{"id":1892,"date":"2026-08-27T15:39:31","date_gmt":"2026-08-27T15:39:31","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/quickening.zapto.org\/wordpress\/?p=1892"},"modified":"2026-09-01T14:00:29","modified_gmt":"2026-09-01T14:00:29","slug":"14-philosophy","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/quickening.zapto.org\/wordpress\/?p=1892","title":{"rendered":"14. Philosophy of Immortality"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

What it means to Live Forever<\/em><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n

“There is no reason to suppose that a man whose hair is grey and whose face is wrinkled has lived a long life \u2014 he has merely existed for a long time.”<\/em><\/p>\n\u2014 Seneca, quoted in Stanis\u0142aw Lem’s 1959 novel on AI and information control<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

The supplements work. The exercise works. The diet works. The sleep architecture works. The evidence for all of it has been assembled in the preceding thirteen chapters with primary literature citations and the honesty to demand proof.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

None of it happens without a prior decision.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The decision that your life is worth extending. That decision is not biochemistry. It is philosophy. Every intervention in this book is downstream of a choice that the book itself cannot make for you \u2014 the choice to begin the journey at all.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This chapter is about that choice. It is the most important chapter in this book. It is ultimately the reason the book was written.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

Longevity Escape Velocity<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Before the objections, before the philosophy, before the personal narrative \u2014 the concept that has organized this entire project since the beginning.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Longevity escape velocity is the point at which medical progress adds more than one year of remaining life expectancy for every calendar year that passes. The physics analogy is exact: just as a rocket needs to reach escape velocity to break Earth’s gravitational pull, medical science must reach LEV to outpace the biological pull of aging. The key insight is that we do not need to solve aging all at once. Fixing the easier forms of cellular damage \u2014 what this book has documented across thirteen chapters \u2014 adds an extra ten or twenty healthy years. That extra time gives researchers the runway to develop advanced therapies for the harder-to-repair damage before old age catches up. The horizon rolls forward. The question is whether you can stay functional long enough to reach the next horizon.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Our longevity rocket has 3 stages:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Stage 1<\/strong> \u2014 the booster. Gets off the ground. Overcomes the initial inertia of aging \u2014 the protocol, the lifestyle, the supplement stack. Without Stage 1 you never leave the ground. With it you are airborne but will eventually crash back down to Earth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Stage 2<\/strong> \u2014 orbital insertion is a steady state where centrfugal force equals gravity. The analogy to longevity: maintaining biological function at maximum lifespan without decline \u2014 squaring the curve completely, dying at 120 without deterioration but still dying at 120. The senolytics clear the cells. The protocol addresses all twelve hallmarks. But the maximum lifespan ceiling is intact. This is considerably better than the current average of 76, but it is not escape velocity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Stage 3 <\/strong>\u2014 escape velocity to leave orbit and escape Earth’s gravity well. Where the rate of medical progress exceeds the rate of aging. When advancements can undo aging and restore youth. LEV achieved.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Biogerontologist Aubrey de Grey formally coined the term in a 2004 peer-reviewed paper in PLoS Biology: “Escape Velocity: Why the Prospect of Extreme Human Life Extension Matters Now.” The mathematical concept \u2014 which he initially called “actuarial escape velocity” \u2014 describes the point at which your probability of dying this year falls faster than calendar time advances. De Grey estimates a 50% probability that humanity reaches LEV in the late 2030s, largely driven by advances in regenerative medicine and artificial intelligence. The late 2030s is eleven to thirteen years from now.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The concept did not begin with de Grey. Robert Anton Wilson wrote “Next Stop, Immortality” in 1978. The physics analogy, the rolling horizon, the idea that technology might outpace aging before any individual alive in 1978 died \u2014 all of it was already there, circulating in futurist communities before it had peer-reviewed language attached.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When I read Wilson’s essay not long after he wrote it, I recognized the trajectory. The acceleration of scientific understanding of aging was already visible in the primary literature. The decision to begin the protocol was partly an investment in being alive when the horizon rolled forward far enough.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is a peculiarity of aging that the young cannot understand and the old forget to mention. Time accelerates. The year that felt endless at ten feels like a month at sixty-six. The decade that seemed impossibly distant in 1982 is now the near-term future. When this protocol began, in the early years of Ronald Reagan’s presidency, the late 2030s was further away than the entire span of the author’s life at that point. It seemed science fiction. It is now eleven years away \u2014 a distance that will arrive with the same shocking suddenness that 2026 has arrived from 1980.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The late 2030s. Do the arithmetic for your own age. The question that transforms this from abstract philosophy to urgent personal decision:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Could this happen in my lifetime?<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

If the answer is possibly, and for anyone under 80 reading this book the answer is possibly, then everything that follows in this chapter becomes immediately personal rather than abstractly philosophical.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

No, we are not immortal yet. The question is whether you can live long enough to reach a future where that becomes possible.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

Nothing in Life Requires That It End<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Before the objections, a more fundamental observation about what aging actually is in the context of biology as a whole.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The bristlecone pine has been alive for five thousand years and shows no signs of stopping. The glass sponge has been filtering seawater for 15,000 years. Pando is the name given to a single clonal colony of quaking aspen in Utah; 40,000 genetically identical trees sharing one root system has been spreading for an estimated 80,000 years. A meadow of seagrass off the coast of Ibiza is a monoclonal colony growing for the past 100,000 years. That is older than human civilization by a factor of ten. This single organism has been quietly photosynthesizing while every human empire rose and fell above it. The amoeba, that most ancient of eukaryotes from 750 million years ago, reproduces by dividing. There is no death written into its biology, only the continuous propagation of life into more life.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Aging as mammals experience it is not a biological imperative. It is an evolutionary strategy, adopted under conditions that no longer exist, that we are now in the early stages of understanding well enough to circumvent. The question is not whether life has to end. The question is whether you can outlast the strategy long enough to reach the toolkit that makes it optional.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Consider the germline. The germ cells in your body carry an unbroken lineage of continuous cellular reproduction stretching back to the first eukaryotes \u2014 never aging, never senescing, simply dividing and continuing. The germline is already immortal. It has been immortal for billions of years. What ages and dies is the soma \u2014 the body built by evolution to carry the immortal line through one more reproductive cycle and then be discarded.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The mechanism by which the germline maintains this continuity has just been clarified. A 2026 Nature paper sequencing sperm from multiple donors found that roughly a quarter to a third of all gene conversion events in sperm arise before meiosis \u2014 in the spermatogonia undergoing mitotic division before entering meiosis. The pre-meiotic germline actively repairs DNA damage through gene conversion at fragile genomic sites, passing the corrected sequence to the next generation. The immortal line maintains itself through continuous active repair. The soma ages because the same investment in maintenance is not made.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Aging is not a property of life. It is a property of bodies that evolution built as temporary vehicles for the part of life that never dies. Sexual reproduction added the capacity to change and adapt across generations without breaking the line’s continuity \u2014 the immortal germline gaining the flexibility to meet new environments while remaining, at its core, the same unbroken thread of living matter it has always been.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The longevity project does not ask biology to do something unprecedented. It asks the soma to match what the germline has always been.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

The Objections<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The objections to life extension divide into two entirely different categories that deserve entirely different responses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The societal objections \u2014 overpopulation, immortal dictators, inequality, stagnation, progress requires death \u2014 treat the individual’s decision to live longer as a political act requiring collective justification. The personal objections \u2014 boredom, fear of extended frailty, uncertainty about purpose \u2014 are questions the individual asks themselves about whether longer life is actually worth wanting.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The personal objections are the most serious. The person who decides they are old has made the most consequential health decision of their life. The societal objections are dismissed: respectfully, once, and then left behind.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Societal Objections are Dismissed<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Your longevity is your business.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Choosing to live longer is not robbing your progeny of their inheritance. It is not consuming anyone else’s lifespan. It is not a political act requiring collective approval. The decision to extend your own life through diet, exercise, sleep, and supplementation is as personal as the decision to eat breakfast. No justification is owed to civilization for choosing not to die on schedule.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The collectivist framework that requires you to justify your personal health decisions against their consequences for civilization is the same framework that produced the employer compliance burden, the industrial commons destruction, and the super-governmental organizations operating above democratic accountability. The obligation-heaping is the tell. Every such argument eventually arrives at the same destination: your individual choices must be subordinated to collective outcomes that someone else has decided matter more than your autonomy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The overpopulation argument applied to life extension is the overpopulation argument applied to antibiotics, to cancer treatment, to cardiac surgery. If the logic is sound, it condemns every advance in medicine that keeps people alive longer than they would otherwise have lived. The argument proves too much.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The immortal dictators concern contains its own refutation: the most durable tyrannies in history persisted across generations through institutional capture and inheritance, not individual longevity. A dictator who lives an extra thirty years is considerably less dangerous than an institution that has been accumulating power for three hundred.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The stagnation and progress-requires-death arguments assume that older people block younger ones from contributing ideas and occupying positions. The most productive individuals in almost every field are not the youngest \u2014 they are the most experienced. The physicist busier every year of retirement than the last. Homer Davenport at 66, still whittling. The accumulated wisdom that age provides is not an obstacle to progress. The retirement cliff that cuts it off prematurely is.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As for the gerontocracy of the wealthy who can afford whatever miraculous advance enables life extension \u2014 the joke is on them. The life extension that works is already available and cheap and does not come from Big Pharma. It’s found in the grocery store’s supplement aisle. The floor and gravity enables exercise. Anyone can grow a Microbiotic Diet. The democratization is already underway. The billionaire’s concierge doctor is charging fifty thousand dollars a year to prescribe what this book documents from the primary literature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We are not our brother’s keeper. Let others worry about the societal objections all they want.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Personal Objections: Engaged<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

These are the ones worth taking seriously. Not because they’re philosophically stronger \u2014 they’re not \u2014 but because they kill people.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Boredom.<\/strong> The fear that an extended life will run out of things worth doing, people worth knowing, experiences worth having. This objection is answered by its own premise: boredom is a choice, and a revealing one. The person who finds life boring at seventy was finding it boring at fifty. Extended time doesn’t create boredom \u2014 it reveals it. The person genuinely engaged with the world \u2014 with ideas, with work, with relationships, with curiosity \u2014 does not run out of things to be curious about. The universe is inexhaustible. The limit is never the available material. It is the quality of attention brought to it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Being older for longer.<\/strong> The fear of extended frailty \u2014 of living longer only to be sicker and more limited for a greater span of years. This is the objection the entire protocol answers. The goal is not lifespan extension alone but extending health-span \u2014 maintaining health, function, and capacity until the end is near, compressing the period of decline rather than extending it. The person running the protocol at sixty-six who lifts heavier weights than the young men at the gym is not accumulating years of frailty. The protocol is designed specifically to prevent the trajectory this objection fears.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What about retirement?<\/strong> The cultural script says: work until sixty-five, stop, rest, decline gracefully. The Bus to Boredom runs on this schedule. The retirement cliff documents what happens when people follow it \u2014 the observable deterioration that begins when engagement ends. What about retirement? The answer is: Don’t. Not in the sense the script intends. Continue working, thinking, creating, contributing \u2014 not because there is no choice but because the alternative is the swimming pool index.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Old people do not worry so much about dying as about suffering on the way there. The protocol addresses that fear directly. The answer to “what about retirement” is the Do Not Bore Yourself to Death Principle, which i will return to in the final chapter. Here it is enough to say: the objection assumes that longer life means more time in the state the objection fears. The protocol is specifically designed to prevent that state from arriving on schedule.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

Life Extension Is Unnatural<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

This needs to be stated plainly because the entire alternative medicine tradition \u2014 and much of the longevity research establishment \u2014 implies that aging is a malfunction to be corrected, a deviation from some intended healthy state.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is not.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Aging is the designed-in consequence of natural selection optimizing for reproductive success rather than individual longevity. The organism is the vehicle for the genes. Once the vehicle has served its reproductive function and contributed what inclusive fitness permits through grandparenting, maintenance investment has no selective return. The program runs correctly and kills the vehicle. The drain on the progeny’s resources is eliminated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Taurine levels declining 80% in elderly humans is not a breakdown. The enzyme that synthesizes it declines with age as part of the same evolutionary indifference to post-reproductive somatic maintenance that produces every other aging hallmark simultaneously. The compound that maintains mitochondrial function, suppresses cellular senescence, protects telomeres, reduces DNA damage, and slows the epigenetic clock declines precisely when the organism’s usefulness to gene propagation is ending. A kill mechanism could hardly be more efficient.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The DREAM complex, the gene suppressor that actively prevents somatic cells from using the full DNA repair capacity their genome contains, is not a failure of the repair system. It is the repair system being deliberately throttled after reproductive age by exactly the evolutionary program that has no further use for a long-lived soma. The body is not failing to repair itself. It is being instructed not to. The researchers who discovered the DREAM complex were not finding a disease mechanism. They were finding evolution’s answer to maximize inclusive fitness.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The protocol described in this book is not a correction of malfunction. It is a conscious override of the program. Natural selection gave the human brain the capacity for abstract reasoning as a tool for reproductive success in ancestral environments. That same capacity can now be directed toward understanding the program that produced it \u2014 and choosing to run it differently.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We are the first species capable of recognizing the evolutionary programming and consciously overriding it. The fish oil that maintains the neural DHA that natural selection provided to enhance reproductive fitness is now being used to extend the lifespan that natural selection programmed to end. The brain that evolved to find food and mates is being used to defeat the aging mechanism that the same evolutionary process installed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is nothing natural about this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That is precisely the point.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The ancient dream was always about overriding the program. Mythology, scripture, fiction, and rat studies converged on 253 years because the dream preceded the mechanism by millennia. The mechanism now exists. The override is underway.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

The Gene That Would Not Be a Defect<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The MTHFR A1298C variant affects approximately one-third of the human population. A genetic variant carried by one-third of humanity is not a defect. It is a variant that persisted through hundreds of thousands of years of natural selection because in the ancestral environment \u2014 leafy greens, liver, fermented foods, diverse plant foods, no processed flour, no synthetic folic acid \u2014 its effects on methylation capacity operated within a range that the dietary environment compensated for. The pathological expression emerges when you put a methylation variant into a diet stripped of the natural folate sources that the variant’s carriers evolved alongside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The question is not why so many people carry it. The question is what environment it was designed to operate in \u2014 and what happens when you replace that environment with the modern food supply.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The gene loads the gun. The environment pulls the trigger. The correct response to a family history of cardiac disease at fifty-eight is not to wait for the event and respond with a statin. The correct response is to understand the gene-environment interaction, identify the specific variants involved, and build the environmental architecture that changes what the gene encounters.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

The Personal Equation<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

My father’s severe depression hospitalization at fifty-nine occurred in an era before folate metabolism was understood as a neurotransmitter synthesis issue. One-third of depressed individuals have outright folate deficiency. The active form, 5-methyltetrahydrofolate, is the only form of folate that crosses the blood-brain barrier, where it serves as cofactor for serotonin, dopamine, and norepinephrine synthesis. Without adequate 5-MTHF, neurotransmitter production is biochemically compromised regardless of dietary intake. Depressed individuals with low serum folate respond poorly to SSRIs \u2014 which presuppose adequate serotonin to reuptake inhibit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The A1298C MTHFR variant I carry impairs the conversion of dietary folate to 5-MTHF and compromises BH4 production \u2014 the essential cofactor for monoamine neurotransmitter biosynthesis. The same variant likely ran in my father’s family, expressing as the artistic sensitivity that heard Prokofiev correctly and as the vulnerability to depression that hospitalized him for nearly a year. The Optimized Folate 5-MTHF in the sublingual trio addresses what the 1980s had no framework to treat. The knowledge arrived too late for Larry. It is available now.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Most people share the delusion that consciousness is something separate from the brain organ that produces it. The moods, the motivation, the will to continue \u2014 these feel like they belong to a “self” that floats above and independent of the biology. This is the most expensive philosophical error in medicine. Consciousness is what the brain does. Mood is neurochemistry. The will to live is the output of a biological system running on nutritional substrate, adequate sleep, functional mitochondria, and balanced neurotransmitters. Impair the substrate and you impair the will.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

My father believed his depression was psychological and his dietary choices were personal preferences. They were the same thing. The machine ran down while the ghost waited for something to change. Nothing changed. At sixty-eight the ghost in the machine concluded it was time to stop living \u2014 not knowing the machine had been making that decision for decades.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Dad, and his mother before him, suffered the same catatonic depression and received the medical system’s only available response at the time: electroshock therapy. The machine that needed folate received high voltage electricity instead. The knowledge that would have addressed the root cause arrived a generation too late for both of them. Treating their “obsessive thoughts” without correcting the substrate that generates them is like wiping the memory to eliminate the obsession \u2014 effective until the same substrate produces the same output again, which it invariably does, because nothing changed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The familial risk profile spans both sides of the family tree. My father’s side carries the depression that hospitalized him for nearly a year, the complications of diabetes that killed him at seventy-four, and the low-serotonin artistic temperament that MTHFR A1298C makes mechanistically coherent. My mother’s side carries diabetes, schizophrenia, and additional heart disease risk \u2014 the metabolic disease that crippled Larry after the cardiac event, and the dopamine-serotonin vulnerability that the Caloric Restriction chapter’s tryptophan discussion touches without naming directly.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The genetic loading from both sides is real. I have so far been able to avoid what the family history would predict.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is the gene-environment interaction argument made personal and specific. The BRCA mutation without the hormonal environment that expresses it does not reliably produce cancer. The familial depression loading without the folate deficit that impairs serotonin synthesis produces less severe illness than the loading plus the deficit together. The schizophrenia genetic variants without the vitamin D deficiency, the omega-3 deficit, the social isolation, and the cannabis exposure that the research documents as triggers do not reliably produce psychosis. The diabetes genetic loading without the dietary substrate and metabolic environment that converts genetic susceptibility into clinical disease produces less progression than the loading plus the free-feeding behavior together.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The protocol addresses every one of these environmental triggers through mechanisms assembled from the longevity literature without being designed for those specific risks:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The omega-3 architecture from fish consumption and supplementation maintains the neural membrane DHA levels that schizophrenia research finds depleted. The vitamin D protocol at therapeutic levels supports the dopamine neurotransmission regulation that schizophrenia research connects to vitamin D status. The 5-MTHF addressing the MTHFR variant on my father’s side simultaneously addresses the hypomethylation documented in schizophrenia on both sides. The blood glucose management through the AMPK protocol, caloric restriction, and yogurt-based amino acid ratio addresses the maternal diabetes loading. The cardiovascular architecture \u2014 the niacin, the omega-3s, the antioxidant protocol, the hormone restoration, the exercise \u2014 addresses the cardiac risk appearing on both sides simultaneously.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The genetics stayed the same. The environment changed. The expression changed with it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I personally have a great deal of squaring to do. The familial risk profile from both sides of the family represents a survival curve with a natural trajectory considerably shorter and more troubled than the one the protocol is attempting to produce. The squaring is not complete. It is ongoing. Every chapter in this book is one more intervention in the environmental half of a gene-environment equation whose genetic half was fixed at conception.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

The Race Condition<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The escape velocity mathematics creates a specific kind of optimism that is distinct from wishful thinking. It is not “medicine will figure it out eventually.” It is something more precise: if the rate of improvement in longevity interventions exceeds the rate at which the individual is aging, the individual survives to the next improvement. The horizon rolls. The race is winnable \u2014 not because anyone crosses a finish line, but because the gap between current capability and the aging rate closes faster than time passes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

De Grey’s estimate: fifty percent probability of reaching LEV by the late 2030s. Sinclair’s estimate: aspects of aging reversed within twenty years. Belmonte at sixty-six \u2014 the founding scientist of the best-funded longevity research organization in history \u2014 expresses doubt he will live to see the results he is creating. He guesses thirty years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Falloon at seventy is targeting OSK human trials in 2026.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The honest range between optimism and caution spans from eleven years to thirty. For anyone currently under seventy reading this book, the probability that at least some version of the second-stage therapies arrives within their potential lifetime \u2014 assuming they maintain the first-stage rocket \u2014 is not negligible. It may be substantial.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The protocol described in this book is the first-stage rocket. It is the intervention set that maintains biological function \u2014 repairs the DNA, clears the senescent cells, maintains the stem cell populations, supports the immune system, optimizes the hormonal environment, protects the genome, feeds the holobiont \u2014 while the second-stage therapies develop. It does not need to be the final answer. It needs to buy enough time for the final answer to arrive.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Belmonte needs to read this book. Not for his own benefit as a researcher \u2014 he knows the mechanisms. For his own benefit as a sixty-six-year-old who doesn’t expect to see his own results, because the protocol is the bridge that gives him the best chance of being wrong about his timeline.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The escape velocity mathematics doesn’t care about the starting point. It cares about the trajectory. The trajectory has been modified. The work continues.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Neither the gene nor the environment acts alone. The escape velocity argument gives the gene-environment work its temporal urgency: maintain the modified environment long enough, and the horizon may roll far enough forward to change the question entirely.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Ancient Dream was not wrong. It was early.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The mechanism now exists. The race is underway.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The question \u2014 the only question the protocol cannot answer for you \u2014 is whether you have decided to run it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

What it means to Live Forever “There is no reason to suppose that a man whose hair is grey and whose face is wrinkled has lived a long life \u2014 he has merely existed for a long time.” \u2014 Seneca, quoted in Stanis\u0142aw Lem’s 1959 novel on AI and information control The supplements work. The […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[13],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/quickening.zapto.org\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1892"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/quickening.zapto.org\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/quickening.zapto.org\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quickening.zapto.org\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quickening.zapto.org\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1892"}],"version-history":[{"count":30,"href":"https:\/\/quickening.zapto.org\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1892\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2028,"href":"https:\/\/quickening.zapto.org\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1892\/revisions\/2028"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/quickening.zapto.org\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1892"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quickening.zapto.org\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1892"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quickening.zapto.org\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1892"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}