Cells communicate in many ways—electrical, chemical, mechanical—but one of the most powerful, the most elegant, is through peptides. Peptides hold a unique position in this conversation of life. They are the whispers and the shouts, the handshakes and the signals, coordinating an orchestra that makes us who we are.

Practitioners are forced into the grey and persecuted at will. This mirrors the analogy of a highway officer who stops one driver for a minor infraction while allowing others to pass unchallenged – ostensibly due to non-risk related characteristics of the driver in question - race. In healthcare, the implications are equally serious.

It is time to recognize that different types of interventions require different levels of evidence. Administering a synthetic enzymatic toxin—something never before present in human environments—may indeed require multiple randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses before widespread adoption. By contrast, restoring a physiologic nutrient deficiency does not fall into the same category of risk and should not be held to the same evidentiary threshold.

That’s the realm of epigenetics—a dynamic, responsive layer of regulation that governs how the genome is read. Epigenetic factors turn genes on and off, modulate their expression, and ultimately shape the proteins that drive function and form. This regulation is profoundly influenced by the environment, lifestyle, diet, stress, circadian rhythms, and even social interactions.

The dominant human mind is no longer young; it is mature — and increasingly elderly. Yet our healthcare systems, economic frameworks, governance structures and social norms were established in a context where youth drove demand, innovation and decision-making. It is worth reflecting on how far we have drifted from those original design parameters — and what that means for future systems planning and the pace of change going forward.

If we do nothing, the result will be a slow but devastating filter…… But our friends in the biomedical sciences may be a beacon of hope…

Do these powers actually protect the public — or do they protect the regulator from scrutiny?

Here lies the paradox: it is the regulator, not the profession, that is suffering a crisis of confidence.

Defeating aging will not be a single intervention. It will require investment, planning and courage.

I support this movement not only because it restores agency to both doctor and patient, but because it acknowledges what many avoid: the mounting burden of environmental toxicity, poor urban design, ultra-processed foods, and social disconnection as key contributors to modern disease and suffering. These factors impose not only human costs but enormous strain on public health budgets.

Today, I can hear the headline and tell you the outlet. I can see the spin and name the editor. Tell me the reporter, and I’ll tell you the narrative. What we consume as “news” is often preloaded with opinion, curated to echo the worldview of its audience. Objectivity has become quaint; tribalism sells better.

The health outcomes of a population reflect the efficacy of the public health systems and regulatory structures. While incoming leaders, including the new CEO of AHPRA, acknowledge challenges in implementation and resourcing, I’m not sure we’ve fully recognised that systems errors — not just surface-level or budget-driven issues — may be at play. If these deeper structural issues remain unaddressed, it becomes harder to fix the symptomatic problems that we all see.

Nowhere is this more visible than in healthcar regulation. Medical boards and public health agencies rigorously scritinize doctors who prescribe medicinal cannabis - even when prescribed legally, ethically, and with proper training……

‘Chronic Cumulative Exposure to Non Lethal Environemental Toxicity’ CCENLET - not nearly as catchy as the illness?

In early human trials, some agents showed promise in increasing muscle volume. For example, ACE-083, an intramuscular myostatin inhibitor, led to localized muscle growth in patients with neuromuscular disease. Other agents like domagrozumab and taldefgrobep alfa showed similar results—more muscle, better biomarkers. But here's the catch.,,,,,,,

the Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) and Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG) framework has produced a narrow, top-down model of care. While this system has undoubtedly improved consistency and documentation, it has also coincided with a healthcare landscape increasingly shaped by corporate priorities, not patient outcomes.

For healthcare providers, recognising this need is central to modern patient care. For patients, engaging in wellness strategies is no longer optional—it is a responsible, science-aligned response to modern life. Protocols can be developed and delivered at every level of care.

To simply wait for disease to declare itself is to miss the entire point of modern longevity and functional medicine. We must now become proactive custodians of biology — identifying early signs of cellular dysfunction, supporting detoxification pathways, and improving the body’s internal communication networks (paracrine, endocrine, and beyond).

Metformin is safe, cheap, already approved for diabetes. It prevents chronic disease and even ageing. Yet it cannot overcome the regulatory barriers to approval for this indication. What does this say about regulatory approval?

The blanked fear around testosterone may no longer be justified…

Emerging therapies, often used in integrative, functional, or boutique clinical settings, are targeting these mechanisms. Therapies that include nutritional and peptide interventions, microbiome modulation, detoxification protocols, precision supplementation, and regenerative strategies are showing remarkable promise. But they remain largely excluded from mainstream care.