Telomeres - Anti Aging - The Skinny

If you don't know about Telomeres yet, you're in for a surprise, especially if you find out about Lobsters!

What is a Telomere?

Telomeres are the DNA protective tips at the end of your chromasomes. Think of them like the plastic tips at both ends of a shoe lace. Chromasomes  are made of DNA and live inside every cell in our body.

Telomeres are made of repeated base pairs of DNA and start life about 20,000 DNA base pairs long. 

Telomeres Get Shorter with Cell Division

Every cell in your body has a limited life so must replicate itself and divide in order to keep you alive. Each cell division must produce and exact copy of the original cell in order to keep us healthy and free from degenerative disease.

With each cell division, our telomeres shorten. When telomere length is eventually reduced to about 5000 base pairs the cell dies. 

When enough of our cells have critically short telomeres, they die and inevitably so do we.

So it has become possible to determine how old someone is just by looking at Telomere length. Based on cell division and how many times a cell can divide; while still maintaining long enough telomeres to copy itself reliably, it is also possible to work out how long before we die.

Using this theory it has been estimated that humans can only live for about 121 years or so; by which time too many of our cells will have critically short telomeres. 

 

But what if we can protect our Telomeres from getting shorter?

Not all of our cells behave the same. Telomeres in cells that are associated with reproduction behave differently. Although they still shorten with each cell division, they make use of an enzyme called Telomerase. 

Telomerase restores and repairs the shortened telomeres so that they maintain their original length. This needs to happen so that healthy cells can be passed on to reproductive mechanisms to ensure that our children begin life with healthy cells contaning chromasomes with full length telomeres.

Other cells in our body can also make use of the telomerase enzyme, but don't because it is turned off by the gene within. This means that when normal cells divide the telomere is not repaired. This results in the eventual death of the cell and us.

Since this research came to light a lot of people have become very excited. Not only about the prospect of eternal life, but more frustratingly at seeing this as a way to make money by promoting products that can activate telomerase in all our cells.

There are ways to naturally protect Telomere length but this science is still young and the most reliable and trustworth information is always written by scientists, not by salesmen.

What about the Lobsters?

Apparently, lobsters never age. All of their cells contain active telomerase which means their cells have no replication limit. How old is the oldest lobster anyway?!

Infantile Politics

Children and Politics don't mix. But  how about infantile politics?

The UK general election is around the corner and I'm questioning my own political reasoning. Who will I vote for? Will I even vote?

It becomes more and more difficult for me to even listen to UK politicians while all they seem to do is mud-sling each other and remind us how great they are. Even second had car salesmen don't sink so low as to bend our ears telling us what crooks the other garages are. They know that they will lose the sale if they get straight on the defensive and bad mouth others to make themselves look good. Yet this is what our elected leaders do every chance they get.

All I really want to hear is what each party is proposing to do for me, then I can decide if I believe it. All I actually hear is politicians and MPs maligning each other on TV and radio.

I don't want to hear this. I don't have time to hear it.

I am slowly drawing the conclusion that none of the parties really have any policies that they are happy to hold up to scrutiny. All they seem to do with their precious TV/radio air time is use it to bad mouth the other party.

We laugh at Donald Trump because he reacts and talks like a small child. But are our guys very much different?

Ok, so our elected representatives are a bit more sophisticated than that. Cheap jibes get wrapped up in expensive grammar and it all sounds rather clever. So saying something childish like "But they started it!" Or "oh, but look what they did!" , won't sound anything like so ...Trump-ish.

When news media challenges or criticizes an MP, the response will invariably be defensive in the form of an attack on the opposing party - but it will be done with enough sophistication to avoid it sounding like what it undoubtedly is. Childish name calling.

I know I am in the minority. Most people will vote for MPs who behave this way because it's the norm. They all do it, politicians have to defend themselves and expose the oppositions lies don't they?

No they don't!

Dirty defamatory politics doesn't help anyone. When politicians and public figures do it, its ugly, but worst of all it's clouds the mind of anyone who just wants to get a clear picture of what is going on and make a informed decision who to vote for. Even worse than that, these people are our leaders and this is the example they give us. This is how to behave and conduct yourself. You get caught red handed doing something you shouldn't, but rather than show remorse and apologise you try and make someone else look blacker than you and lay the blame at their door.

I really don't need the politicians to tell me who is bad and who is good.

Surely we can work out who is lying and which party didn't do what they promised they would. The news media interrogates them and that's their job. It doesn't matter that the media might have political bias or their own agenda. What's important is that their diligent questioning helps me make a judgement for myself.

Only a fool or a child, or Donald Trump uses mudslinging as a defence tactic.

So my guess is that a great chunk of people don't get a clear political picture before they vote.

They'll all vote for the one who talks the big talk and digs up the most dirt on the others. They'll read the tabloids and believe the lies and secretly think that they are all as bad as each other and it doesn't really matter who gets in, "except that one who wears the same tie as my uncle Dick, I like him".

Personally I'd be happy to vote for a grown up. I just don't see any.

Sigh.

Ortlieb Back Roller Classic Bicycle Panniers - Why did they fail?

Ortleib products have set the standards for many years in all things cycling and expedition. But after 3 weeks bicycle touring southern Italy, I now wonder if Ortleib standards are slipping - at least in terms of their ubiquitous Back Roller Classic rear pannier.

Bicycle panniers have to be strong and we all want them to be as light as possible. The challenge for manufactures like Ortlieb is making sure that strength isn't compromised in favour of lightweight materials. This is what I think might have happened, but let me give you a tiny bit of back story to help explain a comparison between Ortlieb panniers bought years apart.

I bought my trusted Ortlieb back roller panniers about 7 years ago in 2010 from a cycle shop in south England. Since then I have cycled over 8000 miles with them through Europe and beyond over all sorts of terrain and they have proved to be virtually indestructible, if not completely bullet proof!

My great friend and occasional cycling companion Nigel, bought his Ortlieb back roller panniers in 2015. The only obvious external difference is the bottom rack clip which, on the newer ones is adjustable without needing a screw driver. An improvement in usability for sure.

In 2015 we both flew to Georgia from our respective homes in England and Australia. We cycled from Tbilisi to Batumi over 14 days. This was the first time Nigel had used his (blue) panniers. The roads in Georgia often turned to gravel and rutted tracks, but all four of our Ortlieb panniers performed without complaint. This is the kind of benchmark reliability that cyclists all over the world have come to expect from Ortlieb products. They are made in Germany and they do what they promise to do - Vorsprung durch something or other.

We have just got home from a cycling tour of southern Italy. We rode 2 KTM bicycles from Rome down the beautiful coast line to Calabria. 600km or so of stunning roads hilly tracks.

While riding through the back streets of Naples we noticed that one of Nigel's panniers had come loose. We stopped to take a look and saw that one of the main screws holding the rail on had stripped right out of it's fixing.


This was the last thing we had expected to see. I'd never had any problems with my panniers, and we assumed both were constructed the same way.

My panniers had taken significantly more punishment than Nigel's over the last 7 years, so we suspected a design change might have compromised the strength of the new ones.

We decided to try and find out how it had happened by examining the fixings and comparing them to my older pannier fixings.

If it was a design weakness, then we would have to reinforce the rest of the fixings to make sure we didn't lose the pannier completely.

Bungee ropes and cable ties might come in handy.

Stopping in a Naples backstreet we discovered that there were some differences in design between my panniers and Nigel's newer ones.

Nigel's pannier rail fixing screws are held by a disc shaped plastic nut. Two of these have had their thread stripped by the screws being forced out. You can see the one of the screws below just after it came out, still with parts of the plastic thread that stripped from the nut.

On my older panniers this fixing is different.

I unscrewed my fixing to take a closer look that revealed what we'd suspected - a different fixing nut. This nut is deeper and evidently stronger.

I wonder if Ortlieb have reverted back to using this kind of nut in their latest models?

There was no way we could use the fixing now since the screw had stripped the thread out of it.

Nigel had some cable ties and used them to secure the pannier back to his bike. Hopefully this would reinforce the remaining 2 fixings.

A few miles later we noticed that the cable tie had come lose and the middle fixing had now also stripped out.

I decided to contact Ortlieb via twitter. Perhaps they could help us find a replacement on route.

In the meantime Nigel re attached the cable ties and then added bungee support to hug the panniers to the rack. This took the pressure off the cable ties and fixings to allowed us to continue cycling south.


We got a well intentioned twitter response from OrtliebUSA later the same day.

I was put in touch with Ortlieb in Germany by email.

I'm sure they did their best to help us out but it seemed that once the conversation moved to private emails, the public pressure was off and Ortleib in Europe failed to follow through with their promise of help. After one email asking us what our route was, we  heard nothing more.

Maybe there was nothing they could do without a dealer close to us?

Perhaps all they wanted to do was take the conversation away from social media?


Nigel's panniers just about survived the 3 week tour, held in place by cable ties and bungee supports.

I haven't seen a 2017 Ortlieb back roller close up so I don't know if this issue is resolved but Nigel's 2015 panniers are evidently not as robust as the ones I have from 2010.

It does seem very strange that the fixing nuts are so different. Why would Ortlieb change something that works so well?

Update 29th may. 

I am very happy to say that Ortlieb sent out replacement panniers to Nigel in Australia. 

His panniers were from a faulty 2014 batch and all fixings before and since are the same as the ones I have, which I highly recommend.

Thank you Rebecca M at Ortlieb for your great help and understanding dealing with this issue. 

Ducati Multistrada - Thanks For The Ride

About 10 years ago I went to buy my first motorbike. I had my eye on a shiny red Ducati 1198 sports bike. The manager of the shop gave me some good advice that day: "Don't buy a Ducati as your first bike." Why? I asked. "Because if you do, you won't be able to appreciate how good it is." And he was right. The Multistrada is my 3rd bike after a KTM 990 and a Honda CBR 600f and it's pedigree and superiority over both the KTM and Honda were undeniable. It's not always easy to explain exactly why something is better, sometimes it comes down to the way it makes you feel.

After 3 years living with the most exciting and thrilling motorbike I have ever riden, I recently sold it back to the shop. The descision to sell it back loses me about £7000. That's a lot of money to lose and I am certainly not well off, but that's the price of free choice.... oouch!

I can't explain why I sold it without first explaining the reason I ride motorbikes. Riding gives me freedom and adventure and a wind-through-my-hair abandon. I ride when the sun shines and when I need to get somewhere fast. I don't commute because the fun and thrills of riding must be protected.

Why did I sell it? 
For  a few reasons. The 15000 mile service cost me a whopping £2000 - ouch again!  I didn't trust in Italian electronics having had minor problems almost from new with the fuel guage and heated grips. This is a big bike with a lot of power and for most of the riding I do, its more than I need. In the Spanish mountains or Italian alps this bike is perfect, but on the narrow windy single track side roads that make up 90% of deepest Surrey, there is simply too much power to have the kind of fun I want. For me there is no point in 'cruising' around on a bike like this, there are other bikes that like to cruise. This bike is Ducati pedigree and needs to be riden to the edge by someone who looks for thrills in every turn.

Why I chose this bike
Because it is excitingto ride -  everytime! It's not a car on two wheels; it hasn't been tamed by german engineers and you have to stay engaged to ride it. Things I can't say about the BMW and Triumph bikes I tested first. The ubiquitous BMW GS 1200 is a fantastic machine and I can't fault it on paper, but riding is not done on paper. The BMW was as close as you can get to being a car on 2 wheels - very safe and very predictable. I was offered a 2 hour test ride on it but took it back after only 30 minutes riding because I was bored of the ride. Similarly for the Triumph Tiger: fantastic engine and a really great bike, great engine; but for me, just too easy and and I knew I would get bored with it.

Here is why I loved the Ducati
It's a Ducati, it's red. It growls like a bike should ( unlike the BMW or Tiger ) . This bike does everything extremely well. I can ride it like a sports bike or a tourer and it is equally happy. Despite is size I can flick it around easily whether I am on my own or touring fully loaded with a pillion on the back.  The ride is what you want it to be, just imagine what you want to do and the Ducati helps you do it.

This is what I didn't like
Too many electronics. This bike has four ride modes but I kept in 'Sports' mode at all times because I prefere to tame it myself while I ride.  The heated grips played up when they got wet, the fuel guage wasn't accurate and had to be repaced also , but thats it. The ABS and traction control were very good - german parts I think. 

Whats next?
Now I think it's time for something a bit more classic - a bike with minimal electronics and shaft drive to eliminate all that painful chain maintenance - maybe even a kick start?  A Moto Guzzi has caught my eye. Might also look at the BMW R9T - both are shaft drive. I won't get the cornering thrills I got with the Ducati but I might just find something else in a bike that lets me put both feet on the ground.

So what about the Brooks B17 saddle?

I'll keep this one skinny.

I got a  Brooks B17 leather saddle when I bought my touring bike. At first it was hard/firm and not at all comfortable compared to minimally padded saddles I'd alway used. I was assured that these leather saddles will get more comfortable with use/age  - as the leather moulds itself to the shape of ones arse bones.

They advise you (at Brooks) how to look after the saddle, suggesting how to protect it from rain where possible using neatsfoot oil or something like that. I'm sure that is good advice that will help extend the lifespan of the saddle.

Well, for 2000 miles I peddled with a not-all-that-comfortable bottom. Then one day at a campsite somewhere in France, I left my bike out in torrential overnight rain. In the morning the bike was sodden.

I set off on a very wet saddle and rode all day. By the end of that day my saddle had moulded into what is is now ( 5 years later) , an armchair comfortable ride. I have never once protected my saddle by preventing it getting wet. It's leather, leather is from animals, animals get wet. See my logic? My saddle may not be in A1 condition, but it is all-day comfortable and has no significant signs yet of wear and tear.( mostly because I turn the bike upside down to fix punctures etc, and the saddle scrapes on stones and concrete.

What makes it so comfortable?
It doesn't have a plastic base. Most modern saddles have plastic bases onto which padding is attached. 6 hours in the saddle on one of these and I feel like I've been sitting on something very hard. A simple leather saddle will never 'bottom out' because it doesn't have a bottom. It's that simple.

Maybe my B17 won't last a lifetime if I continue to treat it with less care and attention than advised by the experts. what's a lifetime anyway?

Classical Guitar - the Julian Bream way

For many years I thought that classical guitar was boring. It just sounded lifeless and too damn perfect. Not too many years ago I heard Julian Bream for the first time and I was instantly converted into a fan.

Music can't be represented by playing all the notes in the right order with technical perfection - that's what computers do, it has to have drama and shape. Julian Bream is a master of that. From what I understand, he didn't study the way most do, and came from playing jazz originally. Maybe thats what I  heard in his playing - some kind of freedom of expression that isn't necessarily on the page.

Expressing classical music well on a guitar is extremely hard. This is why I think there is still a huge void where celebrated classical guitarists should be. It's so hard, that there just aren't many people who have managed to do it well enough to be appreciated by classical music lovers and this means that the instrument still struggles to complete for attention.

Consider what classical guitarists need to do with each piece - aside from physically being able to play all the chords and notes of the piece - attempting to play with one hand what pianists do with two, and what orchestras do with many. The physical challenge is daunting. I think it was Segovia who first said: "the guitar has to be played like an orchestra" or something to the effect that each voice of the piece needs to be expressed as if it were a different orchestral instrument.

The first challenge I realized, is getting a reliable tone from the classical guitar for every note played. I'd have to say it has taken me 4 years of religious practise to be able to produce the sounds I have aspired to.

I started learning on a relatively cheap guitar and thought I had a good sound. Some time later I got my first hand made concert guitar and realized I had very little control over tone, texture and dynamic. There was nowhere to hide on this instrument and my sloppy technique was exposed. Mistakes I had got away with on my cheap guitar that had been hidden by the inadequacies of the cheap instrument, were now amplified by the new one. Every nuance was audible.

I realized that an instrument that is capable of expressing every naughty nuance also makes it possible to produce the tone and textures needed for expression. But I needed a much greater level of control in my right and left hands to do this, so I started again.

The main challenge for me was the right hand and fingernail shapes I needed to pluck the strings and produce good tone/volume. I've tried to learn to be sensitive to the subtleties of each voice[instrument] in the piece, as if each were being conducted. Bream did this beautifully. For example, the melody might need to be played at a higher volume to the mid chord voicing, with the bass notes at a lower volume to the lead voice but higher than the chord voice.

I think Julian Bream is to Classical guitar, what Ronnie O'Sullivan is to snooker. There are ,and have been many world class snooker players. But, only Ronnie O'Sullivan makes me want to actually watch the game - I think he brings 'jazz' into the sport like Bream does to Classical guitar music. Both traditionally quite stiff.

I can't sign off here without mentioning my classical concert guitars. I have a 2018 Brian Cohen, a 2011 Rohan Lowe and a 2012 Hauser copy also from Rohan. 

Jazz Guitar - How I improvise

How the hell to those guys do that?!  Thats the thought that first got me into jazz improvisation. Spontaneous composition, sometimes tuneful, sometimes not, but jazz improvisation to me is the musical freedom i have always craved.

I started studying jazz improvisation in 1994, over 20 years ago. I spent years figuring things out from different angles, transcribing solos from bebop legends and guitar legends a like trying to figure out what they were thinking and how they improvised.

I used to try think about each chord in a progression, so my solos could bebop their way through all the chords with tension and release in all the right places. This was a real brain strain and not that easy to execute musically.

Eventually I realized that I only needed 2 sounds to give myself real freedom to improvise musically - what I call 'Home' and  'Away' - I find this is a much more practical way to improvise and forces me to listen more to what is going on around me. 'Away' sounds can be diatonic[tension] or 'altered'[tension] but I tend to think of 'away' sounds as just 'altered' - non diatonic - because when I improvise jazz ,this simplistic method helps.

I've recorded this example video since it's the only way you can really know what all this theory actually sounds like.

In this clip I am playing roughly the same lines over Fm7 Bb7 to Ebmaj. I am focusing on using major scales only to achieve tension over the V chord. You wont' hear much resolution in this clip because I'm using a kind of 'delayed' resolution - what that means is rather than resolving to a note from the 1 chord (Ebmaj) , I might sometimes resolve to a b5 of the Ebmaj7 chord, just so I can stretch the tension a bit further.

If you have experienced ears, you'll hear the backing chords change at one point to a Gm - C7.  what I play over this is no different what I play over the Fm7 Bb7. I still use Eb major and side-step into E major for the tension ( I explain this further down).

.

Away

So, often when I play over a V chord I'll use a device called side-stepping or tri-tone substitute to get my altered tension, rather than using modes or particular scales. I just look for any chord that has the 'altered' notes of a Bb7 chord ( #5, b9, #9 etc.). That is what I'm doing mainly in this clip.

For example, look at the E major 7 chord, to see why this works so well over the Bb7 (V chord in Eb). Overlay the Emaj7 on the sound of a Bb7 chord, you'll notice that you hit both the b7 and the b9 of the Bb7, as well as the sus4. Sounds really good I think.

So this means that all I need is a major scale and I can make any sounds I need. I don't need to think about modes scales or any other fancy scales to get the fancy sounds I'm after.

This is a diatonic 1 V1 11 V in Eb: 

      Ebmj7 Cm7 Fm7 Bb7 

     But I might think:  Ebmj7 C7alt Fm7 Bb7alt  to improvise over.

The good news for me is that I can do this with one scale. I can play E major over both the C7 and the Bb dominant chords.

I like the sound of an Ebmj7 chord over the Bb7  and also over the C7 because it gives me the #5 and #9 of the C7 chord.

So then all I have to think is home (Eb major) and away ( E major ) and I have all the tension and release I need ove this  1 V1 11 V. On the guitar this is easy since I have to do is move the same scale shape up on fret.

Another device I use to get jazz tension over my V chord (Bb7) is to side-step one up from the V chord(Bb7). If I'm feeling lazy I can just play B major over the Bb like before. But I really like the sound of a B minor 9th arpeggio because I can pinpoint the #9 and b9 on my Bb7 chord, as well as the #5. A really great sounding tension that simulates the dominant 7 sharp 9 chord.

This is one of the things I love about jazz - even the theory is free! you have to learn all the textbook harmony first, but when it comes to playing, I can apply the harmony any way I like.

Here are some chords I think about to play 'away' over the Bb7 V chord.

• E major7
• B major7
• Bdim
• Bm9
• Abm6
• Db9
• Fm7b5

yes, the last 3 chords are the same apart from the roots.

Home

So what's left? the 'Home' sound. well, that is much easier. Major chord, major scale, minor chord, minor scales. But what if all I have is my major scales? Then I use the major scale over minor chords ( Ebmaj over Fm7 or Gm7 etc.).  I don't major scales as as a replacement for harmonic minor and melodic minor sounds, just as my replacement for natural[relative] minor when I have the key harmony straight.

For example, my minor chord is Fm7, so I play Eb major scale because Fm7 is the 11 chord in Eb harmony.

One other thing I like to do over static major chords is play the major scale of the major chord a fourth up from my root because I know it has the b5 in it.

For example, take the Eb major chord. I sometimes play a Bb major scale over it so I get the classic b5 sounds.  It's the A natural from the Bb scale that is the b5 in the Eb scale.

I suppose it comes down to this - there ain't no rules in jazz, only guides to help us learn the language. It's all about how we use harmonic tension and resolution and how musical we are. Its a free language and a never ending journey and I love it.

Hope this is interesting for someone other than me. Happy to answer any theory questions you might have.

Good luck!

Easy Peelers

I bought some mandarins recently from my favourite supermarket. But they weren't called mandarins, they were called "Easy Peelers" . Why would a supermarket like Waitrose pander to the kind of people who want everything to be easy? 

I mean, what's wrong with a little effort - a bit of an incline before free wheeling down the other side - a bit of a struggle, a bit of a challenge. Surely dues must be paid before the most salubrious rewards can be lavished!? No? Of course they bloody should! 

Well I for one am very happy to say these mandarins were actually the most difficult to peel small orange fruit I've come accross in a long time. They were deliciously sweet and sharp, well worth the effort and mess it took me to peel them. In fact, I'd have to say that without the peeling challenge, I probably wouldn't have expected them to taste so good.

What I've learned from this experience is that I really like Mandarins, preferably organic ones. The problem is that without my reading glasses I can't tell whether the ones on the supermarket shelf are mandarins or tangerines because all I can see is the big label: EASY PEELERS - which they are not.

I hope my Clementines mandarins and satsumas continue to be difficult to peel. 

It's not the mis leading labeling that gets me, its what EASY PEELERS say about people.

When I see the 'Easy Peelers' label on Clementines, Tangerines, Maderines and Satsumas alike, it reminds me that I am living in a society that wants everything 'easy'. It's alreay easy - I mean, we get honey in jars, meat in packets and milk in cartons - isn't that enough? 

If my madarin tastes amazing, then I don't want the peeling to be EASY - I just doesn't feel right.
It feels good to pay for rewards. I don't want to cycle down a mountain unless I work hard to get to the top first. This is how things should be. Easy is lazy, easy is decadent, easy is lackadaisical. I just don't like it.

Being Single - not for everyone?

How long can I stubbornly remain single before it starts affecting my wellbeing?

Think back to what made you happy as a 7 year old child. -  can those things still make you happy?

I don't mean the toys and material posessions you would have played with,  I mean the other intangible things like what you saw, where you went - swimming, fishing, cycling, dancing, running, climbing trees etc. and the things you wondered about - your curiosity for life.

I've had 2 long term relationships (10yr+), one of which was a first love; and 2 or 3 others that lasted anything from a few months to a couple of years. In between those relationships I've been single.

When I think back to the single times, I remember that I was mostly happy and probably more active during those times. To me being more 'active' means being more driven, braver, more adventurous generally and more curious about more things, possible more productive too.

Obviously for some of that 'single' time, I was unhappy or sad because I had recenly separated from a companion - something I think we all want and some need. But mostly I think I prefer myself when I am by myself - more sociable, more curious, more driven.

Today I am single and it is more familiar territory to me than otherwise. I do hope I find a companion one day - I sometimes dream about it - but this hope is more of a fuel than a fire. Fuel is more useful to me than fire.

We were all single as children, we didn't need a wife or husband then. We had parents and friends to keep us company. Why did we change?

I understand that I may never find a partner but the most important thing I suppose, is that I hope I will. I'ts just one of many life dreams I have - but I conclude that these are things that fuel me to live my life in the richest way I can.