The Enemy of Good is Better

Steve Aoki's and his epigenetic aging serves as a lesson for those thinking that Bryan Johnson's approach is the only way to go.

(Picture courtesy of Bryan Johnson’s LinkedIn)

The quote in the title of this article is attributed (at least in my consciousness) to a lecturer of mine from my podiatry degree, Dr Steve Urry. It was said in reference to making of orthotics by us students, in short, we were pretty good at making pretty good orthoses for patients but in the pursuit of better we often ruined them. This has some corollaries to things like the Pareto principle (aka the 80/20 rule), in that the last 80% of the work students would improve these orthoses from good to ‘perfect’ (the last 20%). In reality for these orthoses that was mostly aesthetic rather than functional and our risk of messing them up was significant. This teaching has stuck with me though I have seen the pattern repeatedly in the health and performance space.

I want to make it clear at the outset that this is NOT meant to be a criticism, or ‘shot’ at Bryan Johnson - I love what he is doing (click his name if you don’t know who he is). We need these people in the world, tinkerers with skin in the game (literally, check out his before and after pictures). That said, the absolute dedication and monk-like existence he is leading strike me as a potentially counter productive means of achieving optimal longevity.

I recently read this article about Steve Aoki who, for those unfamiliar, is a world famous DJ (not quite the life you’d expect for someone who’s top 30 in the world of slowest epigenetic aging… Yes, that’s a thing, there’s a leaderboard). I thought this served as a great example of the contrast between ‘perfect’ (what even is that), which is what Bryan is striving for, vs something more ‘balanced’ (heck, what is that!?) approach to longevity. This in turn serves as a lesson that could be applied in other areas of life too.

Before we get into some specifics it bears noting that not everyone believes the tests used to assess aging rate are particularly good. They certainly measure many factors that are associated with aging, but also show some significant day to day variation (and maybe this is ideal because we age differently on different days - sports fans will attest to this I am sure). So, for the sake of learning let’s assume these test are accurate and reliable (and that they did the same tests - there are a variety but lets not get bogged down in the weeds).

One lens I often use for understanding things when there are somewhat disparate approaches to the same outcome (this is a particularly helpful in health and performance) is looking at consistencies and discrepancies. Or, what is common and what is different, between approaches.

What Do the Two do Similarly

Both are very wealthy and educated. There may be degrees of difference in these factors between them but on a world’s scale these two are in the top echelon from a a wealth perspective and likely educationally too. If they aren’t (and I am not going to dig into their academic records - education is more than degrees anyway, take it from a guy with multiple) they have the networks and finances to engage those who do (Steve for instance consulted with the world’s experts in his longevity pursuit).

Steve and Bryan both seem to have found their callings and derive significant meaning from them. Again, this is a very much outside-looking-in viewpoint and I may well be wrong but both are very committed. Likewise they seem to be very passionate about their craft, engaging with it to a high degree.

Stress and lifestyle. Whilst both of them no doubt have stress, and portions of their lifestyles that are chaotic, they both focus on optimising what they can in their lifestyle and creating a level of stability. Steve, for instance, minimises travel and takes longer residencies (plays repeated shows in one location for longer than most DJs). This level of stability in lifestyle is key to coping with stress as most people who track their HRV would tell you.

Ultimately they both mostly do a good job with the big rocks when it comes to longevity. Those rocks being: exercise, nutrition, stress management, community and sleep (the last one is a bit more challenging for Steve given his profession).

Where do They Differ?

It’s not much of a stretch to say the biggest between these two is in sleep. Whilst the article linked above details some of Steve’s efforts in this field, it concedes sleep is the area of his biggest need/weakness in the longevity realm. That said, this reflects something bigger picture, and the genesis of this article; Brian’s attempt at perfection in contrast to Steve’s efforts - more akin to “best effort” or “best attempt”.

Another difference is enjoyment. Anyone who’s seen Steve’s shows or video of them can tell the guy just loves what he’s doing (I mean he throws full cakes at people - with deadly accuracy how is he not having a blast), whereas reading about Bryan you will read things like sleep is a bigger priority than spending time with his kids of an evening. I am sure Bryan enjoys much of his life, and his pursuit of longevity itself, but I think there are likely degrees of difference in terms of pure ‘fun’ (again, however this is measured or whatever this actually is). And maybe the difference in their fun is just type 1 vs type 2 fun rather than the amount, who am I to judge. Regardless I think there may be something in this - read on below.

Net Results

This is something that I have been thinking about for quite a while, particularly as a result of tracking HRV and sleep data. You will almost universally read that alcohol is detrimental to both HRV and sleep, and whilst this is true almost all of the time, it’s certainly been the opposite for me at times. In certain contexts, both factors have improved significantly despite consuming some alcohol. The only way that I can make sense of this is is looking at the total net of the situation; sharing lovely wine, in a really enjoyable setting with great company is not the same as having a pre-mixed, sugary alcoholic drink at home alone because you feel you need it to cope with whatever tough situation you’ve just experienced.

How does this pertain to Steve and Bryan?

Well perhaps the suboptimal lifestyle factors that Steve has to undertake have a net situational positive. That is, maybe, the net result of his gigs or lifestyle is a positive as a result of the meaning he derives from them or his enjoyment of them. He’s also very physically active during the gigs and perhaps this is part of it too.
But could the converse also be true for Bryan?
My hunch is yes. That is, in striving for perfection, the net result of the situation may be a little less ideal. The stress involved in being ‘perfect’ may be creating a less than optimal situation. For instance perhaps lack of enjoyment of eating the same things every day vs more variety or the occasional slightly less healthy food choice is ultimately not quite the healthiest possible outcome. Where this crossover lies is hard to say and it’s likely individual - but if anyone can find it it’s probably Bryan.

What Does this Mean for Your Health Choices?

I think there are a few lessons here:

• Perfection is probably not a realistic goal nor optimal situation (and where the crossover lies is probably personality related - the more anxious, perfectionistic types probably need a little more flexibility in their optimal).

• Use data to inform your understanding - it’s hard to understand the situation if you don’t have a way to track it. Blood testing is great (and important) but is usually a medium term time horizon, whereas wearables can often give a shorter term time horizon for feedback. Don’t forget subjective experience here but it’s not the only biomarker (take 6 months off drinking and tell me your subjective experience before this, of feeling ‘normal’ or ‘good’ was accurate).

• If you are making or have made a suboptimal decision, the stress of beating yourself up over it is counter productive and likely adds fuel to the fire.

*Note this is not meant to be misconstrued as some form of health nihilism, you should absolutely be striving to make healthy choices but balancing this with optimising/minimising the stress associated with the pursuit.

What Does this Mean for Performance?

Many of the lessons above translate directly to performance, that is, executing to the best of your ability is key as is trying to train optimally. But being able to shake off bad performances in training or competition and committing to executing training well rather than trying to be perfect or use the perfect program is key.
Most coaches would tell you that they’ve seen great success as a result of athletes training training really well on suboptimal programs and vice versa. On a similar note, during periods of injury, or suboptimal circumstances from a training perspective, doing whatever is possible to the best of your ability is likely more beneficial than most would think. So if you’re travelling for work and can only work out in your hotel room - don’t underestimate the value in this.
On this note, I have plans to write an article on detraining timelines - so subscribe above to be on the list when this comes out if it interests you.

What About in a Work Context?

Podiatry examples aside, when reading advice from creative people and those in the startup world, you regularly see advice to the effect of “done is better than perfect”. This is particularly true for those perfectionists amongst us (Hello my fellow Type A personalities!). Surely there is a stage of career aspect to this too, that is, earlier on when less experienced you may be better of triple checking but as you progress things may be best served with speed over accuracy when consequence is low and/or iteration is possible.

References

1. Chetty R, Stepner M, Abraham S, Lin S, Scuderi B, Turner N, Bergeron A, Cutler D. The Association Between Income and Life Expectancy in the United States, 2001-2014. JAMA. 2016 Apr 26;315(16):1750-66. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.4226. Erratum in: JAMA. 2017 Jan 3;317(1):90. PMID: 27063997; PMCID: PMC4866586.

2. Lleras-Muney A. EDUCATION AND INCOME GRADIENTS IN LONGEVITY: THE ROLE OF POLICY. Can J Econ. 2022 Feb;55(1):5-37. doi: 10.1111/caje.12582. Epub 2022 Mar 29. PMID: 37987018; PMCID: PMC10659761.