It might be possible to reverse a person’s biological age, given further research

In a small trial, drugs appeared to rejuvenate the body’s ‘epigenetic clock’, which tracks a person’s biological age.

I was a bit skeptical as I was diving into this article, for reason's that are self-explanatory. Reversing someone's age? Yea, right!

The results were really surprising, however scientists suggests that the findings are preliminary because the trial was small and did not include a control arm.

OK so this "anti-aging" remedy/technique isn't going to be out in stores by next year - but this study, IMO, was a bit of a breakthroughImagine what we could do / become if we're to the technique of anti aging.

The study involved nine healthy volunteers, who were given a cocktail of three common drugs for a year- growth hormone and two diabetes medications. When scientists analysed marks on a person’s genomes, they found that the volunteers aged backwards- losing an average of 2.5 years from their biological ages.

The marks on their genomes represent their epigenetic clock, as well as their immune systems, actually improved despite the passing of time. Moreover, the volenteers’ immune systems also showed signs of rejuvenation.

A person's Epigenetic clock is estimated by the body’s epigenome – a record of chemical changes to an organism’s DNA. As people age, chemical adjustments or labels are added to people’s DNA, and those change for the duration of their lives, so by taking a gander at those tags an individual’s natural age can be estimated.

Through this study, scientists actually wanted to observe how the growth hormone would change the tissue in the thymus gland, which is is crucial for efficient immune function. Various studies have shown that growth hormone stimulates regeneration of the thymus. But, this harmone can also lead to diabetes. Thus, the study included two widely used anti-diabetic drugs,

Scientists looked at four different measures of the epigenetic clock to understand the differing ages of each of the patients. They found that each volunteer had reversed significantly.

Geneticist Steve Horvath at the University of California, Los Angeles, who conducted the epigenetic analysis said,

“This told me that the biological effect of the treatment was robust. What’s more, the effect persisted in the six participants who provided a final blood sample six months after stopping the trial.”

“Because we could follow the changes within each individual, and because the effect was so very strong in each of them, I am optimistic.”

Scientists now hope to test the same effects with more people, through a controlled study, and with different age groups, ethnicities and with women.

I volunteer to be injected

I have a hard time understanding this.

As far as I know, every cell starts out with around 10 kilobases and each time it copies itself, a bit is cut at the end of the telomeres. Until one day, it can not copy anymore and we start to decay / die slowly.

Cancer cells do not go through this and this is why they can copy like infinite and become a problem. I would not volunteer before at least 10 years have passed and they looked at the testgroup again.

How many are still alive?
Is there a statistical uprise in cancer?
Is the effect still noticeable after 10 years? Has it reversed or nullified by 10 years?


Edit: Here is the source for the entry message:
www.nature.com...

Great...all we need, for our elite ruling class is to live forever. Don't plan on any of us proles getting our hands on this, as long as we can reproduce they won't need us to live forever.

a reply to: DAZ21

Actually if this is so simple, we just have to guess what are those two common diabetes medication and take it with growth hormon and that's it. Sounds very simple. Maybe even too much... But hey, you never know if you don't try.

a reply to: LtFluffyCakes96

As long as they can do it in the next 30 years.

originally posted by: Oleandra88
I have a hard time understanding this.

As far as I know, every cell starts out with around 10 kilobases and each time it copies itself, a bit is cut at the end of the telomeres. Until one day, it can not copy anymore and we start to decay / die slowly.

Cancer cells do not go through this and this is why they can copy like infinite and become a problem. I would not volunteer before at least 10 years have passed and they looked at the testgroup again.

How many are still alive?
Is there a statistical uprise in cancer?
Is the effect still noticeable after 10 years? Has it reversed or nullified by 10 years?


Edit: Here is the source for the entry message:
www.nature.com...

This was my understanding as well, I was under the impression the "key" to aging was telomeres, in that animals with long lifespans have some sort of telomere protection.

@LtFluffyCakes96 is there a link to the study in question?

a reply to: Oleandra88

I think you misunderstand the telomere issue.

All cells lose a single telomere at division; that does not exclude cancer cells. Cancer appears to occur, according to some researchers, when there are no more telomeres available to lose. The cells do not wither and die at this point; they still reproduce, but they reproduce incorrectly. the resulting cells from the division do not act like normal, healthy cells.

It is akin to a computer program with a bunch of "NOOP" (do nothing) statements at the beginning... as long as those statements are there, the program will advance to the correct starting point. If those statements are not there, and the statement that is supposed to start the program is also missing, then the program may not operate correctly. It will still operate, just not properly.

Cancer is an imbalance between hormones that cause the cells to die off and the hormones that cause them to undergo mitosis. Normally, the body produces mitosis-inducing hormones when repair is needed, as in the case of an injury, and cells will produce hormones to die off when a cell has malfunctioned somehow. That is the very basis of regeneration of damaged tissue and still not fully understood. In cancer, the cells seem to produce their own mitosis-inducing hormone and will not produce the one that tells themselves to die off. The program has in effect malfunctioned, and the cells then divide out of control with each successive generation more damaged than the last.

Again, this is poorly understood and not my forte, but it is what I have gleaned from conversations with researchers I know. It also can be considered to be potentially applicable to other diseases besides cancer... Parkinsons, Alzheimers, etc.

Present research focuses on creating proper conditions for telomerase to form. Telomerase is a substance that causes new telomeres to form on the DNA strands. It seems to decrease as we age, and is thought by some to be the base cause of aging.

TheRedneck

a reply to: Lucidparadox

is there a link to the study in question?

onlinelibrary.wiley.com...

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck
Thank you for correcting me then! I would edit a note into it what I wrote, that this turned out to be garbage and point to your post.

I did not understand half of what you wrote so I better shut up now. *slowly sliding out of the thread...*

a reply to: Oleandra88

Never shy away from knowledge.

As I said, this is not my forte, just information I have from some friends (ex-classmates really) who are into medical research. But ask any questions you are unsure about and I'll answer them to the best of my ability.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

Haha, I never shy away but I can acknowledge when I am wrong. I would not like it when others read my post and memorize wrong things. It is not a shame for me to admit it. I see you are a moderator! You could use your magic to write a "this is actually wrong please read further *link to your message that corrects me*" into my message above, if you want/are allowed to.

a reply to: Oleandra88

No, actually I am not a moderator... in this thread. I have posted as a member and therefore am forbidden to use any moderation abilities in it. Right now, I am just a member, just like you; we are equal. It's one of the things that makes ATS function so well.

When I post as a staff member, there will be no confusion. Trust me.

TheRedneck

I'm thinking blood sugar levels is the key to reverse ageing. When you have, "growth hormone and two diabetes medications" mixed together = high blood sugar levels.

reverse ageing here I come.....
I'm buying a BIG bowl of Chocolate Ice Cream TONIGHT!

a reply to: alomaha

One of them starts with a "M" I can't remember the full name but I have heard that it could be used in Anti Aging .

Found it

"Metformin"

I tried HGH but stopped because it made me angry like a steroid .

a reply to: Gargoyle91

Metformin is a prescription anti-diabetes drug for Type 2. My wife was on it for a while. Somehow it's supposed to make the pancreas more responsive to insulin levels?

TheRedneck

a reply to: LtFluffyCakes96

Democrats worst nightmare!

a reply to: TheRedneck

Looks like theres some merit to it's use in Anti aging .

"Metformin (Metformin hydrochloride) is a type of medicine known as a biguanide. This works to lower the amount of sugar in the blood of people with diabetes. It does this by lowering the amount of sugar produced in the liver, and also increasing the sensitivity of muscle cells to insulin.


Metformin as an Anti-Aging Drug
Metformin has been a staunch workhorse against diabetes for more than 50 years. Studies show that metformin acts by boosting the activity of AMPK, a master metabolic regulator that favors fat- and sugar-burning and prevents their accumulation."

Will Metformin Become the First Anti-Aging Drug?

a reply to: TheRedneck
Okay, I never asked