[Johnnyvee]

There is currently an ongoing clinical trial in Colombia conducted by an American company called Libella gene therapeutics, in corporation with Sierra sciences and a few others.
http://www.libellagenetherapeutics.com/
https://www.sierrasci.com/

This trial is by far the most interesting thing to happen not only in the field of biology, but in science as a whole this side of the millennium. (In my opinion.) It`s the culmination of a long list of in vitro studies,(cells in a petri dish) and in vivo studies in mice involving a form of gene therapy called AAV. It basically involves hijacking a benign virus in order to deliver a payload(a gene) into the cells in an effective manner. This technology has only very recently become safe enough for use in human subjects. It is however still very expensive.

The gene delivered here is a gene that allows the cells to express telomerase. Telomerase is an enzyme that repairs the caps(ends) of the chromosomes that get a little bit shorter each time a cell divides.
We start out with about 15k base pairs at the beginning of life. That is reduced to about 10k at birth, and death is associated with about a 5k base pair telomere length. Although there are some conflicting data, the majority of studies(and there as tons) indicate that the chromosomal instability and radical mutations that follow as a consequence of short telomeres are the cause of cancer. But also short telomeres are associated with pretty much everything that is bad health wise. Cells simply can`t function or divide and you see increased apoptosis, reduced viability, cells that go rogue and attack healthy tissues, and as I said cancer.

Although this is contested, you can make a very convincing argument that telomere shortening is the only cause of aging in humans. Everything else follows downstream from short telomeres.
There are many forms of ageing in different organisms, but primates probably age by telomere shortening. We have the gene that expresses telomerase, but it`s repressed by a protein.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repressor


Certain natural products (and two pharmaceuticals) can to a small extent lift the repressor and allow for mRNA to read the telomerase gene. Gene therapy allows for full expression.

This repression of telomerase is an evolved trait as ageing would have been an evolutionary advantage at some stage in the history of life. This on order to shuffle the genes faster to adapt better to environmental changes. Out with old, in with the new basically! Not for all species though, as there are quite a few immortal organisms on the planet.(clams, probably lobsters and quite a few plants also.) Also for most of the history of life, immortality was the norm. Cells just divided and multiplied but there was no senescence. This adaptation came in much later, after the dawn of (complex/true) multi-cellularity, about half way through the history of life on the planet. It should also be noted that cancer is just that form of life, it`s the default state of our own cells, the way they existed prior to becoming multicellular. (Before cells talked to each other)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellular_c...munication

Cancer involves the lack of growth control in cells, simply because this was the name of the game of the evolutionary competition between cells at this stage. It was all about growing as much as possible, and there was no need to reign in growth as cells were not part of a larger organism. (just like bacteria today.)
When telomeres get short (and mutations build up), the cells seem to revert to their default state and start this uncontrolled growth pattern again. Hence avoiding cancer is all about keeping your telomeres from getting critically short.
(Also general oxidative damage to the rest of the DNA will contribute towards cancer via mutations again.)
Another way to see it is that curing cancer and curing ageing are one and the same, since cancer mostly is a consequence of ageing cells, i.e. short telomeres. Things like viruses can contribute towards cancer also through increased immune cell proliferation, and the resulting short telomeres. This is probably why you in rare cases see children get cancer, which are usually immune cancers, and not the type of cancers you only see in adults.

Further evidence that telomere shortening is the main cause, (if not the only cause of ageing) is found in organisms that don`t display much, if any senescence. Lobsters are a good example of this. Like all really long lived organisms (certain clams, tortoises etc.) they have both telomerase activated in all cells, and also very powerful endogenous antioxidant mechanisms. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9849895
The same is true for certain clams, some of which have been recorded as close to 500 years old. (clams have growth year-rings.) Lobsters keep growing, and only get larger and more fertile as they age. Of course their risk of dying increase with each year they live, as there are may external causes that can kill them, like infections, predators etc. But they do not display any signs of ageing as I said, which is true for clams and some other organisms as well, that all again express telomerase in all cells.



Lobsters get bigger as they age and have been recorded at close to 50 pounds, and estimated to be close to a 150 years old. They display no signs of ageing, but do have problems getting enough energy with their massive size, increasing their the risk of death.

There are some natural products and two synthetic molecules currently available that are small enough to be allowed into the cells without the need for gene therapy. The most potent are; Astragalus, Rhodiola, broccoli seed extract, chia seed extract, vitamin D3, and a few others. (I`m doing a few of these myself.) The most potent are the synthetic TA-64 and more so, something called TAM-818. Both based on the astragalus plant. TAM-818 is orders of magnitude more potent as TA-64, and allows for expression of telomerase at about 16 percent of the limit where your telomeres will actually get longer rather than shorter, and you will then theoretically get younger. (We shall see soon.) The good news is that when the telomerase enzyme is activated to a smaller extent, it seeks out the critically short telomeres, which are the ones that cause trouble as described above. So you will not see any increase in average telomere length with these, but the disease causing critically short ones are elongated and you will also to some extent will slow down the rate of ageing/telomere shortening.

The production of the gene therapy using the test subjects own cells is a very expensive and laborious task, and why the cost of gene therapy is quite astronomical at the moment. But as with most technology, what was in the beginning only available for the wealthy tend to become affordable for most eventually. It takes about 4-12 months to produce the quadrillions of cells that will deliver the telomerase enzyme to all cells in the body, but the first indications of efficacy could be ready around May-June. (But Autumn is more likely.)
The scientists that designed the study have tests in place from day 1, then day 3, 9, 27 etc. (standard procedure) In the mice study done at Harvard a few years back, it took about 3 weeks before the mice showed signs of rejuvenation. This included improved insulin sensitivity, bone density, memory,(maze test)virility returned, hair coat came back dark and dense, energy levels etc. It will be interesting to see if the effect is similar in human subjects. It should be said that mice don`t age by telomere shortening, as they have telomerase. They age by oxidative damage. (As do we to some extent.)They engineer the mice so they don`t express telomerase. However it`s hard to see why this shouldn`t work in humans as well, based on all the studies, including the in vitro studies with human cells I mentioned.

There is also a patient that have tried the gene therapy already. Her name is Liz Parrish. Although one subject is certainly not enough to draw any conclusions, and she only got the therapy a few years back, all tests seem to indicate that it`s working. She`s 46 I think, and in my opinion looks more like 30. Another reason to believe this might work in a larger cohort.

Liz Parrish. Definitely a WBAAAVGTR. (Would Bang After Adeno-Associated Virus Gene Therapy Rejuvenation.)

There will of course be a lot of different opinions when it comes to anti-aging and life extension. I think that being able to stay young for a good while in order to experience the things you want in life is a good thing. So is curing most disease, which follows as a consequence if these types of treatment prove successful. (Although many of these anti-aging people have no understanding of anthropology, and are way to reductionist in their approach. Which means they miss simple clues like, for example, the fact that hunter-gatherers have basically no auto-immune disease. No need for a drug in other words, diet change will do.)

Anyway, I think this could potentially be one of the big stories this year, and I just wanted to give you a heads up. The media is generally clueless when it comes to science, and will not be interested unless it`s sensational news. One would believe that actually turning old people young again would garner some attention, and also a lot of money could potentially be thrown at some of these companies. Having followed the evolution of telomere biology, gene therapy and the people involved for some time, I will be more surprised if this doesn`t work than if it actually does. Needless to say the implications could be huge!

[qwertyuiop]

(02-14-2018 01:22 PM)Johnnyvee Wrote:  

There is currently an ongoing clinical trial in Colombia conducted by an American company called Libella gene therapeutics, in corporation with Sierra sciences and a few others.
http://www.libellagenetherapeutics.com/
https://www.sierrasci.com/

This trial is by far the most interesting thing to happen not only in the field of biology, but in science as a whole this side of the millennium. (In my opinion.) It`s the culmination of a long list of in vitro studies,(cells in a petri dish) and in vivo studies in mice involving a form of gene therapy called AAV. It basically involves hijacking a benign virus in order to deliver a payload(a gene) into the cells in an effective manner. This technology has only very recently become safe enough for use in human subjects. It is however still very expensive.

The gene delivered here is a gene that allows the cells to express telomerase. Telomerase is an enzyme that repairs the caps(ends) of the chromosomes that get a little bit shorter each time a cell divides.
We start out with about 15k base pairs at the beginning of life. That is reduced to about 10k at birth, and death is associated with about a 5k base pair telomere length. Although there are some conflicting data, the majority of studies(and there as tons) indicate that the chromosomal instability and radical mutations that follow as a consequence of short telomeres are the cause of cancer. But also short telomeres are associated with pretty much everything that is bad health wise. Cells simply can`t function or divide and you see increased apoptosis, reduced viability, cells that go rogue and attack healthy tissues, and as I said cancer.

Although this is contested, you can make a very convincing argument that telomere shortening is the only cause of aging in humans. Everything else follows downstream from short telomeres.
There are many forms of ageing in different organisms, but primates probably age by telomere shortening. We have the gene that expresses telomerase, but it`s repressed by a protein.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repressor


Certain natural products (and two pharmaceuticals) can to a small extent lift the repressor and allow for mRNA to read the telomerase gene. Gene therapy allows for full expression.

This repression of telomerase is an evolved trait as ageing would have been an evolutionary advantage at some stage in the history of life. This on order to shuffle the genes faster to adapt better to environmental changes. Out with old, in with the new basically! Not for all species though, as there are quite a few immortal organisms on the planet.(clams, probably lobsters and quite a few plants also.) Also for most of the history of life, immortality was the norm. Cells just divided and multiplied but there was no senescence. This adaptation came in much later, after the dawn of (complex/true) multi-cellularity, about half way through the history of life on the planet. It should also be noted that cancer is just that form of life, it`s the default state of our own cells, the way they existed prior to becoming multicellular. (Before cells talked to each other)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellular_c...munication

Cancer involves the lack of growth control in cells, simply because this was the name of the game of the evolutionary competition between cells at this stage. It was all about growing as much as possible, and there was no need to reign in growth as cells were not part of a larger organism. (just like bacteria today.)
When telomeres get short (and mutations build up), the cells seem to revert to their default state and start this uncontrolled growth pattern again. Hence avoiding cancer is all about keeping your telomeres from getting critically short.
(Also general oxidative damage to the rest of the DNA will contribute towards cancer via mutations again.)
Another way to see it is that curing cancer and curing ageing are one and the same, since cancer mostly is a consequence of ageing cells, i.e. short telomeres. Things like viruses can contribute towards cancer also through increased immune cell proliferation, and the resulting short telomeres. This is probably why you in rare cases see children get cancer, which are usually immune cancers, and not the type of cancers you only see in adults.

Further evidence that telomere shortening is the main cause, (if not the only cause of ageing) is found in organisms that don`t display much, if any senescence. Lobsters are a good example of this. Like all really long lived organisms (certain clams, tortoises etc.) they have both telomerase activated in all cells, and also very powerful endogenous antioxidant mechanisms. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9849895
The same is true for certain clams, some of which have been recorded as close to 500 years old. (clams have growth year-rings.) Lobsters keep growing, and only get larger and more fertile as they age. Of course their risk of dying increase with each year they live, as there are may external causes that can kill them, like infections, predators etc. But they do not display any signs of ageing as I said, which is true for clams and some other organisms as well, that all again express telomerase in all cells.



Lobsters get bigger as they age and have been recorded at close to 50 pounds, and estimated to be close to a 150 years old. They display no signs of ageing, but do have problems getting enough energy with their massive size, increasing their the risk of death.

There are some natural products and two synthetic molecules currently available that are small enough to be allowed into the cells without the need for gene therapy. The most potent are; Astragalus, Rhodiola, broccoli seed extract, chia seed extract, vitamin D3, and a few others. (I`m doing a few of these myself.) The most potent are the synthetic TA-64 and more so, something called TAM-818. Both based on the astragalus plant. TAM-818 is orders of magnitude more potent as TA-64, and allows for expression of telomerase at about 16 percent of the limit where your telomeres will actually get longer rather than shorter, and you will then theoretically get younger. (We shall see soon.) The good news is that when the telomerase enzyme is activated to a smaller extent, it seeks out the critically short telomeres, which are the ones that cause trouble as described above. So you will not see any increase in average telomere length with these, but the disease causing critically short ones are elongated and you will also to some extent will slow down the rate of ageing/telomere shortening.

The production of the gene therapy using the test subjects own cells is a very expensive and laborious task, and why the cost of gene therapy is quite astronomical at the moment. But as with most technology, what was in the beginning only available for the wealthy tend to become affordable for most eventually. It takes about 4-12 months to produce the quadrillions of cells that will deliver the telomerase enzyme to all cells in the body, but the first indications of efficacy could be ready around May-June. (But Autumn is more likely.)
The scientists that designed the study have tests in place from day 1, then day 3, 9, 27 etc. (standard procedure) In the mice study done at Harvard a few years back, it took about 3 weeks before the mice showed signs of rejuvenation. This included improved insulin sensitivity, bone density, memory,(maze test)virility returned, hair coat came back dark and dense, energy levels etc. It will be interesting to see if the effect is similar in human subjects. It should be said that mice don`t age by telomere shortening, as they have telomerase. They age by oxidative damage. (As do we to some extent.)They engineer the mice so they don`t express telomerase. However it`s hard to see why this shouldn`t work in humans as well, based on all the studies, including the in vitro studies with human cells I mentioned.

There is also a patient that have tried the gene therapy already. Her name is Liz Parrish. Although one subject is certainly not enough to draw any conclusions, and she only got the therapy a few years back, all tests seem to indicate that it`s working. She`s 46 I think, and in my opinion looks more like 30. Another reason to believe this might work in a larger cohort.

Liz Parrish. Definitely a WBAAAVGTR. (Would Bang After Adeno-Associated Virus Gene Therapy Rejuvenation.)

There will of course be a lot of different opinions when it comes to anti-aging and life extension. I think that being able to stay young for a good while in order to experience the things you want in life is a good thing. So is curing most disease, which follows as a consequence if these types of treatment prove successful. (Although many of these anti-aging people have no understanding of anthropology, and are way to reductionist in their approach. Which means they miss simple clues like, for example, the fact that hunter-gatherers have basically no auto-immune disease. No need for a drug in other words, diet change will do.)

Anyway, I think this could potentially be one of the big stories this year, and I just wanted to give you a heads up. The media is generally clueless when it comes to science, and will not be interested unless it`s sensational news. One would believe that actually turning old people young again would garner some attention, and also a lot of money could potentially be thrown at some of these companies. Having followed the evolution of telomere biology, gene therapy and the people involved for some time, I will be more surprised if this doesn`t work than if it actually does. Needless to say the implications could be huge!

Who does this and how much does it cost?

[Johnnyvee]

(02-14-2018 02:58 PM)qwertyuiop Wrote:  

(02-14-2018 01:22 PM)Johnnyvee Wrote:  

There is currently an ongoing clinical trial in Colombia conducted by an American company called Libella gene therapeutics, in corporation with Sierra sciences and a few others.
http://www.libellagenetherapeutics.com/
https://www.sierrasci.com/

This trial is by far the most interesting thing to happen not only in the field of biology, but in science as a whole this side of the millennium. (In my opinion.) It`s the culmination of a long list of in vitro studies,(cells in a petri dish) and in vivo studies in mice involving a form of gene therapy called AAV. It basically involves hijacking a benign virus in order to deliver a payload(a gene) into the cells in an effective manner. This technology has only very recently become safe enough for use in human subjects. It is however still very expensive.

The gene delivered here is a gene that allows the cells to express telomerase. Telomerase is an enzyme that repairs the caps(ends) of the chromosomes that get a little bit shorter each time a cell divides.
We start out with about 15k base pairs at the beginning of life. That is reduced to about 10k at birth, and death is associated with about a 5k base pair telomere length. Although there are some conflicting data, the majority of studies(and there as tons) indicate that the chromosomal instability and radical mutations that follow as a consequence of short telomeres are the cause of cancer. But also short telomeres are associated with pretty much everything that is bad health wise. Cells simply can`t function or divide and you see increased apoptosis, reduced viability, cells that go rogue and attack healthy tissues, and as I said cancer.

Although this is contested, you can make a very convincing argument that telomere shortening is the only cause of aging in humans. Everything else follows downstream from short telomeres.
There are many forms of ageing in different organisms, but primates probably age by telomere shortening. We have the gene that expresses telomerase, but it`s repressed by a protein.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repressor


Certain natural products (and two pharmaceuticals) can to a small extent lift the repressor and allow for mRNA to read the telomerase gene. Gene therapy allows for full expression.

This repression of telomerase is an evolved trait as ageing would have been an evolutionary advantage at some stage in the history of life. This on order to shuffle the genes faster to adapt better to environmental changes. Out with old, in with the new basically! Not for all species though, as there are quite a few immortal organisms on the planet.(clams, probably lobsters and quite a few plants also.) Also for most of the history of life, immortality was the norm. Cells just divided and multiplied but there was no senescence. This adaptation came in much later, after the dawn of (complex/true) multi-cellularity, about half way through the history of life on the planet. It should also be noted that cancer is just that form of life, it`s the default state of our own cells, the way they existed prior to becoming multicellular. (Before cells talked to each other)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellular_c...munication

Cancer involves the lack of growth control in cells, simply because this was the name of the game of the evolutionary competition between cells at this stage. It was all about growing as much as possible, and there was no need to reign in growth as cells were not part of a larger organism. (just like bacteria today.)
When telomeres get short (and mutations build up), the cells seem to revert to their default state and start this uncontrolled growth pattern again. Hence avoiding cancer is all about keeping your telomeres from getting critically short.
(Also general oxidative damage to the rest of the DNA will contribute towards cancer via mutations again.)
Another way to see it is that curing cancer and curing ageing are one and the same, since cancer mostly is a consequence of ageing cells, i.e. short telomeres. Things like viruses can contribute towards cancer also through increased immune cell proliferation, and the resulting short telomeres. This is probably why you in rare cases see children get cancer, which are usually immune cancers, and not the type of cancers you only see in adults.

Further evidence that telomere shortening is the main cause, (if not the only cause of ageing) is found in organisms that don`t display much, if any senescence. Lobsters are a good example of this. Like all really long lived organisms (certain clams, tortoises etc.) they have both telomerase activated in all cells, and also very powerful endogenous antioxidant mechanisms. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9849895
The same is true for certain clams, some of which have been recorded as close to 500 years old. (clams have growth year-rings.) Lobsters keep growing, and only get larger and more fertile as they age. Of course their risk of dying increase with each year they live, as there are may external causes that can kill them, like infections, predators etc. But they do not display any signs of ageing as I said, which is true for clams and some other organisms as well, that all again express telomerase in all cells.



Lobsters get bigger as they age and have been recorded at close to 50 pounds, and estimated to be close to a 150 years old. They display no signs of ageing, but do have problems getting enough energy with their massive size, increasing their the risk of death.

There are some natural products and two synthetic molecules currently available that are small enough to be allowed into the cells without the need for gene therapy. The most potent are; Astragalus, Rhodiola, broccoli seed extract, chia seed extract, vitamin D3, and a few others. (I`m doing a few of these myself.) The most potent are the synthetic TA-64 and more so, something called TAM-818. Both based on the astragalus plant. TAM-818 is orders of magnitude more potent as TA-64, and allows for expression of telomerase at about 16 percent of the limit where your telomeres will actually get longer rather than shorter, and you will then theoretically get younger. (We shall see soon.) The good news is that when the telomerase enzyme is activated to a smaller extent, it seeks out the critically short telomeres, which are the ones that cause trouble as described above. So you will not see any increase in average telomere length with these, but the disease causing critically short ones are elongated and you will also to some extent will slow down the rate of ageing/telomere shortening.

The production of the gene therapy using the test subjects own cells is a very expensive and laborious task, and why the cost of gene therapy is quite astronomical at the moment. But as with most technology, what was in the beginning only available for the wealthy tend to become affordable for most eventually. It takes about 4-12 months to produce the quadrillions of cells that will deliver the telomerase enzyme to all cells in the body, but the first indications of efficacy could be ready around May-June. (But Autumn is more likely.)
The scientists that designed the study have tests in place from day 1, then day 3, 9, 27 etc. (standard procedure) In the mice study done at Harvard a few years back, it took about 3 weeks before the mice showed signs of rejuvenation. This included improved insulin sensitivity, bone density, memory,(maze test)virility returned, hair coat came back dark and dense, energy levels etc. It will be interesting to see if the effect is similar in human subjects. It should be said that mice don`t age by telomere shortening, as they have telomerase. They age by oxidative damage. (As do we to some extent.)They engineer the mice so they don`t express telomerase. However it`s hard to see why this shouldn`t work in humans as well, based on all the studies, including the in vitro studies with human cells I mentioned.

There is also a patient that have tried the gene therapy already. Her name is Liz Parrish. Although one subject is certainly not enough to draw any conclusions, and she only got the therapy a few years back, all tests seem to indicate that it`s working. She`s 46 I think, and in my opinion looks more like 30. Another reason to believe this might work in a larger cohort.

Liz Parrish. Definitely a WBAAAVGTR. (Would Bang After Adeno-Associated Virus Gene Therapy Rejuvenation.)

There will of course be a lot of different opinions when it comes to anti-aging and life extension. I think that being able to stay young for a good while in order to experience the things you want in life is a good thing. So is curing most disease, which follows as a consequence if these types of treatment prove successful. (Although many of these anti-aging people have no understanding of anthropology, and are way to reductionist in their approach. Which means they miss simple clues like, for example, the fact that hunter-gatherers have basically no auto-immune disease. No need for a drug in other words, diet change will do.)

Anyway, I think this could potentially be one of the big stories this year, and I just wanted to give you a heads up. The media is generally clueless when it comes to science, and will not be interested unless it`s sensational news. One would believe that actually turning old people young again would garner some attention, and also a lot of money could potentially be thrown at some of these companies. Having followed the evolution of telomere biology, gene therapy and the people involved for some time, I will be more surprised if this doesn`t work than if it actually does. Needless to say the implications could be huge!

Who does this and how much does it cost?

Anyone can apply for the clinical trial, but they have certain criteria.
The costs are in the millions of dollars, but as I mentioned, the price is sure to drop if it becomes commercially available. It`s a bit like commercial space travel in that sense. (A bit cheaper though.)

[Heightcel]

Damn, the implications for this are gigantic

[Johnnyvee]

(02-14-2018 05:35 PM)Heightcel Wrote:  

Damn, the implications for this are gigantic

One would think so! It`s really surprising that there`s so few people who know about this. That was also my motivation for writing this. It might come as a shock to many if it actually works, which I think it will.

[Simeon_Strangelight]

Nope - won't happen. One of those countless announcements that don't pan out.

And it will not work.

[Johnnyvee]

(02-14-2018 05:58 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

Nope - won't happen. One of those countless announcements that don't pan out.

And it will not work.

I share that pessimism in general when it comes to exciting news in science/technology. It tends to be a new type of rock they`ve found on Mars or something. It`s only since I`ve "paid my dues" so to speak, reading most of the actual studies, that I feel relatively confident that there will be a rejuvenating effect from this treatment that is significant. To me it`s more of a question of why it shouldn`t work, rather than the opposite. I just can`t find too many reasons. If it doesn`t work however, some very, very smart people will have wasted their careers.

[Simeon_Strangelight]

Don't take me wrong - rejuvenating effects is one thing - various therapies already exist - some are extremely expensive.

As for stopping ageing and reversing the ageing process forever - nope. This won't happen. Our genetic age is 140 anyway based on plenty of genome research - we somehow age prematurely. We should look like fit 60 year olds at age 100. So humans should reach at least that lifespan of healthy and fit 140. This may be a step in that direction, but there won't be any immortal humans coming out of this.

I know this for a fact for a different reason.

As for studies being heralded as breakthrough - there was even a study on that and it said that 99% of the announcements usually did not pan out - not even in the least. There are many interest groups which are interested in first making grand claims, because erring on the side of "not yet there" is getting them more cash than telling the full truth.

[Johnnyvee]

(02-14-2018 06:25 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

Don't take me wrong - rejuvenating effects is one thing - various therapies already exist - some are extremely expensive.

As for stopping ageing and reversing the ageing process forever - nope. This won't happen. Our genetic age is 140 anyway based on plenty of genome research - we somehow age prematurely. We should look like fit 60 year olds at age 100. So humans should reach at least that lifespan of healthy and fit 140. This may be a step in that direction, but there won't be any immortal humans coming out of this.

I know this for a fact for a different reason.

As for studies being heralded as breakthrough - there was even a study on that and it said that 99% of the announcements usually did not pan out - not even in the least. There are many interest groups which are interested in first making grand claims, because erring on the side of "not yet there" is getting them more cash than telling the full truth.

125 years, which is usually considered the max. potential age and 140 years are not too far apart. There are so many things that can accelerate telomere shortening, that it`s not exactly a mystery why nobody can achieve a theoretical maximum age for humans. (If that is 140 years.)

I have more faith in private corporations, rather than universities when it comes to getting things done in the real world. Uni. academics sometimes make claims to further their careers etc. This is not the case here. All of the people and companies involved are independent.

[debeguiled]

(02-14-2018 05:58 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

Nope - won't happen. One of those countless announcements that don't pan out.

And it will not work.

So I guess you don't want to hear about my perpetual motion machine.

[Ballr]

I hate when Man tampers w/ Nature.

[Siddartha]

I don't put any stock into any form of aging intervention that focuses solely on genes without considering lifestyle, dietary intervention, or exercise. It's like people flying down to panama for MCSC injections for back/joint/nerve pain without getting off the completely toxic Standard American Diet first. Paleolithic-Ketogenic with intermittent fasting is probably much closer to any actionable interventions then any back alley or international pharma "revolutionary study" that sells a one-off treatment regimen while requiring nothing else to change.

[lex the impaler]

They should use the resources to fast track the development of vaselgel.

[Simeon_Strangelight]

(02-14-2018 06:48 PM)debeguiled Wrote:  

(02-14-2018 05:58 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

Nope - won't happen. One of those countless announcements that don't pan out.

And it will not work.

So I guess you don't want to hear about my perpetual motion machine.

Nope.

Unless you mean some machine that is fueled by the geo-magnetic field of Earth. To the uninitiated and traitorous it can be viewed like a perpetual motion machine, but that is akin to saying that a wind machine is perpetual so long as the wind is blowing.

[Guitarman]

"Which means they miss simple clues like, for example, the fact that hunter-gatherers have basically no auto-immune disease. No need for a drug in other words, diet change will do.) "

Hunter gatherer diet would be Paleo/ Keto.

I've noticed a rejuvenating effect since going keto/ low carb 16 months ago.

[Johnnyvee]

(02-15-2018 04:15 AM)Guitarman Wrote:  

"Which means they miss simple clues like, for example, the fact that hunter-gatherers have basically no auto-immune disease. No need for a drug in other words, diet change will do.) "

Hunter gatherer diet would be Paleo/ Keto.

I've noticed a rejuvenating effect since going keto/ low carb 16 months ago.

Yeah, I do Paleo also. Don`t stay ketogenic too long though, as it inhibits something called mTor, which in the long term can lead to problems with bone density, immunity and also reproductive issues. Fat adapted, but not ketogenic (long-term) is the way to go

[Johnnyvee]

(02-14-2018 11:09 PM)Siddartha Wrote:  

I don't put any stock into any form of aging intervention that focuses solely on genes without considering lifestyle, dietary intervention, or exercise. It's like people flying down to panama for MCSC injections for back/joint/nerve pain without getting off the completely toxic Standard American Diet first. Paleolithic-Ketogenic with intermittent fasting is probably much closer to any actionable interventions then any back alley or international pharma "revolutionary study" that sells a one-off treatment regimen while requiring nothing else to change.

Paleo is a good idea, I`ve been eating Paleo-ish for some years now.
But paleo will not stop your telomeres from getting short. Slow the rate by reducing oxidative damage yes, but there will still be a basal rate of shortening. I don`t disagree with you though. The glycation issue, and also general oxidative damage is a problem, and Paleo, plus anti-oxidants is a possible solution.

However, the theory here is that young cells can deal with even a more unhealthy lifestyle and diet because they function better. Young people don`t suffer from atherosclerosis and dementia, even with a poor diet. This is also quite different from taking a drug. You actually change your DNA permanently.

[Hypno]

The science is there and this is likely to happen in our lifetimes. I also don't think there is a reason for this to stocp at 125 or 140. Biotechnology is compounding geometrically and at a faster rate than computer technology. The implications are difficult to fully grasp.

However, I don't necessarily have faith in the mechanism, and life extension on this level is likely to take longer than next year.

[Razors Edge]

It's definitely very interesting.

[slowpoke]

(02-14-2018 09:56 PM)Ballr Wrote:  

I hate when Man tampers w/ Nature.

Even fake tits?

[Kid Twist]

People quickly forget that repression of telomerase in general around the body does have a benefit --- curtailing mutation and thus, cancer. It is the very reason we don't have active telomerase in the first place.

If you think cancer is a problem and support this, haha, you ain't seen nothing yet.

[Johnnyvee]

(02-17-2018 03:04 PM)Kid Twist Wrote:  

People quickly forget that repression of telomerase in general around the body does have a benefit --- curtailing mutation and thus, cancer. It is the very reason we don't have active telomerase in the first place.

If you think cancer is a problem and support this, haha, you ain't seen nothing yet.

I am well aware of this theory, but it`s in all likelihood false.
Cancer is caused by mutations. When the telomeres get short the chromosome loses it`s stability, and generations of radical mutations occur. In addition to this you have mutations from general oxidative damage. These mutations are the most likely cause of cancer. (But I mentioned that it`s still contested.) Long telomeres are not associated with mutations.

Because ageing has been a huge evolutionary advantage, nature has evolved different ageing mechanisms. One of those is turning off telomerase in order to age the cells, and subsequently kill off the organism. Nature doesn`t care about us after the age where we would normally be finished with child-rearing, which is about the age of 35. Cancer is also in general a disease of older people, from about the age 35 is when it pops up with increased risk the older you get, and also the shorter your telomeres get. Cancer activates telomerase after the change in the cells genetic phenotype. This is what many people miss. Now it`s not your own cells anymore. So, short telomeres is definitely associated with cancer in primates. You also have quite a few organisms that have telomerase expressed in all cells, and not only are biologically immortal, but also very rarely get cancer. Lobsters are a good example. But as I said, since cancer is caused by mutations, you can still get cancer even with long telomeres, because of oxidative damage in general, but it`s far less likely.

One shouldn`t be arrogant when it comes to such a complicated subject, but at this stage I feel 95 percent certain (at least) that short telomeres (and what causes it) is the primary cause of cancer.

[The Stronger Sex]

I'm sold. Liz is 74, in case you didn't know.

[Johnnyvee]

(02-17-2018 05:56 PM)The Stronger Sex Wrote:  

I'm sold. Liz is 74, in case you didn't know.

46 I think, but she does look good

[Running Turtles]

I want this to be true as much as anyone, but I feel like they're selling a dream in order to get investments. Even the website feels like a landing page.


Screenshot from the bottom of their page:


The e-mail is a Gmail address.

I think there will be major breakthroughs in aging in our lifetime, but taking things with a grain of salt never hurt.