21 replies to this topic

[JohnD60]

This is not to be confused with the C60 Shelf life thread which is about dry C60 only.

I mixed my batch of 750ml C60 and Olive Oil (.7mg/ml) back in about August 2012. I don't use that much now, about 15ml C60/OO once a week. So I still have about 300ml left, I am wondering if I should just make a new batch after six months. I store it at room temperature in a dark kitchen cabinet. Any thoughts?

[niner]

I think it should last a lot longer than plain olive oil, since it contains a powerful antioxidant. Plain olive oil is good for at least a year, so I'd think that c60-oo would be good for a couple years at least. I've been storing olive oil in the freezer to good effect. At the rate you're using it, you have about 5 months worth left. I'd just keep it somewhere cool and dark. What you're doing now seems fine to me.

[Turnbuckle]

Freeze what you're not using in the next few months. Generally speaking, chemical reactions tend to double with every 10 C. So, if your freezer is -20 C and your cabinet is 20 C, your oil will last 16 times longer in the freezer, and a six month shelf life becomes 8 years.

Edited by Turnbuckle, 16 March 2013 - 10:03 PM.

[anagram]

Feels like a very exact affirmation. Is there anything we can definitively add to C60oo to slow down its oxidation.

[hav]

My recollection is that in the Baati study they made all their mixture up front, stored it on a cool, dry, dark storage shelf and tested it over a period of 4 years without observing any degradation. By maxwatt's calculation, if you freeze it you should probably plan on making a new batch every 64 years?

Howard

[JohnD60]

My recollection is that in the Baati study they made all their mixture up front, stored it on a cool, dry, dark storage shelf and tested it over a period of 4 years without observing any degradation. By maxwatt's calculation, if you freeze it you should probably plan on making a new batch every 64 years?

Howard

It has been a long time since I read the study, but I seem to recall that the actual dosing only took place over a period of maybe six months.

[niner]

My recollection is that in the Baati study they made all their mixture up front, stored it on a cool, dry, dark storage shelf and tested it over a period of 4 years without observing any degradation. By maxwatt's calculation, if you freeze it you should probably plan on making a new batch every 64 years?

It has been a long time since I read the study, but I seem to recall that the actual dosing only took place over a period of maybe six months.

Baati treated for six months, but they kept the c60-oo around. You know, for that followup study that they should have started around the time they realized they had highly anomalous lifespans? Oh well...

I don't know how they tested it, but if it was giving identical chromatograms after 4 years, then it's probably pretty stable. In principle, the back of the envelope calculation that Turnbuckle (not maxwatt) did suggests that if frozen at -20, it would last a hell of a long time.

[Hebbeh]

My recollection is that in the Baati study they made all their mixture up front, stored it on a cool, dry, dark storage shelf and tested it over a period of 4 years without observing any degradation. By maxwatt's calculation, if you freeze it you should probably plan on making a new batch every 64 years?

It has been a long time since I read the study, but I seem to recall that the actual dosing only took place over a period of maybe six months.

Baati treated for six months, but they kept the c60-oo around. You know, for that followup study that they should have started around the time they realized they had highly anomalous lifespans? Oh well...

I don't know how they tested it, but if it was giving identical chromatograms after 4 years, then it's probably pretty stable. In principle, the back of the envelope calculation that Turnbuckle (not maxwatt) did suggests that if frozen at -20, it would last a hell of a long time.

It's my understanding, if I'm not mistaken, that this is the same olive oil from the same batch that was given to AgeVivo for his mice...and if so, it would be more than 4 years old.

[niner]

Yeah, that's the stuff. I meant to mention that.

[maxwatt]

Tocopherol (vitamin E) or carnosic acid (present in rosemary) are most frequently used to preserver fats and oils. BHT used to be used. But C60 is such a powerful antioxidant it's probably not necessary. Though rosemary flavored oilvie oil sounds pretty good to me.

I concur with Turnbuckle's recommendation on cold storage, though my approach has been to make up only enough for a few weeks and start with fresh oil.

[JohnD60]

It's my understanding, if I'm not mistaken, that this is the same olive oil from the same batch that was given to AgeVivo for his mice...and if so, it would be more than 4 years old.

If true, not the way I would have done it, I would have mixed a fresh batch. Seems like it is adding an unnecessary varible to the experiment. Just because AgeVivo did it that way, it is not evidence that 4 year old C60oo has not been adversely impacted by time, unless his rats end up living a long time.

Edited by JohnD60, 21 March 2013 - 03:24 PM.

[Turnbuckle]

Tocopherol (vitamin E) or carnosic acid (present in rosemary) are most frequently used to preserver fats and oils. BHT used to be used. But C60 is such a powerful antioxidant it's probably not necessary. Though rosemary flavored oilvie oil sounds pretty good to me.

I concur with Turnbuckle's recommendation on cold storage, though my approach has been to make up only enough for a few weeks and start with fresh oil.

A European patent has this to say:

Rosemary is one of the most well known antioxidants, especially for long-term storage. In the experiment the keeping time was doubled from 300 to 600 days by fish oil stabilized with fullerene when compared to rosemary.

http://www.google.co...1907519B1?cl=en

So it might be twice as good as rosemary, but it isn't going to last forever unless you refrigerate it. Also, this only applies to the rancidity of the oil. You have to wonder what's happening to the potency of the C60.

In the above patent, Table 1 shows what happens to the oil at 5C vs 25C.

[Logic]

Antioxidant activity and cytotoxicity of solubilized C60
and its conjugates with butylated hydroxytoluene
http://www.google.co....74115972,d.d2s
 
It seems that antioxidant capacity of C60BHT is higher than that of C60.
That probably has nothing to do with the MOA of C60oo though?

Edited by Logic, 01 September 2014 - 08:08 PM.

[g-5]

My c60oo has almost 2 years, storage in room temperature, and it works.
Now I'm using it daily, few weeks, over 10ml per week

[JohnD60]

My c60oo has almost 2 years, storage in room temperature, and it works.
Now I'm using it daily, few weeks, over 10ml per week

 

How specifically are you able to confirm that "it works"?

[g-5]

My endurance is much better than normal, skin is better than normal, I guess it works.

[Logic]

Antioxidant activity and cytotoxicity of solubilized C60
and its conjugates with butylated hydroxytoluene
http://www.google.co....74115972,d.d2s
 
It seems that antioxidant capacity of C60BHT is higher than that of C60.
That probably has nothing to do with the MOA of C60oo though?

 

Perhaps I should start a new thread as everyone seems to be missing the point?

 

If the ORAC value of C60BHT is higher than that of hydrated C60 ;  it deserves consideration as supp that may be superior to Hydrated C60 and perhaps C60oo.

 

As C60oo likely has a completely different MOA to the above; C60BHT may be a good adjunct to C60oo? 
 

[GVA]

 

Antioxidant activity and cytotoxicity of solubilized C60
and its conjugates with butylated hydroxytoluene
http://www.google.co....74115972,d.d2s
 
It seems that antioxidant capacity of C60BHT is higher than that of C60.
That probably has nothing to do with the MOA of C60oo though?

 

Perhaps I should start a new thread as everyone seems to be missing the point?

 

If the ORAC value of C60BHT is higher than that of hydrated C60 ;  it deserves consideration as supp that may be superior to Hydrated C60 and perhaps C60oo.

 

As C60oo likely has a completely different MOA to the above; C60BHT may be a good adjunct to C60oo? 
 

 

Sorry, but hydrated C60 fullerene  was not investigated in this work 

[Logic]

Sorry, but hydrated C60 fullerene  was not investigated in this work

It seems you are correct GVA. but am still confused?

The PDF says:

MATERIAL AND METHODS
Fullerene (C60) and C60-Butylated hydroxytoluene conjugates (C60 -BHT1, C60-BHT2 and C60-BHT3) 2 were solubilized either through:
A. Surfactants addition (Polyvinylpyrrolidone. (PVP) or Tween20 )
B. Encapsulation in liposomes, type multilamellar vesicles layers (MLV’s), suitable for pharmaceutical formulation.
C. Suspension in water


In the
EVALUATION OF LIPID PEROXIDATION (TBARS ASSAY)
section it says:
C60-MLV showed better antioxidant activity than C60-aq suspensions.

From this I concluded that the  ORAC values and TBARS assay graphs were measured against aqueous solutions of C60 and BHT as controls?

I cant find a full study to read. Does anybody have one?

[GVA]

 

Sorry, but hydrated C60 fullerene  was not investigated in this work

It seems you are correct GVA. but am still confused?

The PDF says:

MATERIAL AND METHODS
Fullerene (C60) and C60-Butylated hydroxytoluene conjugates (C60 -BHT1, C60-BHT2 and C60-BHT3) 2 were solubilized either through:
A. Surfactants addition (Polyvinylpyrrolidone. (PVP) or Tween20 )
B. Encapsulation in liposomes, type multilamellar vesicles layers (MLV’s), suitable for pharmaceutical formulation.
C. Suspension in water


In the
EVALUATION OF LIPID PEROXIDATION (TBARS ASSAY)
section it says:
C60-MLV showed better antioxidant activity than C60-aq suspensions.

From this I concluded that the  ORAC values and TBARS assay graphs were measured against aqueous solutions of C60 and BHT as controls?

I cant find a full study to read. Does anybody have one?

 

 

Yes, I can’t also find a full study to read. But, in this sense, as I hope, there is more demonstrative article about antioxidative properties of "fullerenes" (see attached pdf-file at this post).

 

The overall conclusion therein is as follows:

 

“3.2. Antioxidant capacity of C60 micellar solutions (TBARS assay)

We studied antioxidant activities of the prepared series of water soluble forms of fullerene C60 by measuring the product of lipid peroxidation (LP)—thiobarbituric acid reactive substance (TBARS). Aqueous solutions of the fullerene supramolecular forms were investigated in the concentration range from 0.1 to 10 uM. (!!!)

Butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT) as a commercial, well known antioxidant, served as reference. Results obtained in this investigation show that the antioxidant potential strongly depends on the type of solubility enhancer, and the LP level, at all investigated supramolecular structures, varied in a concentration dependent manner. The best (!!!) antioxidant activity was exhibited by stable water suspension of fullerene (C60aq ~= FWS = water solution of HyFn), which decreased the level of TBARS by more than 80% at 4.68 uM (Fig. 4). This result shows that C60 is more potent ROS scavenger than BHT(!!!). Our findings are in agreement with results of Wang et al. which found that liposoluble C60 had greater antioxidant power than vitamin E!!! [33]. Introducing a surfactant to modify fullerene solubility caused a slight or a complete discrepancy of ROS-scavenging potentiality. In our model system, fullerene coated with ionic surfactants- MTAB, DTAC and SDS showed a prooxidative (!!!) effect and supramolecular structures of C60 with surfactants of the Tween group (T20, T60 and T80) also exhibited the same(!!!).

….C60-PVP, in the same concentration range, suppresses lipid peroxidation similarly to BHT. Takada et al. reported significant inhibitory effect of PVP entrapped fullerene on the oxidative discoloration of beta-carotene [23],…..”

 

In other words, independent researchers themselves, without our involvement, have shown that FWS  (HyFn) is most powerful antioxidant known among "fullerenes", and vitamin E and BHT which are considered as standards for antioxidants.

 

 Fullerene C60 in micellar solutions and TBARS test.pdf   349.45KB   2 downloads

[Logic]

In other words, independent researchers themselves, without our involvement, have shown that FWS  (HyFn) is most powerful antioxidant known among "fullerenes", and vitamin E and BHT which are considered as standards for antioxidants.
 
Fullerene C60 in micellar solutions and TBARS test.pdf

Thx GVA

However I still wonder if there may be a synergy between BHT and C60HyFin and/or C60oo due to the higher ORAC values of C6oBHT?

There is lots of evidence of BHT stopping lipid peroxidation and hence arthrosclerosis as well BHT having anti viral properties.
http://www.longecity...opic/42592-bht/

Could C60 have similar effects..?

[GVA]

 

Thx GVA

However I still wonder if there may be a synergy between BHT and C60HyFin and/or C60oo due to the higher ORAC values of C6oBHT?

There is lots of evidence of BHT stopping lipid peroxidation and hence arthrosclerosis as well BHT having anti viral properties.
http://www.longecity...opic/42592-bht/

Could C60 have similar effects..?

 

Yes, but for C60HyFn, not for single C60 molecule or for "C60_OO adducts" . Discussion about it is strong scientific matter not for this forum. Sorry!

Edited by GVA, 11 September 2014 - 12:26 AM.