43 replies to this topic

[Walter Derzko]

Carbon 60 Hydrated Fullerenes does not contain any hydroxyl groups.

 
 
You keep saying that, but the slide presentation you linked to clearly shows six OH groups in the innermost shell.

You got your chemistry WRONG turnbuckle—The (OH) you are referring to is a OH(-) anion of water and not a covalently attached hydroxyl group/tail.

Walter Derzko

Translated reply from Dr. Grigoriy Andrievsky

First of all, C60HyFn not a polyhydroxyl analogue of the chemical derivatives of C60 – such as fullerenols (C60 {OH} n) -, where the OH- group is covalently "attached " to the surface of carbon in C60.
According slides 59,69,69 and especially to slides 48-52 in the aquatic environment, near the surface of C60 molecules there is an increase / enhancement of the hydrolysis of water molecules that are thousands of times lighter compared to the dissociation of water in bulk. There the "OH" refers to
conventional OH (-) anions, which is a consequence of water dissociation reaction specifically:
H2O <-> H (+) + HO (-) with pK = 7, but for C60HyFn - pK = 3.5 !!!

(GV Andrievsky, VK Klochkov, A. Bordyuh, GI Dovbeshko. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF TWO AQUEOUS-COLLOIDAL SOLUTIONS OF C60 FULLERENE WITH HELP OF FT-IR REFLECTANCE AND UV-VIS SPECTROSCOPY. Chem. Phys. Letters, 364 (2002) 8- 17).

Original email reply in Ukrainian

Він далі каже:,
After a first pass through the file, I noted where I got the idea there were six OH groups involved in hydrated C60--slides 59, 64 & 65, for instance, show OH groups.
=================================
Поперше, C60HyFn не є аналогом полігидроксильованих хімічни похідних С60 - fullerenols (C60{OH}n) -, у яких OH- групи є ковалентно "прив'язанними" до углецевої поверхні С60.
У відповідності слайдам 59,69,69, а особливо до слайдів 48-52, в водному середовищі, поблизу поверхні молекули С60 вібувається підвищенний/посиленний гідроліз молекул води, який в тисячі разів є полегшеним в порівнянні з дисоціацією води in bulk. Там "OH" є звичайними OH(-) anions, які є слідством звістної реакції дисоціації води:
H2O <--> H(+) + HO(-) з pK=7,
but for C60HyFn - pK= 3.5!!! (G.V. Andrievsky, V.K. Klochkov, A. Bordyuh, G.I. Dovbeshko. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF TWO AQUEOUS-COLLOIDAL SOLUTIONS OF C60 FULLERENE WITH HELP OF FT-IR REFLECTANCE AND UV-VIS SPECTROSCOPY. Chem. Phys. Letters, 364 (2002) 8-17).

Edited by Walter Derzko, 07 April 2015 - 06:06 PM.

[Turnbuckle]

Well then, good that it's not C60(OH)6, as that is one of the worst--

 

Among the C60(OH)x tested, C60(OH)6–12 had the most potent cytotoxic activity. 

 

Cytotoxic Effects of Hydroxylated Fullerenes in Three Types of Liver Cells

 

 

Of course, it still has substantial toxicity, as show in the study I linked to above. So maybe covalent bonding makes little difference.

 

 

 

 

[Walter Derzko]

Hydroxylated Fullerenes and pure pristine Hydrated Fullerenes are two different animals. Most Fullerene derivatives or modified fullerenes are toxic in vivo, where as Carbon 60 Hydrated Fullerenes are not. By digging up obscure in vitro studies that do not match already proven human and animal in vivo safety studies you appear to be confusing the audience, who may not know the difference.

We all know that your real agenda is to discredit Carbon 60 Hydrated Fullerenes.

[Turnbuckle]

We all know that your real agenda is to discredit Carbon 60 Hydrated Fullerenes.

 

 

Untrue. I had a good impression of this product until you appeared, then I began to smell the usual homeopathic BS. I like the idea of hydrated C60, as it is clean, unlike the witch's brew of C60/EVOO, and it isn't going to go rancid. On the other hand, it is ridiculously expensive, and has no longevity data equivalent to the EVOO study. And now the possibility it is toxic.

[Walter Derzko]

AGAIN TURNBUCKLE IS WRONG

 

HyFn appears to be highly toxic to cultured cells, much like fullerols--and even HyFn can be considered a fullerol from the data Walter provided (on another thread), with its six OH groups. A study in Russia shows this toxicity--A Paradoxical Effect of Hydrated C60Fullerene at an Ultralow Concentration on the Viability and Aging of Cultured Chinese Hamster Cells.

Abstract—The effect of an aqueous solution of hydrated C60fullerene (HyFn) on the growth and “stationary
phase aging” (accumulation of “agerelated” changes in cultured cells during the slowing down of their pro
liferation within a single passage and the subsequent “aging” in the stationary phase of growth) of transformed
B11dii FAF28 Chinese hamster cells was studied. The final calculated concentration of HyFn in the growth
medium was 10⎯19 M. A paradoxical result contrasting the available data on the absence of HyFn cytotoxicity
at higher concentrations was obtained in our experiments: namely, HyFn decelerated cell proliferation (esti
mated by the growth of mass culture, as well as by the efficiency of colony formation) and accelerated the
“stationary phase aging” of the cell culture. Moreover, repeated addition of an aqueous solution of HyFn (to
the final calculated concentration of 10–19 M) to the cells that had already reached the stationary phase of
growth caused a rapid (within no more than 24 h) death of a significant part of the cell population. The
observed effect of HyFn at ultralow concentration is supposed to arise from the alterations in the properties
of the water surrounding the fullerene molecule: namely, water becomes a donor and acceptor of electrons
and regulates redox processes (especially those involving oxygen) in aqueous systems. This effect of HyFn at
an ultralow concentration may be specific for transformed cells, and, therefore, experiments on normal fibro
blasts with limited mitotic potential are planned as a continuation of the present study. It is also possible that
the reported antiaging effect of HyFn in experimental animals is due to its anticancer, immunostimulatory,
antiviral, and antibacterial properties manifested only at the wholeorganism level.

 

 
 
 
According to Figure 2, attached, adding HyFn to the growth of a culture of cells at any point killed a substantial part of the population.

AGAIN TURNBUCKLE IS WRONG!!
Turnbuckle writes: A study in Russia shows this toxicity--A Paradoxical Effect of Hydrated C60Fullerene at an Ultralow Concentration on the Viability and Aging of Cultured Chinese Hamster Cells.

Once again Turnbuckle, you try to make yourself out as some sort of an expert and again you fail miserably. Your reputation on this Forum as a credible source flies out the window every time you post your countless attempts at misinformation and lies.

You appear to wish to interpret the Russian paper which you quoted, the way it suits your purpose and not the way the experimental model was actually designed. The model was to show the accelerated aging of transformed cultured B11dii FAF28 Chinese hamster cells (in fact cancer cells) under the influence of C60HYFNs at very small concentrations. In simple terms for the lay person: C60 Hydrated fullerenes are toxic to and kill cancer cells.
Dr Grigoriy Andrievsky collaborated with his Russian colleagues in the design of this experiment, where they say at the end:
"This effect of HyFn at an ultralow concentration may be specific for transformed cells (!!!), and, therefore, experiments on normal (!!!) fibro blasts with limited mitotic potential are planned as a continuation of the present study. It is also possible that the reported antiaging effect of HyFn in experimental animals is due to its anticancer, immunostimulatory, antiviral, and antibacterial properties manifested only at the whole organism level." !!!!!

Edited by Walter Derzko, 08 April 2015 - 02:10 AM.

[Walter Derzko]

We all know that your real agenda is to discredit Carbon 60 Hydrated Fullerenes.

 
 
Untrue. I had a good impression of this product until you appeared, then I began to smell the usual homeopathic BS. I like the idea of hydrated C60, as it is clean, unlike the witch's brew of C60/EVOO, and it isn't going to go rancid. On the other hand, it is ridiculously expensive, and has no longevity data equivalent to the EVOO study. And now the possibility it is toxic.

witch's brew of C60/EVOO? vs C60 Hydrated Fullerenes

-"homeopathic BS" You are the one that keeps calling it homeopathic BS, not me. I called it Nanotechnology and the 4th phase of water according to Pollack's theory

-"Ridiculously Expensive?" How about $3-4 worth of C60 HYFN as a raw material ingredient per 500 ml bottle of water at the wholesale level, so we can expect manufacturers will charge about $30 -$40 at the retail level, with a standard 10X capstone markup, when it hits the marketplace, which keeps pace with high end botanical antioxidants such as premium green tea extracts or other high ORAC value antioxidants. That's a cheap price considering it's a ultra high universal antioxidant and has dozens of health benefits based on 20 years of preclinical and clinical studies http://c60water.com/...physicians.html

Repeating what the Russian paper that you quoted concluded: It is also possible that the reported antiaging effect of C60HyFn in experimental animals is due to its anticancer, immunostimulatory, antiviral, and antibacterial properties manifested only at the whole organism level." !!!!!


-"And now the possibility it is toxic." YES toxic to transformed hamster cancer cells as you quoted above.

"has no longevity data equivalent to the EVOO study" In the works at the Kyiv Institute of Gerontology. Results should be ready in about two years if we start soon.

Edited by Walter Derzko, 08 April 2015 - 02:28 AM.

[mikeinnaples]

Walter, you really need to relax. Your general attitude makes it very difficult to read your posts even if they happen to have any value.

[Turnbuckle]

AGAIN TURNBUCKLE IS WRONG

 

HyFn appears to be highly toxic to cultured cells, much like fullerols--and even HyFn can be considered a fullerol from the data Walter provided (on another thread), with its six OH groups. A study in Russia shows this toxicity--A Paradoxical Effect of Hydrated C60Fullerene at an Ultralow Concentration on the Viability and Aging of Cultured Chinese Hamster Cells.
 

Abstract—The effect of an aqueous solution of hydrated C60fullerene (HyFn) on the growth and “stationary
phase aging” (accumulation of “agerelated” changes in cultured cells during the slowing down of their pro
liferation within a single passage and the subsequent “aging” in the stationary phase of growth) of transformed
B11dii FAF28 Chinese hamster cells was studied. The final calculated concentration of HyFn in the growth
medium was 10⎯19 M. A paradoxical result contrasting the available data on the absence of HyFn cytotoxicity
at higher concentrations was obtained in our experiments: namely, HyFn decelerated cell proliferation (esti
mated by the growth of mass culture, as well as by the efficiency of colony formation) and accelerated the
“stationary phase aging” of the cell culture. Moreover, repeated addition of an aqueous solution of HyFn (to
the final calculated concentration of 10–19 M) to the cells that had already reached the stationary phase of
growth caused a rapid (within no more than 24 h) death of a significant part of the cell population. The
observed effect of HyFn at ultralow concentration is supposed to arise from the alterations in the properties
of the water surrounding the fullerene molecule: namely, water becomes a donor and acceptor of electrons
and regulates redox processes (especially those involving oxygen) in aqueous systems. This effect of HyFn at
an ultralow concentration may be specific for transformed cells, and, therefore, experiments on normal fibro
blasts with limited mitotic potential are planned as a continuation of the present study. It is also possible that
the reported antiaging effect of HyFn in experimental animals is due to its anticancer, immunostimulatory,
antiviral, and antibacterial properties manifested only at the wholeorganism level.

 

 
 
 
According to Figure 2, attached, adding HyFn to the growth of a culture of cells at any point killed a substantial part of the population.

 

AGAIN TURNBUCKLE IS WRONG!!
Turnbuckle writes: A study in Russia shows this toxicity--A Paradoxical Effect of Hydrated C60Fullerene at an Ultralow Concentration on the Viability and Aging of Cultured Chinese Hamster Cells.

Once again Turnbuckle, you try to make yourself out as some sort of an expert and again you fail miserably. Your reputation on this Forum as a credible source flies out the window every time you post your countless attempts at misinformation and lies.

You appear to wish to interpret the Russian paper which you quoted, the way it suits your purpose and not the way the experimental model was actually designed. The model was to show the accelerated aging of transformed cultured B11dii FAF28 Chinese hamster cells (in fact cancer cells) under the influence of C60HYFNs at very small concentrations. In simple terms for the lay person: C60 Hydrated fullerenes are toxic to and kill cancer cells.
Dr Grigoriy Andrievsky collaborated with his Russian colleagues in the design of this experiment, where they say at the end:
"This effect of HyFn at an ultralow concentration may be specific for transformed cells (!!!), and, therefore, experiments on normal (!!!) fibro blasts with limited mitotic potential are planned as a continuation of the present study. It is also possible that the reported antiaging effect of HyFn in experimental animals is due to its anticancer, immunostimulatory, antiviral, and antibacterial properties manifested only at the whole organism level." !!!!!

 

 

 

Oh, I agree that the experiment was on transformed cells, where the toxicity seems to be very high at a very low dose. The authors say they intend to do more testing on normal cells, and until such time, it would be wise to approach this stuff with some caution. That said, there seems to be a bi-modal activity of at least some C60 preparations. On the one hand they act as an anti-oxidant, and on the other they seem to stimulate stem cells (as noticed by some here taking C60/EVOO) while apparently killing some cancer cells, even at extremely low doses. My hypothesis is that C60 is repressing a mitochondrial uncoupling protein (like UCP2) thereby causing stem cells to differentiate while turning on the apotheosis program that is suppressed in cancer cells. This protein is key to both--

 

For instance, for stem cells--

 

UCP2 regulates energy metabolism and differentiation potential of human pluripotent stem cells

 

Abstract

It has been assumed, based largely on morphologic evidence, that human pluripotent stem cells (hPSCs) contain underdeveloped, bioenergetically inactive mitochondria. In contrast, differentiated cells harbour a branched mitochondrial network with oxidative phosphorylation as the main energy source. A role for mitochondria in hPSC bioenergetics and in cell differentiation therefore remains uncertain. Here, we show that hPSCs have functional respiratory complexes that are able to consume O2 at maximal capacity. Despite this, ATP generation in hPSCs is mainly by glycolysis and ATP is consumed by the F1F0 ATP synthase to partially maintain hPSC mitochondrial membrane potential and cell viability. Uncoupling protein 2 (UCP2) plays a regulating role in hPSC energy metabolism by preventing mitochondrial glucose oxidation and facilitating glycolysis via a substrate shunting mechanism. With early differentiation, hPSC proliferation slows, energy metabolism decreases, and UCP2 is repressed, resulting in decreased glycolysis and maintained or increased mitochondrial glucose oxidation. Ectopic UCP2 expression perturbs this metabolic transition and impairs hPSC differentiation. Overall, hPSCs contain active mitochondria and require UCP2 repression for full differentiation potential.

 

 

 

And for cancer, at least some tumors can be attacked via UCP2--

Mitochondrial uncoupling protein 2 and pancreatic cancer: A new potential target therapy.

 

...Some studies have shown that the mitochondrial uncoupling protein (UCP2) is over-expressed in pancreatic cancer as compared to adjacent normal tissues. In addition, recent discoveries established a key role of UCP2 in protecting cancer cells from an excessive production of mitochondrial superoxide ions and in the promotion of cancer cell metabolic reprogramming, including aerobic glycolysis stimulation, promotion of cancer progression.

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/25805929

 

 

 

This UCP hypothesis also explains why many see a boost of energy from C60.

 

Now when you look at UCP2, its pore is very suggestive--a round channel of approximately the same diameter of C60, and thus something that could be physically blocked by a spherical molecule of sufficient size.

Edited by Turnbuckle, 08 April 2015 - 04:00 PM.

[Walter Derzko]

Walter, you really need to relax. Your general attitude makes it very difficult to read your posts even if they happen to have any value.

To be fair Mikeinnaples, You should also be telling turnbuckle to relax too, since he has been the aggressor on this Forum all week long, posting inaccurate and misleading information about C60 Hydrated Fullerenes. I'm, just for the record, correcting his misinformation. Check the thread history. In each instance, it's turnbuckle that has been picking every fight. Respectfully, Walter Derzko

P.S. I'm going to take your advice Mikeinnaples though and relax away from these "discussions and debates" with turnbuckle, since frankly I'm getting bored with turnbuckle, I know I won't convince or influence him and I've got much more important work to do in the next few months.

[Walter Derzko]

Oh, I agree that the experiment was on transformed cells, where the toxicity seems to be very high at a very low dose. The authors say they intend to do more testing on normal cells, and until such time, it would be wise to approach this stuff with some caution. That said, there seems to be a bi-modal activity of at least some C60 preparations. On the one hand they act as an anti-oxidant, and on the other they seem to stimulate stem cells (as noticed by some here taking C60/EVOO) while apparently killing some cancer cells, even at extremely low doses. My hypothesis is that C60 is repressing a mitochondrial uncoupling protein (like UCP2) thereby causing stem cells to differentiate while turning on the apotheosis program that is suppressed in cancer cells. This protein is key to both--
 
For instance, for stem cells--

 
This UCP hypothesis also explains why many see a boost of energy from C60.
 
Now when you look at UCP2, its pore is very suggestive--a round channel of approximately the same diameter of C60, and thus something that could be physically blocked by a spherical molecule of sufficient size.

This sounds like a good hypothesis of action for C60, based on previous preclinical and clinical studies

[Daniel Cooper]

How did a thread about an interview with Fathi Moussa about C60oo turn into a thread about hydrated fullerenes?  Seems to be a significant derail has occurred here.

 

 

 

[Anthony_Loera]

Maybe the Hydrated fullerenes argument should be split into it's own thread?

 

Hydrated fullerenes are not talked about in the video. 

Hydrated fullerenes have not been shown to increase lifespan in the Moussa study.

 

It appears Walter really wants to discuss them rather than C60 Olive oil (which is what the video is about) and maybe Hydrated fullerenes deserves it's own thread away from the video, so as not to confuse folks.

 

A

[smithx]

The title of this thread is a little confusing to me. "Olive Oil Study With Fathi Moussa And Anthony Loera From RevGenetics" seemed to imply that there was another study.

 

What was actually released was just a video interview of Moussa where he discusses the one published study that we already know about. Is that correct?

 

 

[Logic]

Maybe the Hydrated fullerenes argument should be split into it's own thread?

 

Hydrated fullerenes are not talked about in the video. 

Hydrated fullerenes have not been shown to increase lifespan in the Moussa study.

 

It appears Walter really wants to discuss them rather than C60 Olive oil (which is what the video is about) and maybe Hydrated fullerenes deserves it's own thread away from the video, so as not to confuse folks.

 

A

 

Either: 

Walter believes 'there is  no such thing as bad press' and is purposefully hijacking every C60oo thread, pissing people off and starting arguments to pimp his product.

And somehow getting away with it!?

 

Or:

He is just one of those poeple (purposefully misspelled) who is arrogant and argumentative as a way of life and willing to stoop to any level to make a couple of $$.

 

Its probably a bit of both.

 

What he should have done is start his own thread, with links (acknowledgments) to previous threads and then gently pointed out where studies on C60HYFN show similar or better effects to those mentioned on other C60oo threads. 

 

I too agree, and vote, that all his posts should be moved to their own thread.

'Walters arrogant arguments for C60HYFN (Warning: Likely to put you off them for life)'

would be a good heading IMHO.

 

(I have been put off reading the C60oo threads by him, although I must add that he has calmed down somewhat lately)

 

My 3 year old thread on C60HYFN:

http://www.longecity...fn/#entry527984

Please dont mess it up by moving his posts there!