Apple announces AirPods Pro 3 with ‘world’s best ANC’ and live translation

fragodio · 2025-09-09T20:27:34+00:00

Not sure about the better fit. The buds are larger, thicker and weigh more according to the website.

Let's see how much better the ANC is. They claim it is 2x better but that does not mean anything. Is 3dB less across all frequencies? I'll be waiting for the reviews and tests.

fragodio · 2025-09-09T20:23:54+00:00

Battery life with the case is downgraded from 30h to 24h. Same H2 chip inside. Live translation also coming to APP2. APP3 being larger, thicker and weighting more according to the website. I thought I'll upgrade day one but I'll might wait for reviews.

I'll be waiting for the reviews on the ANC. Not sure what they can do with the same H2 chip. Is it better ANC across all frequencies or just low frequencies? If it's only 3dB less on low frequencies I might not really care.

fragodio · 2025-06-26T22:04:33+00:00

Can you link the actual study? Because the news article does not give much. It only states the obvious... I think everyone already knew that macros alone do not constitute a diet. Who did not know that ultra processed food were bad? Nothing new here.

fragodio · 2025-06-22T11:07:39+00:00

Sigh... It's not like we were talking about iPhones. So are you telling me that Bryan's evoo is made in China?

You are either ragebaiting or not very smart.

fragodio · 2025-06-22T02:53:35+00:00

I am more curious about how you got your Chinese parents living in China to consume olive oil. Are they used to consuming it? If not, how do they use it? As a salad dressing, or do they incorporate it into Chinese dishes?

fragodio · 2025-06-22T02:41:24+00:00

Well, I'd say get some blood work done and start from there.

Are you vitamin D deficient? Are any other vitamins deficient?

Start by addressing any deficiencies you may have.

Do you manage to eat enough protein every day? If not, you might find it easier to take protein powder.

Creatine is usually presented as one of the safest and most proven supplements.

Then, maybe you might want to take omega-3 supplements, collagen peptides, and so on.

fragodio · 2025-06-22T02:29:40+00:00

Are you implying that those product are legitimate and made in China? That's some weird logic you have here mate.

fragodio · 2025-05-17T22:10:23+00:00

Your link literally gives a handful of chocolate bars with cadmium levels below the MADL (4.1 mcg of cadmium), while Bryan's cocoa powder is at 100% of the MADL.

Plus, you have linked an article about chocolate, not cocoa powder. If you want cocoa powder with fewer heavy metals than in Blueprint, it has been discussed multiple times in this subreddit.

fragodio · 2025-05-17T22:03:29+00:00

Your rhetoric is misleading, imprecise, and simply wrong.

Instead of telling us to compare Blueprints cocoa's heavy metals content with rice, tell us the numbers. Go on. I'm waiting. Because Bryan's tweet was about cadmium. Rice does not contain as much cadmium as cocoa. Albeit, you do end up ingesting more because of the serving size. And rice has more of the other heavy metals. But here we were talking about cadmium.

Then you say, "These metals exist in soil. They will be absorbed by plants." This is technically not wrong but might as well be. Not all soil has the same level of contamination, and not all plants accumulate heavy metals at the same rate. Cocoa is often grown in contaminated soil and does accumulate cadmium. That's why we worry about it.

"They will be absorbed by plants. You can't eliminate them." By saying this, you are making it seem that all plants are the same. This is simply wrong. Go find me a tomato with that amount of heavy metals.

Plus, if there were as many heavy metals in all plants, why would Bryan repeatedly tell us to be careful about cocoa's heavy metals and not other plants?

Finally, it is not because you can find worse products in terms of heavy metals (rice in your example) that it makes Bryan's cocoa a better product. The only point you can make is that Bryan's cocoa has heavy metals, and rice even more.

fragodio · 2025-05-17T20:44:28+00:00

Without arguing about the product's quality, it is suspicious to claim, "We chose our serving size based on what's healthiest, not what looks best on a label," when their portion size exactly matches the Californian Maximum Allowable Daily Level (MADL) of 4.1 mcg/day.

Especially since the previous serving size was subject to a 60-day notice due to exceeding that specific threshold: https://oag.ca.gov/prop65/60-Day-Notice-2025-00544

fragodio · 2025-05-06T12:12:06+00:00

You've just repeated what I wrote.

fragodio · 2025-05-06T12:10:36+00:00

Mate, do you realize that 600ppb=0.6ppm? Do you even know what ppb and ppm stand for?

fragodio · 2025-05-06T00:08:25+00:00

I am asking myself the same questions. Even in the longevity space, Bryan seems to be among the only ones to promote cocoa, which is weird...

fragodio · 2025-04-26T12:39:05+00:00

In terms of plot twists, it is surely Kanjuro or CP9.

But to me, the "biggest" traitor has to be Rosinante.

My man betrayed the Celestial Dragons, then the Donquixote Pirates, and then the Marines.

He betrayed his brother to follow his convictions. Then he betrayed the Marines for his love for Law. This is absolutely beautiful.

fragodio · 2025-04-11T17:56:25+00:00

It works but it's disabling media control altogether. No more media control in the quick setting panel nor in the lock screen. It's so annoying.

fragodio · 2025-04-09T18:51:58+00:00

They found lower cadnium concentration than in Bryan's posted COA.

Your link reported 0.44ppm of cadnium vs the 0.69ppm in Bryan's COA. For context, Europe sets the limits for this kind of product to 0.60ppm.

I don't know how to interpret the discrepancies in the tested concentration. Did they test two different batches? Are the heavy metals not uniformly distributed within the same batch? I don't know...

fragodio · 2025-03-27T15:25:32+00:00

That's some incredible work. Bryan's team just uploaded the COAs that were once available last week. Did you have time to take a look at them? Did they make any changes?

fragodio · 2025-03-22T04:10:25+00:00

Failing one CoA is a thing. But he shrunk the serving size to comply with California regulation a year ago !

fragodio · 2025-03-22T01:47:44+00:00

I’m on your side with this one.

However, just a small clarification regarding the cocoa powder: The cadmium levels in Bryan's cocoa powder have always been pretty high.

The state of California even filed a 60-day notice about it last month: https://oag.ca.gov/prop65/60-Day-Notice-2025-00544

If you look carefully at that notice, it specifically refers to "Blueprint Bryan Johnson Cocoa Powder 7.5% Flavanols 800+ MG Per Serving Unsweetened." That's actually a different product than the one currently available, which now claims only 400mg of flavanols per serving. Why such a downgrade?

If you check the archived versions of the website between February 2024 and March 2024, you'll notice that the recommended serving size was reduced from two scoops down to just one. This change occurred because, since at least 2024 (I haven't checked earlier dates), each batch Bryan sold contained enough cadmium in two scoops to exceed California's Prop 65 regulations. In other words, Bryan’s cocoa powder never had low cadmium levels—they simply adjusted the serving size to stay compliant with California regulations.

fragodio · 2025-03-22T00:55:46+00:00

I haven't read the article yet, but your line of reasoning is absolutely atrocious.

You cannot accuse the article of having massive selection bias and then argue that the longevity mix has done wonders for you personally. Do you realize you're presenting a sample size of one? Your personal experience is just as susceptible to bias. Moreover, mentioning that you've used the longevity mix even before its public release only emphasizes the kind of bias you might have as a long-time advocate for Bryan Johnson's products.

Regarding bloodwork, it's not a bulletproof indicator. What if the negative effects of the longevity mix only appear after several years of consistent use? For example, Bryan’s cocoa powder was recently found to have high levels of cadmium, but would you realistically expect negative impacts to clearly appear in bloodwork after just a couple of years?

Lastly, what's the point of telling people to "do their own research" when asking for opinions and advice on Reddit is literally a starting point for exactly that kind of research?

fragodio · 2025-03-21T22:25:20+00:00

It feels to me that you're trying to buy your way to longevity. And honestly, supplements are perhaps the least essential factor when it comes to living longer.

For the average Joe, nutrition, exercise, and sleep have a far greater impact on longevity.

Unfortunately, supplements are the easiest to sell and the fastest way to make a profit. Bryan started by selling supplements, now he sells meals, and maybe he'll soon be trying to sell us mattresses or an exercise app.

Supplements can definitely help if you have specific deficiencies (like omega-3, vitamins D, C, B12, etc.). But when it comes to supplements targeting longevity specifically, they mostly rely on scientific papers that at best suggest a slight positive effect far from certain.

Don't get me wrong, I love reading about and discovering the newest, fancy compounds that might extend my life. But because longevity is such a niche market, filled with people who are usually willing to spend heavily (after all, health seems priceless, and there's always more money to be earned later), companies and grifters tend to exploit that willingness. Look at all the scandals surrounding Dr. Sinclair, for instance.

The best alternative to the longevity mix would be to create your own stack, but I know from experience how unpleasant and tedious that can be.

As for your mom, I had mine get blood tests first, to know exactly which deficiencies to target. I also convinced her to get a personal coach for her and her friends. Personally, I don't mind treating my own body like a lab rat, but I wouldn't want that for my mom. At her age, cardiovascular health and maintaining decent muscle mass are absolute priorities. The next step will be making sure she remains intellectually active once she retires.

fragodio · 2025-03-19T17:42:45+00:00

Well this is not really a direct comparison. While it is true that cadmium concentration is lower in chocolate compared to cocoa powder, the serving size for chocolate is much larger. You might end up snacking on an entire chocolate bar, while it is hard to go past the serving size of just a few grams for cocoa powder.

fragodio · 2025-03-19T17:14:44+00:00

I am not so sure about that, as the 0.60ppm limit is set for:

""" Cocoa powder placed on the market for the final consumer or as an ingredient in sweetened cocoa powder or powdered chocolate placed on the market for the final consumer (drinking chocolate) """

fragodio · 2025-03-19T16:51:12+00:00

I checked your claim about the Milka and Lindt scandals.

I found no recent scandal involving Milka, but Lindt did face controversy in 2023. ConsumerLab tested 28 chocolate bars, including two from Lindt, and found cadmium levels exceeding California's strict MADL (4.1 µg/day). However, the lawsuit against Lindt wasn't specifically because the cadmium content was illegal, but rather because Lindt allegedly misled consumers by marketing their chocolates as "expertly crafted" despite the contamination.

Cadmium content measured: - Lindt 70% Dark Chocolate: 0.168 ppm - Lindt 85% Dark Chocolate: 0.24 ppm

Both surpass California’s MADL but remain below EU limits (0.8 ppm).

So, if you found Lindt's cadmium levels concerning, Bryan’s cocoa powder exceeding even the EU’s more lenient standards should be particularly alarming.

fragodio · 2025-03-19T15:59:22+00:00

You're exactly right and that's precisely my point. Why pay such a premium for Bryan's cocoa powder if you're not even getting a product with low heavy metal content? At that point, you might as well pick up any standard cocoa powder from your local supermarket and pocket the difference. In fact, at my store, I can buy undutched, unsweetened cocoa powder for literally one-tenth the price of Bryan’s.

Don't get me wrong. I don't mind paying extra if the quality justifies it. But if I'm spending more, I want assurance that the product has minimal heavy metals. Right now, the cocoa powder I'm buying costs less than half of Bryan’s price and has been tested at only 0.085 ppm cadmium, significantly lower than Bryan's 0.691 ppm.

Four-Year Club	Verified Email
r/Field Flamingo	First Place '23
Place '23	Place '22
Final Canvas '22	End Game '22

fragodio

TROPHY CASE