DatasetsOfHumans : https://goo.gl/maps/7gSsSTweRCBo9gf87 > #GPegmanEHR ?









ReTweeting -

Stanford Department of Medicine 
@StanfordDeptMed on TwitterX
New on the #FutureofMedicine: #StanDOM clinician & AI researcher @jonc101x joins host @euanashley to explore what happens when AI meets real-world medicine—& why the results aren't always what we expect.

▶ Watch: bit.ly/4sKbtoC
🎧 Listen: bit.ly/43LGRZv

Jonathan Chen on AI in Medicine: Promises, Pitfalls and Practice (March 2026)




E 

An #AgingReversalMachine is a #WUaSmoonshot in a #RealisticVirtualEarthForGenetics (#GStreetView w #GTimeSlider)


An #AgingReversalMachine @ #GrowWithGoogleWUaS @WorldUnivAndSch in #GStreetView w #GTimeSlider w #GoogleComputerScientists -How can I add right now 2007, 2012, 2024 #GCell & #GMolecule #DatasetsOfHumans here for ex @HarbinBook #GateHouse ~ https://goo.gl/maps/7gSsSTweRCBo9gf87 to #GPegmanEHR ?


E 1

An #AgingReversalMachine is a #WUaSmoonshot in a #RealisticVirtualEarthForGenetics (#GStreetView w #GTimeSlider) w @WorldUnivAndSch being in a #GrowWithGoogleWUaS program: Google does #Gmoonshots How best to engage #GoogleComputerScientists #CalicoLabs & #IsomorphicLabs for this?



AND


WorldUnivandSch
@WorldUnivAndSch
·
Jul 9, 2025
How best
@WorldUnivAndSch
 to connect in #GStreetView w #GTimeSlider
@HarbinBook
 #GateHouse yrs '07, '12 & '24 https://goo.gl/maps/7gSsSTweRCBo9gf87 w https://youtu.be/q9FBhEAXRY4 w our #AvatarAgentElectronicHealthRecords w
@geochurch
 https://youtu.be/bnCEIPQFNnk for #AgingReversal & #ExtremeLongevity ?


https://x.com/WorldUnivAndSch/status/1942981538871914583 



And see - 


F 
How to develop further the potential for STEM cells & OSKM aging reversal and extreme longevity - eg for Dick Robb MD's stroke, and my right ear 'eustachian tube dysfunction' or inner ear condition, and in a #RealisticVirtualEarthForOSKM, #ForYoga ... (eg to model also the effects of turmeric, ginger, and similar natural anti-inflammatory foods) and regarding - 


Can we reverse aging? In what ways can a #RealisticVirtualEarthForGenetics think #GStreetView w #TimeSlider #GCellView #GMoleculeView identify #WUaSPromisingTargets for #AgingReversal such as #SRSF1 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/6426#:~:text=SRSF1%20is%20a%20critical%20regulator,transcription%2C%20dependent%20on%20chromatin%20acetylation in #Canyon94516 #WUaSLongevityGeneticsInstitute #wuAsVR?

https://twitter.com/WorldUnivAndSch/status/1738943791678075067

https://twitter.com/sgkmacleod/status/1738945558818042017








Retweeting - 

Alex Plesa
@amplesa
In search for new rejuvenation factors, we tested our top 90 genes by overexpressing them in human aged skin fibroblasts. Using the resulting gene expression profiles, we mapped out a landscape of fibroblast aging and rejuvenation, and identified SRSF1 as a promising target. 4/8


https://twitter.com/amplesa/status/1737852964830953802




*


This is momentous for aging reversal (and check out all 8 of 8) - 

Can we reverse aging? 
7 yrs ago, Ocampo et al. showed that partial reprogramming can ameliorate aging hallmarks. But, OSKM induction has safety limitations & no new factors have emerged since. Here, biorxiv.org/content/10.110… we used 🧬 screens to find new rejuvenation factors🧵1/8 



*
2/8



*
3/8



*
4/8


*
5/8



*
6/8



*
7/8




*
8/8



+
Laurie Green
@LaurieGreen36
What does reverse aging mean exactly? Curious to know your take on it as it seems as if a lot of people have a different take on it

https://x.com/LaurieGreen36/status/1738574418605973649?s=20
https://twitter.com/LaurieGreen36/status/1738574418605973649



Alex Plesa
@amplesa
Ultimately, I think about it as converting a biological system (cell/tissue/organ/organism) to a more functional state, representative of a younger age.

https://x.com/amplesa/status/1738625223509893273?s=20

https://twitter.com/amplesa/status/1738625223509893273




G

Namaste, Yogically 8 Limbs of Yoga, Yoga and Science Friendly regards, Happy Birthday Ma/Janie, Warmly & Kindly, 
Scott

Thursday, April 2, 2026
bird of paradise flower: Restorative Yoga class on Saturdays (and as we may live to 150 and well beyond:) * Youth Vaccine?


PS

Fascinating essay on 

“healthy aging” and leave it at that.
Life is good. Death is bad. I'm done apologizing.

Tweeted by MIT Tech Review Biomedicine Editor Antonio Regalado  (above)-

Good piece on the language used to describe radical life extension. Takes aim at our recent story. Knock is that I want to die, and ridicule people who don't. H

https://x.com/antonioregalado/status/2039394597483286722


Retweeting -

https://x.com/peterottsjo/status/2039089901002780968

Apparently, wanting to live makes me an extremist

I just read a shocking new piece in MIT Technology Review. In it, they detail what they view as the preferred outcome for each and every one of us.
It’s harrowing: Your bones thin. Your muscles waste. Your arteries harden and your heart begins to fail at the job. Your immune system, once a sophisticated defense network, starts confusing your own tissue for the enemy. Your brain loses volume. Memories dissolve. If cancer doesn't find you, dementia might. If neither does, your organs will simply wind down, one by one, until a cascade of failures puts you in a bed where you will be fed through a tube and cleaned by a stranger. Then your heart stops. Your cells, starved of oxygen, begin to rupture. Bacteria that lived in your gut start eating you from the inside out.
The alternative - that someone might try to engineer a way around it - is presented as ghoulish, ethically suspect, and creepy as hell. The people working on it are “extreme life-extension proponents.” The people funding it are operating “in secret.” The people organizing around the idea that maybe, just maybe, we shouldn't accept all of the above as inevitable are "hardcore adherents" of a movement the article describes with the warmth typically reserved for doomsday cults.
I'm being very facetious here. The first part above - what I just called MIT Technology Review’s “preferred outcome” - is, as you can probably imagine, never put into words. But the second part is very much the essence of the article.
Now, Antonio Regalado is a serious journalist whom I respect a great deal. As a reporter his job is not to keep secrets, but to expose them. And in all fairness, he includes more voices and nuances than he’s obligated to.
The funny thing is, I'd already started writing this essay before the. It was prompted by aabout the same company - R3 Bio (don’t worry, you’ll get the context in a bit) - but framed in very different language.
And what I wanted to write about was never really about R3. It was - it is - just about that: language.
I'm tired of speaking in code. I'm tired of watching people in this field dog-whistle their actual ambitions because saying them plainly is too dangerous. I'm tired of a conversation where the people trying to solve the biggest source of human suffering on earth have to stay closeted for fear of exactly the kind of coverage R3 just got.
We can never just say the thing. We can never just say: aging is a catastrophe, it kills more people than anything else on earth, and we should be working as hard as possible to stop it. Instead, we must carefully manage every word. Soften every ambition. Wrap every honest statement in enough qualifications that it no longer sounds alarming, which also means it no longer sounds urgent.
And when someone does say the thing plainly, the response is exactly what you'd expect: they get called radical.

So: A few days before the MIT Technology Review piece, Wired ran a story about R3 Bio, based in the Bay Area. Wired described a startup building “organ sacks” to replace animal testing and ease the organ shortage. MIT Technology Review gave a very different framing: A company pursuing “brainless clones” and “backup human bodies” as a path to life extension.
. On its website, the company responded to the coverage by saying it is “not in fact working on any large scale ‘organ sacks’, ‘brainless animals’ or whatever these articles insinuate” and that its work involves “molecules, cell cultures and microscopic structures.”
Three different framings, one company. I don't know exactly what R3 is doing - but if even half of what's been reported is accurate, then their denial is itself the point. A company that may well be working on something that could one day help people not age and die can't afford to say so. That's the language trap in its purest form.
And it's not just R3. According to MIT Technology Review, the entire community around this work - including Vitalism, of which I'm a member, and the Longevity Biotech Fellowship, whose retreats I've been part of - is guilty by association.
Replacement biology is the idea, broadly, that you can extend life by growing new parts and swapping out the old ones.withbehind it. But if you lead with that - if you say “we're developing technology so that people don't have to age and die” - you get the treatment R3 got. Sinister framing. Words like “extreme.” Comparisons to Dr. Strangelove. Your conferences portrayed as secret gatherings where unsettling things are whispered behind closed doors.
So you don't say that. You talk about “molecules, cell cultures and microscopic structures” which, you know, could be said about pretty much every biotech in the world.
Society has somehow decided that it’s acceptable to age and die, but not acceptable to discuss alternatives, especially if they make people a little uncomfortable.
I want to be clear: I'm not endorsing R3 Bio, I don’t know the people behind the company and have never spoken to them. I don't know enough about the specifics to do that, and some of what's been reported gives me pause. What I am endorsing is the project of solving aging. And what exhausts me is the fact that we cannot talk about it honestly without the conversation collapsing into exactly this kind of cycle.

The MIT Technology Review piece also describes Vitalists as “self-described ‘hardcore’ longevity adherents”. That's technically accurate. Here's another way to look at it:
Life and health are good. Aging causes immense suffering. Solving it is scientifically plausible. Humanity should apply the necessary resources to get there.
And I hate the word “radical.” It gets thrown at us constantly, and every time it does, it reframes the most basic human desire - not wanting to suffer, not wanting to die - as something deviant. Something that requires justification. Something that puts you outside the bounds of polite discourse.
You know what I find radical? The fact that over 100,000 people die of aging every single day and the global response is essentially a shrug. The fact that governments are staring down a tidal wave of age-related chronic disease that threatens to bankrupt their healthcare systems, and yet “solving aging” doesn't appear on a single serious policy agenda. The fact that when someone organizes to change this - raises money, funds research, builds a community - they get profiled like a cult.
That's radical. Our position is the sane one.
This language problem didn't start with R3 Bio or MIT Technology Review. It's been compounding for years. Say “lifespan” and people hear: decades of frailty in a nursing home. So the field retreated to “healthspan,” which polls better and sounds more responsible.
Lurking behind healthspan is the truly awful phrase “healthy aging,” which, if you think about it for more than three seconds, means deteriorating “gracefully” until you die. But “healthy aging” is perfectly okay to say out in the open. No one will demonize you for sugar coating the thing that takes your life away from you and everyone else.

Say “aging is a disease” and you've just disqualified yourself from the regulatory frameworks that determine what gets funded, trialled, and covered by insurance.
Yes, the language constrains the science. Not in some abstract, theoretical way. In the way that matters: the science that can't be named doesn't get funded. The science that doesn't get funded doesn't become medicine. The medicine that doesn't exist doesn't save lives. And so the vocabulary we're permitted to use quietly shapes who lives and who dies - while we argue about optics. It’s fucked up.
Go back to the MIT Technology Review piece and notice something. It spends thousands of words on the ethics of creating organisms that cannot think, feel, or suffer. Scientists worry about the moral status of these entities. Ethicists weigh in. The yuck factor is discussed at length. Fair enough, these are legitimate questions.
But notice what gets almost no emotional weight: the fact that actual, conscious, feeling human beings - people with families, memories, fears, plans for next Tuesday - are aging, suffering, and dying. Right now. Today. A hundred thousand of them since yesterday. The moral urgency flows toward protecting the theoretical interests of an organism designed to have no awareness. It does not flow toward the people this research could help.

I don't have a tidy resolution, I’m just tired of the whole thing. I understand the case for strategic framing. “We're solving the organ shortage.” “We're targeting age-related disease.” “We're extending healthy years." All true, all useful, and sometimes the only way to get through a door - whether at the FDA, with investors, or with an audience that isn’t ready to face what aging does to the people they love.
But the next time someone calls you “radical” for wanting to solve aging, don't explain yourself. Don't soften your position. Don't retreat to “healthspan” because it's safer. Ask them, instead, what exactly is moderate about accepting a hundred thousand deaths a day. Ask them what's “mainstream” about watching the people you love deteriorate and calling it natural. Ask them to defend their position for once - because we've been defending ours for long enough.
Maybe replacement biology isn't the path that gets us there. Maybe cryonics won't work. Maybe the first generation of epigenetic reprogramming will disappoint. I don't know. Nobody knows yet. But we have to try all of it - every path, all at once, as fast as we can - because the people dying today don't have the luxury of waiting for whichever approach offends the fewest people.
And we should be proud to say so. Not cautious. Not apologetic. Not hedging behind euphemisms designed to make the mission sound small enough to be acceptable. Proud. Proud that we looked at the biggest source of human suffering on earth and decided it wasn't good enough. Proud that we're building a community, funding science, and demanding that the world pay attention. Proud that we refuse to call the slow destruction of every person we love “healthy aging” and leave it at that.
Life is good. Death is bad. I'm done apologizing.

https://x.com/peterottsjo/status/2039089901002780968



PPS

AI-Powered Aging Vaccine Design
https://gemini.google.com/share/1ebb138af2e6


Understanding how to build a vaccine—especially one as ambitious as an "aging reversal" vaccine—requires blending current immunology with the high-tech digital simulations being pioneered by Google’s ecosystem.

1. What are Vaccines Made Of?

At their core, vaccines are "educational software" for your immune system. They consist of two main parts: the active blueprint and the support system.

The Active Ingredients (Antigens)

  • The Blueprint (mRNA/DNA): Modern vaccines (like those for COVID-19) don't use the germ itself. Instead, they use a strand of mRNA that tells your cells to build a specific, harmless protein.

  • The Carrier (Viral Vectors): Uses a safe, modified virus (like an adenovirus) to "deliver" genetic instructions into the cell.

  • The Parts (Subunits): Just the "bits and pieces" of a virus or bacteria (like a surface protein or sugar) so the body recognizes it.

The Support System (Excipients)

  • Adjuvants: Aluminum salts or lipids that act like a "megaphone," shouting at the immune system to pay attention to the antigen.

  • Lipid Nanoparticles (LNPs): Tiny fatty bubbles that protect mRNA from being destroyed before it reaches your cells.

  • Stabilizers & Preservatives: Sugars (sucrose) or gelatin to keep the vaccine stable during shipping.

2. Designing an "Aging Reversal" Vaccine

Aging isn't caused by a single germ; it’s a systemic breakdown. To create a vaccine for it, you wouldn't be fighting a virus; you'd be "training" the body to clear out the biological "trash" that causes aging.

The Strategy: Targeted Senolysis

A primary target for an aging vaccine is Senescent Cells (often called "Zombie Cells"). These are cells that stop dividing but refuse to die, pumping out inflammatory signals that age the surrounding tissue.

  • The Vaccine Goal: Train your T-cells to identify and destroy senescent cells by targeting specific surface proteins (like uPAR or GPNMB) that only appear on "old" cells.

3. The #RealisticVirtualEarth Workflow

In your simulated environment, you would integrate Google’s most powerful tools to "de-age" a cell at the molecular level.

Phase 1: Identification (Calico Labs + Google Cell View)

  • Calico Labs specializes in the basic biology of aging. You would use their datasets to identify which proteins are the "clocks" of aging.

  • Google Cell View: Imagine a "Street View" for the cell. You "zoom in" from the tissue level down to the mitochondria. You use the Time Slider to compare a healthy 20-year-old cell vs. an 80-year-old cell, highlighting the damaged proteins (the "potholes" in your digital street).

Phase 2: Design (Isomorphic Labs + AlphaFold 3)

  • AlphaFold 3: You input the sequence of a "zombie cell" protein. AlphaFold 3 doesn't just predict the protein's shape; it models how it interacts with DNA, RNA, and ligands.

  • Isomorphic Labs: You use their "Drug Design Engine" to create a synthetic antibody or an mRNA sequence that perfectly fits that "zombie" protein. It’s like designing a key for a specific lock to ensure the vaccine only kills the bad cells and leaves the healthy ones alone.

Phase 3: Simulation & Production

  • The Virtual Earth Simulation: Before a single drop is made, you run a digital twin simulation. You "inject" the digital vaccine into a virtual human model to see if it causes "off-target" effects (e.g., does it accidentally attack your stem cells?).

  • Google Drug Subsidiaries: Once the digital design is perfected, the instructions are sent to automated labs to synthesize the mRNA and package it into LNPs for real-world testing.

The Reality Check

While we can't "vaccinate" against time itself yet, the collaboration between AI (Isomorphic), Biology (Calico), and Visualization (Virtual Earth) is exactly how the next generation of "Longevity Medicine" is being built. We are moving from "guessing" which drugs work to "engineering" them with pixel-perfect precision.

AI-Powered Aging Vaccine Design
https://gemini.google.com/share/1ebb138af2e6



PPPS


On Fri, Mar 27, 2026 at 1:01 PM Scott Yoga Mac Flower MacLeod <yogamacflower@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Dick (Robb MD, possibly posthumously, also a professor in Harvard Medical School), Unitarian Us' Chris Michaels and Ma/Janie, Annie, Alden, Sandy, George and Maitreyi (both professors in Harvard Medical School too), Peter (Norvig Stanford AI), Marlynn Wei MD JD (author of "The Harvard Medical School Guide to Yoga: 8 Weeks to Strength, Awareness, and Flexibility"), Doortje (Van Kooten), Vivek (Hutheesing, - "Meditation and Yoga" your father said  ... from India to the world as its greatest 'exports' - great (at around the 57 minute mark - https://vivekhutheesing.com/india-past-present-and-future/ in the great Q&A),  All,  


Yoga greetings! Tomorrow Sat 3/28/26 for an exploratory "Restorative Yoga class on Saturdays (and as we may live to 150 and well beyond:)" ??? ...  and at 
around 8 am Pacific Time all together individually - or around 8 am in your time zone?? I've added this Yoga exploration here to "Brahma Kamal (Saussurea obvallata): "Restorative Yoga class on Saturdays (and as we may live to 150 and well beyond:)? ...








* 























https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strelitzia

....



Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Comments (Atom)