Partial reversal of aging achieved in mice by restoring mitochondria cellular communication

the site comes up but there's nothing to read    :0(

dj

corleone said:

I realize this is off topic,

I realize this is off topic, but I found the article interesting and wanted to share.

While this article is presented in the media as a major breakthrough in the study of aging  - by using a chemical that occurs naturally in the human body, it was possible to restore tissues in two-year-old mice to a much younger state - I have a different take on it. Hopefully in the near future scientists will be able to attack specifically the pathway (barely) described below, and reverse the anaerobic glycolysis, used by malignant, rapidly growing tumor cells (for those interested, search Warburg effect in oncology).

 

For those who can’t access the article, here it’s the gist of the article:

The muscle from two-year-old mice that had been given the NAD-producing compound, resembled that of six-month-old mice. In human years, this would be like a 60-year-old converting to a 20-year-old in these specific areas.
One particularly important aspect of this finding involves HIF-1: it normally switches on when the body is deprived of oxygen. Otherwise, it remains silent. Cancer, however, is known to activate and hijack HIF-1. Researchers have been investigating the precise role HIF-1 plays in cancer growth.
"It’s certainly significant to find that a molecule that switches on in many cancers also switches on during aging," said Gomes. "We're starting to see now that the physiology of cancer is in certain ways similar to the physiology of aging. Perhaps this can explain why the greatest risk of cancer is age."
"There’s clearly much more work to be done here, but if these results stand, then certain aspects of aging may be reversible if caught early," said Sinclair.
The researchers are now looking at the longer-term outcomes of the NAD-producing compound in mice and how it affects the mouse as a whole. They are also exploring whether the compound can be used to safely treat rare mitochondrial diseases or more common diseases such as Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes.

 

 

 

If not, you may be interested in the history of Cancer treatment and the details of the current research and targeted therapy.  It gives the history of Cancer research and breakthroughs/failures in treatments.  Right now, for example, the cause of the SCC HPV+ is found in the gene E6 and E7 and scientists are studing targeted drugs that can correct the genetic mutation on mice.  Next step, clinical trials with humans!   HPV inactivates Rb's and p53's signal which are tumor supressors.  So the breaks are not working properly due to the virus.  That is my simplistic unscientific explanation.

 Some day in the future we will all carry a computer chip with all of our DNA and they will plug it into the computer program to ID the aberrant gene that caused the cancer and know exactly how to target it.  So instead of focusing on a "cure" they will have the appropriate drug to target the problem gene that caused the cancer to grow in the first place, and this will in effect stop the uncontrolled growth and will not attack our healthy cells.  Short term and long term side effects may be a thing of the past.  May not happen in my lifetime, but I am keeping an eye on the research on E6 and E7 genes. 

PJ

corleone said:

Yes, read it. 

Yes, read it.

 

The targeted therapy is the future, but we are not there yet. I brought to your attention this article, because I am hoping scientists will get a "non-specific" way (for instance by providing NAD+) to target the SIRT1 – HIF-1alpha pathway. In that experiment the researchers noted that by raising nuclear NAD+ in old mice (they did not check this specifically for cancer cells, but I won’t be surprise to be a similar mechanism) reverses pseudohypoxia and metabolic dysfunction, and that’s precisely what I am hoping for. Keep tumor growth in check (this would be not a cure, but enough to slow it down).

 

Cancer in check and boost my immune system.  Your article was fascinating.  Thanks,

PJ

donfoo said:

makes you think

Thanks for posting. I saw the tabloid version about the research. How many people contemplate the bioethic issues facing societies due the rapid advance of medical science and technology? Aren't we barely just starting to cope with the ethical issues of longer life spans? Social security is not viable today. We live twenty years longer and yet retire at the same age (65) as decades ago when longevity was much shorter. How are we doing with making health care affordable today to the masses? How is that easier when people live another 10, 20, 30 years more? Doesn't the increasing use of implanted high tech make you shudder at the unintended consequences? Read what Craig Venter is doing and seeing ahead in the are of genomic science, synthetic life, and manipulation and creation of new DNA - basically creating new life, wasn't that the domain of God? My greatest fear is humans have an inherent resistance to change, cling to the status quo, and with the expontential increase in the advance of technology and integration with biology, will never catch up much less get in front of the possibilities. Throughout mankind power has been held by the few, the elite, and one can only assume they will use all this as every more powerful tools to control the masses. How is that for going OT? Merry Xmas to all. don

I agree with most of what you said... no doubt/ But with my vast amount of wealth (hahahahahahaha) I could see myself living to 120.

Seriously, I wouldn't want to be apart from God for that long.

God bless,

Jamie