Monthly Archives: September 2022

Is it possible to use cardarine to grow taller?

Cardarine has been used by bodybuilders and is linked to height growth. Cardarine is a PPAR Delta agonist(activator).

PPARDelta has been linked to height. From A single nucleotide polymorphism on exon-4 of the gene encoding PPARdelta is associated with reduced height in adults and children.  “compelling evidence was found for this locus and its association with height (P = 10(-8)) with an overall effect size of about 0.5 cm per allele{1cm total}.” It’s possible that the effects of PPARdelta are biphasic where there is an equilibrium amount to maximize height and too little or too much reduces height or that there is a minimum amount of PPARDelta activation that is needed for height and that any further has no effect. The authors speculate that PPARDelta may affect height via metabolic efficiency or via affects on osteoclast function. Metabolic efficiency would have no effect on height as an adult but there is potential if it affects osteoclast function as degradation of bone would be a needed step to grow taller as an adult as it would both make the bone more susceptible to plastic deformation and allow for tissues that are capable of interstitial growth to take the place of bone.

Obviously, 1 cm in height is not going to break the bank in terms of increasing height while skeletally immature but if a PPARdelta agonist can increase osteoclast activity that can be used as part of a height increase routine.

Here’s the studies that says PPAR affects osteoclasts

Cloning and function of rabbit peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor delta/beta in mature osteoclasts

“Osteoclasts modulate bone resorption under physiological and pathological conditions. Previously, we showed that both estrogens and retinoids regulated osteoclastic bone resorption and postulated that such regulation was directly mediated through their cognate receptors expressed in mature osteoclasts. In this study, we searched for expression of other members of the nuclear hormone receptor superfamily in osteoclasts. Using the low stringency homologous hybridization method, we isolated the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor delta/beta (PPARdelta/beta) cDNA from mature rabbit osteoclasts. Northern blot analysis showed that PPARdelta/beta mRNA was highly expressed in highly enriched rabbit osteoclasts. Carbaprostacyclin, a prostacyclin analogue known to be a ligand for PPARdelta/beta, significantly induced both bone-resorbing activities of isolated mature rabbit osteoclasts and mRNA expression of the cathepsin K, carbonic anhydrase type II, and tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase genes in these cells. Moreover, the carbaprostacyclin-induced bone resorption was completely blocked by an antisense phosphothiorate oligodeoxynucleotide of PPARdelta/beta but not by the sense phosphothiorate oligodeoxynucleotide of the same DNA sequence. Our results suggest that PPARdelta/beta may be involved in direct modulation of osteoclastic bone resorption.“

Here’s the other study:

PPAR agonists modulate human osteoclast formation and activity in vitro

“Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPARs) are members of the nuclear steroid hormone superfamily and exist in three isoforms: PPARalpha, beta and gamma, each with specific functions. In this study, we have investigated the expression of PPARs by human osteoclast precursors and osteoclasts generated in vitro. In addition, the effects of fibrates and isoform-specific PPAR agonists on osteoclast formation and resorption in vitro were determined. Human peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) were stimulated with human recombinant RANKL and M-CSF to generate osteoclasts. RNA was extracted at days 0, 7, 14 and 21 and RT-PCR for all three PPAR isoforms demonstrated their expression throughout this culture period. To determine the effect on osteoclast formation, PPAR agonists (10(-8) M to 10(-5) M) were added from the beginning of the culture until day 14 and the number of multinucleated osteoclasts counted. The effect of PPAR agonists on osteoclast function was similarly determined by treating mature, multinucleated osteoclasts cultured on dentine wafers with PPAR agonists (10(-8) M to 10(-5) M) for 7 days and quantifying resorption. Bezafibrate and fenofibrate, which non-discriminately activate all PPAR isoforms, significantly inhibited the formation of multinucleated osteoclasts from PBMC in vitro. Bezafibrate treatment of mature osteoclast resulted in 50% inhibition (at 10(-8) M and 10(-7) M) of resorption, yet fenofibrate had no significant effect. Activation of individual PPARs with isoform-specific agonist (GW9578, L165041 and ciglitizone which preferentially activate PPARalpha, beta and gamma respectively) resulted in significant dose-dependent inhibition of multinucleated osteoclast formation. Divergent effects on osteoclast resorption were observed; GW9578 had no significant effect on resorption, whereas ciglitizone and L165041 dose-dependently inhibited and stimulated resorption, respectively. These data show for the first time expression of all three PPAR isoforms throughout the development and maturation period of osteoclasts generated from human PBMCs. In addition, we demonstrate that isoform-specific PPAR agonists have strong effects on multinucleation and highly variable effects on bone resorption. In conclusion, this study highlights the potential of PPARs as therapeutic targets in diseases with accelerated osteoclast formation and resorption.”

I couldn’t find any further studies linking PPARDelta to longitudinal bone growth nor can I find any anecdotal cases of people growing taller off of taking cardarine.

Can Flexioss be used to to prove LSJL or Lateral Impact Loading?

Arthur Lazar is someone who has spoken about LSJL in the past on Quora. “Not really. There is 0 evidence for that. The original working experiment was performed on mice – mice growth plates never ossify. MAYBE if someone would develop a machine which can put perfect constant pressure, perfectly shaped for bone area where the pressure is supposed to be, then in theory it could work. But this is a bro-science, so it’s a big MAYBE. But as for now, using clamp, dumbelss or whatever you can use to press at bone would never work.”<-Mice growth plates don’t ossify but they become senescent which is just as bad for growth.

Here’s some more of his thoughts on LSJL: “Yes, I do work on a device for automatic long bone loading method as I believe that the standard lsjl loading (manual with clamps, weights, mpistols) is an invalid approach that lacks consistency, frequency and stability which all was provided with the original, successful experiment.”<-I don’t know what an mpistol is. I believe it is a typo. I don’t know what the original intent is.

“Thank you for your interest, but currently my team is complete and current priority of the projects puts the lsjl idea on the bottom of the list. When I am done with the prototype and IF it will have a desired affect on Flexioss structure (in the terms of force application on the structure) I will publish the design in order to expand the team and get potential investors interested.”

Here’s another set of communications someone had with him.

So the question is should we be using flexioss to try to find the best loading regime to induce the proper stimulation to induce new longitudinal bone growth. I believe personally that the best regime is some kind of lateral impact loading(I believe that tapping the epiphysis would be superior than the diaphysis now but I am trying both). Clamping has a slippage problem which impact does not have. The loads of direct lateral impact are stronger than that occur during normal physiological activities which are more axial.

Lateral impact does occur during boxing both to the hand and to the face and ribcage. Also, it occurs to the feet bones during running(but this depends on whether you are a heel or toe striker). It also happens to bones during muay thai kick boxing.

The problem is that this impact is often at irregular intervals and not targeted to specific areas of the bone such as the epiphysis. The epiphysis is where there is less cortical bone, is close to where the growth plates used to reside in skeletally mature individuals, and is close to the articular cartilage which if stimulated could potentially contribute to height growth. In muay thai you have no control over where you are kicked and if you do kick you are trying to use the strongest part of the bone.

Lateral impact has the potential in my opinion to drive the most fluid forces throughout the bone. Greater than any axial impact certainly due to the pressure gradient of the bone and the epiphysis is the weakest most porous part of the bone so impact to that area has the potential to drive fluid forces throughout the entire bone. Muscular contractions also have the ability to stimulate fluid forces throughout the bone but that is limited by muscular size and strength. Lateral impact also has the ability to gradually induce plastic deformation throughout the bone. Most plastic deformation occurs axially to shorten the bones such as in rickets/paget’s disease etc. Lateral impact loads have the potential to induce plastic deformation in a way such as to lengthen the bones.

Here is the flexioss.

So the question is can we use the flexioss to find the best way to induce lateral plastic deformation in such a way as to lengthen the bones or to induce fluid forces to either induce articular cartilage endochondral ossification or to cause denovo cartilagenous regions within the bone.

In the study Dose-dependent new bone formation by extracorporeal shock wave application on the intact femur of rabbits., they found trabecular bones heaving with cartilagenous tissue which would be huge as bone tissue is not capable of interstitial bone growth.

The manufacturers of flexioss claim that it has properties similar to that of cancellous bone so yes it can potentially be used to find the best loading regime to induce plastic deformation in such a way as to longitudinally lengthen the bone. Obviously, it can’t really be used to mimic the fluid properties of the bone.

McKenzie Chin Tuck a fast and easy trick to be taller

I have tried the McKenzie Chin Tuck posture and it absolutely makes you measure taller but your eye level appears shorter. It is not a breakthrough by any means but I have tried and you can see yourself becoming taller in the mirror when you do it.

So when you adopt this posture you measure taller because you are maximizing the apex bump of your head. But personally, I feel shorter because with a more backwards head posture my eyes are at a higher level so people are shorter relative to high level.

There is an exercise related to this where you push the chin back to get a neck muscle stretch and there are some indications that it may be worthwhile to do this.

I write more in my response to Body Height changes with hyperextension. Basically temporary hyperextension of the spine(15s) can result in temporary height gain due to disc hydration. And I think this exercise may achieve hyperextension of disc components. So I’d say it’s worth doing but only brief periods as you would be better suited to strengthening your neck muscles via something like free weight training or machines if you can’t do free weights due to injury or a structural reason.

It’s mentioned further in the body height changes with hyperextension study that it’s putting the load on the facets that enables for disc hydration. You’d think that tilting your head back would actually put the load on the facets. But I think the key is that tucking your chin in achieves neck muscle activation and if you look at the back muscle anatomy if the muscles are activated they will pull everything upwards.

Note that the majority of the back muscles slope upwards so when they are contracted they indirectly pull up the spine in alignment. I write about the muscular pull maximizing height gain here.

So I’d say in general adopt the mckenzie chin tuck along with chest up/shoulders back to maximize back muscle activation in posture. And occasionally do the press the finger against the chin thing for short periods of time to allow for disc hydration.

The drawback for the mckenzie chin tuck posture is that although it makes you measure taller it makes your jaw look smaller.

Here’s a video that explains it more:

I find that just bringing your chin is enough to get a good height gain appearance without having to worry about protecting the technique yes as mentioned you will have double chins but you will measure taller.

This guy looks taller after doing the McKenzie chin tuck:

Here’s a study that backs up the McKenzie chin tuck:

Head posture and loading of the cervical spine

” Precision stadiometer tests were run, using seven subjects, to measure the effects on spinal length of different angles of gaze. After 1 h exposure whilst sitting in a controlled posture, there were significant differences in the shrinkage of the spine between the horizontal gaze and the 20° and 40° angles below the horizontal. The increased spinal loading demonstrated by the increase in spinal shrinkage calls into question the recommendations for angle of gaze recommended in textbooks.”

I think it is the forward posture affecting the height change and not actually the gaze of the eyes.

“The mean compressive load on the cervical discs was 10 kg higher for the forward flexed position”

“Each subject would attend on three separate days, on each of which one of the three
randomly chosen head angles, 0 degree, 20 degrees and 40 degrees, would be tested.”

“A shrinkage of the spine during the forward inclination of the head, observed during this
experiment, of approximately 1 mm over a 1 h period, equivalent to about 5% of the total diurnal shrinkage”