• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
* * * * * 2 votes

C60 and increased idiocy

c60 olive oil arrogance buckyballs

  • Please log in to reply
43 replies to this topic

#1 Edgar

  • Guest
  • 19 posts
  • 6
  • Location:USA

Posted 04 August 2012 - 03:01 PM


My cautionary tale. I hope it's of use to someone.

I've been following this group since April. Years ago I was a research assistant working with various forms of nano-carbon and testing production methods. C60 has held my interest for some time.

I'm a 45 year old male, 5'10" 185 lbs.

I've been taking 10mg/day for 3 weeks so far. I put 500mg C60 (Sesres 99.5%) in 750ml California Olive Ranch EVOO on a magnetic mixer for 10 days. The solution is so dark, a high-powered flashlight is barely visible as small ruby glow from the opposite side of the jar. Shining the light on the outside shows a deep blood red. A tablespoon (my daily dose) is a deep brown, like maple syrup.

Energy level - At the end of a long workday, I don't have the physical and mental fatigue that I used to.

Appetite - Something to be careful of. I experience sharper hunger 'pains' now, where before they would be an ache that bordered on nausea. These are more like what I remembered getting when I was a lot younger. I've gained two pounds.

Stamina - My limit on some exercises in previous years was about 20 reps. 30 or more is not a problem now. After about 10 days of C60 I began to exercise regularly after about 18 months hiatus.

Hair growth - I'm getting some small stubble in my bald spot.

Skin - I've had some small spots of scaley leukoderma on my arms for years. The scales have disappeared and the spots are turning a bit pink. Some other old scars are starting to disappear as well. Something resembling UV protection is definitely there, but it doesn't turn you into Superman... More on that below.

With regards to a possible placebo effect, it's funny how that can work both ways. Within the first few days of taking C60, I was hyper-aware of any little pain or difference in my body. At one point, when I was a little alarmed at feeling some soreness in my kidney area, I thought back and then realized, "Oh, did I really just carry that compressor down the stairs one-handed?" I had many small instances within the first couple of weeks of aches perfectly attributable to my increased activity. One interesting marker, however, is my previous consumption of Tylenol and Advil for daily headaches and chronic back pain has been reduced to zero. Minor prostatitis pain has been reduced to zero. So, if this is just a placebo effect, I'll probably keep taking C60 for its powerful psychosomatic properties alone.

It isn't just a rosey picture however. I'm currently experiencing a strong negative effect, though I can't blame the C60. Turnbuckle coined the term "C60 arrogance" which is quite apt here.

I've indicated that C60 seems to provide some protection against sunburn. A couple weeks ago I spent the afternoon at a waterpark with the family. It had been years since the last time I'd had that type of sun exposure; but I boldly limited the amount of sunblock. It was partly overcast, and after a few hours at the park it was as if I hadn't had any sun at all. So the next week I was even further enboldened, and went without sunblock of any kind. Thus the title of this thread.

4 hours of strong exposure was enough to do me in. My burn pattern indicates that the damage was done during the final 45 minutes lazing belly-up in the kiddie pool, so I probably would have been OK up to 2 or 3 hours. I would have been even better if I'd used a little sunscreen.

I don't think the C60 blocks UV anyway... its effect is more how it must be helping the skin mitigate the damage.

My wife put things in perspective for me when I was refusing the sunblock. I told her, "It's for science!"
She replied, "You might as well be doing it for Narnia! Idiot."

There you go. For science, and for Narnia!
  • like x 6

#2 Turnbuckle

  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 04 August 2012 - 03:35 PM

Some other old scars are starting to disappear as well.


Something I'd noticed too but failed to mention. Two small scars from several years ago disappeared, but two similar scars from decades ago did not.

Click HERE to rent this advertising spot for C60 HEALTH to support Longecity (this will replace the google ad above).

#3 Hebbeh

  • Guest
  • 1,661 posts
  • 570

Posted 04 August 2012 - 04:19 PM

I don't think the C60 blocks UV anyway... its effect is more how it must be helping the skin mitigate the damage.


That is my experience also as I reported in an earlier thread...I also got sunburned, but it healed amazingly quick. And I also suspect that the burn requires a little longer exposure...as I reported earlier, in looking back, even though I got burned....it should of probably been worse than it was.

#4 Anthony_Loera

  • Life Member
  • 3,168 posts
  • 745
  • Location:Miami Florida

Posted 04 August 2012 - 04:23 PM

Can anybody get this study?
http://www.ncbi.nlm....8?dopt=Abstract

It looks like the used pristine C60 which is different than C60oo.... But it maybe interesting because some folks don't filter the C60oo.

I'm trying to figure out if they are expats from Narnia.

Cheers
A

Circle me on Google+
https://profiles.goo...236572014252197

Edited by Anthony_Loera, 04 August 2012 - 04:23 PM.


#5 Logic

  • Guest
  • 2,659 posts
  • 587
  • Location:Kimberley, South Africa
  • NO

Posted 04 August 2012 - 04:45 PM

Hmmm...

That study seems to indicate that not filtering may be a good idea?

#6 Hebbeh

  • Guest
  • 1,661 posts
  • 570

Posted 04 August 2012 - 05:02 PM

Appetite - Something to be careful of. I experience sharper hunger 'pains' now, where before they would be an ache that bordered on nausea. These are more like what I remembered getting when I was a lot younger. I've gained two pounds.


I also experienced increased hunger. I suspect that it increased my metabolism to what I had as a teenager when I could eat whatever due to a teenage metabolism. I try to maintain a very lean physique and am very disciplined with diet...almost to being OCD about it...a carryover from my bodybuilding days...so I was careful to not increase food intake. Anyway, already being very lean (7-8% BF as measured both on a Tanita and calipers), I lost 2 pounds while strength actually increased...highly unusual. And I'm 55.

#7 Logan

  • Guest
  • 1,869 posts
  • 173
  • Location:Arlington, VA

Posted 04 August 2012 - 05:53 PM

Appetite - Something to be careful of. I experience sharper hunger 'pains' now, where before they would be an ache that bordered on nausea. These are more like what I remembered getting when I was a lot younger. I've gained two pounds.


I also experienced increased hunger. I suspect that it increased my metabolism to what I had as a teenager when I could eat whatever due to a teenage metabolism. I try to maintain a very lean physique and am very disciplined with diet...almost to being OCD about it...a carryover from my bodybuilding days...so I was careful to not increase food intake. Anyway, already being very lean (7-8% BF as measured both on a Tanita and calipers), I lost 2 pounds while strength actually increased...highly unusual. And I'm 55.


I'm assuming people will see noticeably increases in lean muscle after some time of fat loss and increased strength.

#8 zorba990

  • Guest
  • 1,602 posts
  • 315

Posted 04 August 2012 - 05:55 PM

When does the telekinesis kick in?
  • like x 3
  • Enjoying the show x 1

#9 Hebbeh

  • Guest
  • 1,661 posts
  • 570

Posted 04 August 2012 - 06:00 PM

When does the telekinesis kick in?


It takes a little practice to get the electrons to shoot out your finger without blowing a hole in your foot but YMMV.
  • like x 2

#10 tintinet

  • Guest
  • 1,972 posts
  • 503
  • Location:ME

Posted 04 August 2012 - 06:46 PM

I think I've been less hungry since starting C60 OO. Strength and endurance have increased slightly and I'm slightly leaner. Not often tired, but sleep seems deeper.

#11 mikey

  • Guest
  • 987 posts
  • 171
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 04 August 2012 - 07:29 PM

Can anybody get this study?
http://www.ncbi.nlm....8?dopt=Abstract

It looks like the used pristine C60 which is different than C60oo.... But it maybe interesting because some folks don't filter the C60oo.

I'm trying to figure out if they are expats from Narnia.

Cheers
A

Circle me on Google+
https://profiles.goo...236572014252197


I'll have that study in a few days.

#12 DAMABO

  • Guest
  • 181 posts
  • 4
  • Location:Mars

Posted 04 August 2012 - 08:22 PM

where does one get such stuff? is it expensive? can anybody just take it? greets

#13 AgeVivo

  • Guest, Engineer
  • 2,113 posts
  • 1,555

Posted 04 August 2012 - 09:18 PM

"C60 and increased idiocy"

Thank you for this thread to wake up people.

- When reading the title of the thread I actually first thought you meant that the C60 thread seems like a good way for sellers to use the latest hype to mention various supplements, without so natural connections with c60...
- I think that your personal report is very good for people to be more cautious, more prudent, and if trying things then to document it much better! (before versus after, dates and specific conditions in which things where observed, photos, etc).
- As soon as there is "c60" it should be good... No! Inventions of new protocols must be done seriously. It could lead to toxicity for many reasons. For short term toxicity, the thing that comes to my mind is to have the solution injected in mice at rather large dosage.
  • like x 1

#14 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 04 August 2012 - 09:33 PM

That study seems to indicate that not filtering may be a good idea?


I don't think we can say that based on the Russian study. There isn't much information in the abstract, but I'm guessing that the "dispersion" they mention is in water, which results in the formation of partially hydroxylated C60 aggregates that are very different than C60 in oil.

On the other hand, here is a study looking at C60 in corn oil, including an extremely high 1000mg/kg dose. The fullerene was sonicated in cold oil for a brief time, and was mostly undissolved. There was no consistent negative effect on the animals. This could be taken as evidence that filtration and/or centrifugation are optional.

J Toxicol Sci. 2012;37(2):353-61.
Sub-acute oral toxicity study with fullerene C60 in rats.
Takahashi M, Kato H, Doi Y, Hagiwara A, Hirata-Koizumi M, Ono A, Kubota R, Nishimura T, Hirose A.

Division of Risk Assessment, National Institute of Health Sciences, Tokyo, Japan.

To obtain initial information on the possible repeated-dose oral toxicity of fullerene C60, Crl:CD(SD) rats were administered fullerene C60 by gavage once daily at 0 (vehicle: corn oil), 1, 10, 100, or 1,000 mg/kg/day for 29 days, followed by a 14-day recovery period. No deaths occurred in any groups, and there were no changes from controls in detailed clinical observations, body weights, and food consumption in any treatment groups. Moreover, no treatment-related histopathological changes were found in any organs examined at the end of the administration period and at the end of the recovery period. Blackish feces and black contents of the stomach and large intestine were observed in males and females at 1,000 mg/kg/day in the treatment group. There were no changes from controls in the liver and spleen weights at the end of the administration period, but those weights in males in the 1,000 mg/kg/day group increased at the end of the recovery period. Using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry, fullerene C60 were not detected in the liver, spleen or kidney at the end of the administration period and also at the end of the recovery period. In conclusion, the present study revealed no toxicological effects of fullerene C60; however, the slight increases in liver and spleen weights after the 14-day recovery period may be because of the influence of fullerene C60 oral administration. In the future, it will be necessary to conduct a long-term examination because the effects of fullerene C60 cannot be ruled out.

PMID: 22467026 Free Full Text


  • like x 2

#15 Logan

  • Guest
  • 1,869 posts
  • 173
  • Location:Arlington, VA

Posted 06 August 2012 - 06:16 AM

"C60 and increased idiocy"

Thank you for this thread to wake up people.

- When reading the title of the thread I actually first thought you meant that the C60 thread seems like a good way for sellers to use the latest hype to mention various supplements, without so natural connections with c60...
- I think that your personal report is very good for people to be more cautious, more prudent, and if trying things then to document it much better! (before versus after, dates and specific conditions in which things where observed, photos, etc).
- As soon as there is "c60" it should be good... No! Inventions of new protocols must be done seriously. It could lead to toxicity for many reasons. For short term toxicity, the thing that comes to my mind is to have the solution injected in mice at rather large dosage.


Why would you have a problem with people experimenting with C60? It has to be far less harmful than all the people out there binge drinking on the weekends.

Doesn't it benefit you to see how people respond to taking C60 over time?

I understand your reason for airing on the side of caution, but if others choose not too, so be it.
  • like x 5

#16 Turnbuckle

  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 06 August 2012 - 11:38 AM

"C60 and increased idiocy"

Thank you for this thread to wake up people.

- When reading the title of the thread I actually first thought you meant that the C60 thread seems like a good way for sellers to use the latest hype to mention various supplements, without so natural connections with c60...
- I think that your personal report is very good for people to be more cautious, more prudent, and if trying things then to document it much better! (before versus after, dates and specific conditions in which things where observed, photos, etc).
- As soon as there is "c60" it should be good... No! Inventions of new protocols must be done seriously. It could lead to toxicity for many reasons. For short term toxicity, the thing that comes to my mind is to have the solution injected in mice at rather large dosage.


Why would you have a problem with people experimenting with C60? It has to be far less harmful than all the people out there binge drinking on the weekends.

Doesn't it benefit you to see how people respond to taking C60 over time?

I understand your reason for airing on the side of caution, but if others choose not too, so be it.


It's the fear of the unknown. There will always be those urging caution while others just go out there.

#17 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 06 August 2012 - 05:58 PM

I think Edgar is being a little hard on himself calling his UV photoprotection experiment "idiocy". It was a crude dose-ranging experiment, he learned something, and shared it with us. That's a good thing. It appears, based on his experience and the experience of Hebbeh, Marc D, jg42122 and Lister, that C60 does provide a significant amount of reduction of erythema, but it's not a miraculously perfect sunscreen. An open question is whether or not damage at the molecular level is reduced an equivalent amount.

If I'm not mistaken, the usual way in which conventional sunscreens are tested is by looking at the minimal dose of UV that produces erythema.

Edited by niner, 06 August 2012 - 06:01 PM.

  • like x 1

#18 platypus

  • Guest
  • 2,386 posts
  • 240
  • Location:Italy

Posted 06 August 2012 - 06:09 PM

It has to be far less harmful than all the people out there binge drinking on the weekends.

What do you mean with "has to be"? How did you rule our sigificant toxicity in humans a priori?

#19 Turnbuckle

  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 06 August 2012 - 06:12 PM

It has to be far less harmful than all the people out there binge drinking on the weekends.

What do you mean with "has to be"? How did you rule our sigificant toxicity in humans a priori?



People have been using this stuff in other forms, and the people here for about three months, with not a single negative result equal to what many if not most of us have experienced with alcohol. So I wouldn't call this a priori.

Edited by Turnbuckle, 06 August 2012 - 06:13 PM.


#20 Mind

  • Life Member, Director, Moderator, Treasurer
  • 19,058 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Wausau, WI

Posted 06 August 2012 - 06:13 PM

"C60 and increased idiocy"

Thank you for this thread to wake up people.

- When reading the title of the thread I actually first thought you meant that the C60 thread seems like a good way for sellers to use the latest hype to mention various supplements, without so natural connections with c60...
- I think that your personal report is very good for people to be more cautious, more prudent, and if trying things then to document it much better! (before versus after, dates and specific conditions in which things where observed, photos, etc).
- As soon as there is "c60" it should be good... No! Inventions of new protocols must be done seriously. It could lead to toxicity for many reasons. For short term toxicity, the thing that comes to my mind is to have the solution injected in mice at rather large dosage.


Why would you have a problem with people experimenting with C60? It has to be far less harmful than all the people out there binge drinking on the weekends.

Doesn't it benefit you to see how people respond to taking C60 over time?

I understand your reason for airing on the side of caution, but if others choose not too, so be it.


It's the fear of the unknown. There will always be those urging caution while others just go out there.


There is always a balance to be struck between risk-taking and caution. I am glad we get both of it here, openly, in the forum. Hopefully it will help people make the decision that is most in line with their risk-tolerance.

#21 Logan

  • Guest
  • 1,869 posts
  • 173
  • Location:Arlington, VA

Posted 06 August 2012 - 07:33 PM

"C60 and increased idiocy"

Thank you for this thread to wake up people.

- When reading the title of the thread I actually first thought you meant that the C60 thread seems like a good way for sellers to use the latest hype to mention various supplements, without so natural connections with c60...
- I think that your personal report is very good for people to be more cautious, more prudent, and if trying things then to document it much better! (before versus after, dates and specific conditions in which things where observed, photos, etc).
- As soon as there is "c60" it should be good... No! Inventions of new protocols must be done seriously. It could lead to toxicity for many reasons. For short term toxicity, the thing that comes to my mind is to have the solution injected in mice at rather large dosage.


Why would you have a problem with people experimenting with C60? It has to be far less harmful than all the people out there binge drinking on the weekends.

Doesn't it benefit you to see how people respond to taking C60 over time?

I understand your reason for airing on the side of caution, but if others choose not too, so be it.


It's the fear of the unknown. There will always be those urging caution while others just go out there.


There is always a balance to be struck between risk-taking and caution. I am glad we get both of it here, openly, in the forum. Hopefully it will help people make the decision that is most in line with their risk-tolerance.


I agree. I just think we should be somewhat thankful that people have tried something like C60 for a good 3 or 4 months now. I don't have a problem with expressing reasons for airing on the side of caution.

I feel better about trying C60 out in a few months now that others have been on it.

It has to be far less harmful than all the people out there binge drinking on the weekends.

What do you mean with "has to be"? How did you rule our sigificant toxicity in humans a priori?


You're right, I can't say definitely, no one can at this point, but, I don't hear about people getting horrible hangovers and feeling stupid for a few days. We all know what drinking too much alcohol will do to the body and more seriously the brain. I can't imagine something like C60 could ever come close to doing such harm.

#22 Junk Master

  • Guest
  • 1,032 posts
  • 88
  • Location:United States

Posted 06 August 2012 - 08:24 PM

Well, after this weekend I can say unequivocally that c60 is not as effective for a hangover as Noopept. I can't say I noticed any increased alcohol tolerance either.

I did manage to get a sun burn as well, but I can confirm it was after a much longer exposure that it would normally take and seems to be healing more rapidly as well.

#23 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 06 August 2012 - 08:36 PM

We all know what drinking too much alcohol will do to the body and more seriously the brain. I can't imagine something like C60 could ever come close to doing such harm.


It certainly doesn't do that in humans in a time frame of a few months, even at pretty high doses. OTOH, I could certainly imagine it doing something horrible after two or ten or twenty years. I don't expect that, and am waiting for my C60 to arrive, so I'm putting my health where my mouth is. I've made a decision that for me, the risk/reward tradeoff is favorable. I probably wouldn't make the same decision if I was 20.

#24 AgeVivo

  • Guest, Engineer
  • 2,113 posts
  • 1,555

Posted 06 August 2012 - 09:58 PM

There is always a balance to be struck between risk-taking and caution. I am glad we get both of it here, openly, in the forum. Hopefully it will help people make the decision that is most in line with their risk-tolerance.

Yes, balance. I have put the post above, and am putting this one because in my own perception many posts tend to be a bit light: so far there is lots of talks but hardly any compelling effects and a large neglect of risks.

Risks: whereas I myself think that risks are very small (as thought by the researchers, who have injected massive doses in animals and worked with it for years, often without gloves), they should be reminded of exemples of risks: I hope that people trying c60 on themselves won't for example develop sterility, or cancers later. Remember that at some time there was a hype with irridium necklaces! We are a priori much more confortable here but I am not sure that the C60 protocols are the same as the researchers used (same oil? same C60 origin? same method?) and that they have been checked for sume type of toxicity? and I understand that those compounds may have strong mechanical effects. As always, humans are not rodents so there is always some risk (eg humans live longer so could have longer-term mechanical effects of C60). And concerning very positive long term effects it was mostly one paper so waiting for it to be replicated might not necessarily be a bad idea, depending on your risk appetite.

Now I guess it is a question of safety, enthousiasm, risk, life... your choice, your life!

Edited by AgeVivo, 06 August 2012 - 10:02 PM.


#25 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 07 August 2012 - 12:20 AM

so far there is lots of talks but hardly any compelling effects and a large neglect of risks.


Really? Hardly any? By my count, there were ~ten reports of increased stamina, nine reports of weight lifters exceeding their previous limits, four or five reports of UV photoprotection, even two reports of hair growth. Although this is admittedly a growing collection of anecdotes, it's starting to get compelling, at least to me. Aside from Baati, fullerenes have been in a lot of animals of various species, and have even been approved as OTC pharmaceuticals in Ukraine, for what that's worth. (Not much, I admit.) I think that there was a lot of discussion of risks early on, but I think a lot of people have come to the conclusion that the risks are small. I agree that the risks are not zero. The risks of Statins aren't zero either, but that doesn't stop an awful lot of people from taking them.

#26 AgeVivo

  • Guest, Engineer
  • 2,113 posts
  • 1,555

Posted 07 August 2012 - 06:54 PM

Hi niner,

I like your enthusiasm; although I think we should dig a little deeper if you are Ok. Today Bapineuzimab was reported to fail to treat Alzheimer's disease despite much hope and promising data so far. Here there is hope with C60 today, with not much data and of unclear quality --

Great that you have followed people's reports in details; though we should compare positive results with non-positive results, and it would be nice to allow deeper judgement than counting all reports with the same weight. An idea: do you think that you could make a table with the indicators you mention in columns , and one experimenter per line?

More precisely I would see the following columns : "pseudo", "date of treatment start", "date of announcement of experimenting", "date of last information", "treatment type" (includes source of C60 and olive oil), "increased stamina", "increased weight lifting", "UV photoprotection", "hair growth"). Excel, MS Word, google doc... anything; if it is possible to copy paste links to posts in each box that would be even better. I am very busy currently (work+family+organizing http://www.eha2012.org and other) but if you need help of course I'll try to help you. Boxes would contain positive reports but also reports like "I have in the sun but got sunburn".

That way everyone will better see the global picture and have a more informed judgement on columns/lines/boxes. Depending on what is confirmed with time we will see what were (/who had) placebo effects. Don't hesitate to PM me!

Edited by AgeVivo, 07 August 2012 - 07:47 PM.

  • like x 2

#27 Logan

  • Guest
  • 1,869 posts
  • 173
  • Location:Arlington, VA

Posted 08 August 2012 - 01:18 AM

I haven't read about the Alzheimer's treatment, but it sounds like people with the disease were not suddenly remembering things they could not remember before. With c60, humans are taking it and reportings positive benefits that are unlikely to be placebo. I'm not sure if the Alzheimer's treatment is a good example. Unless, a large number of patients were experiencing significant improvement, and it ended up not lasting, as the patients went back to their impaired states, and the disease continued to progress while still being treated. Perhaps something like this could happen with C60. Guess we will find out.

Edited by Logan, 08 August 2012 - 01:21 AM.


#28 AgeVivo

  • Guest, Engineer
  • 2,113 posts
  • 1,555

Posted 10 August 2012 - 01:44 AM

With c60,

With c60 like any new drug many unexpected things and many bias may exist, especially when not done in a double-blind way.

For that reason and also the goal to be transparent and informative rather than opaque and confusing, wrt those who are testing or thinking of testing, it would be very useful to make the global-view grid I propose just here above.

#29 Logan

  • Guest
  • 1,869 posts
  • 173
  • Location:Arlington, VA

Posted 10 August 2012 - 02:04 AM

With c60,

With c60 like any new drug many unexpected things and many bias may exist, especially when not done in a double-blind way.

For that reason and also the goal to be transparent and informative rather than opaque and confusing, wrt those who are testing or thinking of testing, it would be very useful to make the global-view grid I propose just here above.


The kind of table/grid you speak of would be helpful.

My father just bought some of Carbon's C60. I will be asking him for feedback after he starts taking it and will report back here.

#30 MarcD

  • Guest
  • 51 posts
  • 4
  • Location:Switzerland

Posted 10 August 2012 - 05:29 AM

There is for sure something c60oo is doing with melanin. I was taking Melanotan II 3 months ago and after the first initial dose I really notices a difference. Lot of people were asking me: has you been in holidays?
10 days ago I began again taking melanotan II, but instead of the desired effect nothing happened beside an upset stomach. It's not working at all. I took 9 days the initial dose every day, that's 9 times more than the first time 3 months ago.





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: c60, olive oil, arrogance, buckyballs

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users