23 replies to this topic

[resveratrol]

I want to get your thoughts on hyperbaric oxygen therapy. I've just realized that hyperbaric therapy significantly increases stem cell circulation via nitric oxide.

http://www.hyperbari...om/StemCell.htm

http://www.nationalh...ygenTherapy.pdf

http://www.scienceda...10405082616.htm

From the last article: "In mice, HBO2 increased circulating stem cell factor by 50%, increased the number of circulating cells expressing stem cell antigen-1 and CD34 by 3.4-fold, and doubled the number of CFCs."

I'm surprised there isn't a LOT more discussion of this as an anti-aging therapy ... particularly in light of research such as the very recent ScienceDaily article here (http://www.scienceda...10405082616.htm), which suggests that a failure of cell proliferation is one of the major causes of aging.

This seems to me like a no-brainer. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy has low risk and serious potential to dramatically increase your stem cell proliferation, which is quite difficult to affect any other way.

Discuss!

Edited by resveratrol, 27 June 2011 - 01:46 PM.

[DbCooper]

I got 17 "chamber rides" last year, going down to about 45 feet and breathing pure O2. Other than the process taking all day, I felt amazing coming out of the chamber. Oh and your constantly trying to stay ahead of the depth by eqaulizing the pressure in your ears.

It was amazing how fast little cuts and stuff heal up.

[niner]

I was talking to a very good podiatrist a few months ago, and he said that he finds HBO2 to be very helpful for poorly healing foot wounds in diabetics. At the time, I figured it must just be from the higher partial pressure of O2 leading to improved oxygenation. I didn't know about the stem cells. That's really interesting. This suggests that HBO2 is something akin to regenerative medicine.

[adamh]

Mikey Jackson used it all the time. What more proof do you need?

[Brainster]

I have a little knowledge on Hyperberic O2. I've been doing chamber runs for over 10 years and have 500 + logs. I can tell you that it heals cuts, bruises, hangovers etc extremely fast! I have a vast amount of people who also say I do not look my age, I think that's part genetic, healthy life style, and of course long term use of a hyperberic chamber! I'm always at the 40 foot depth mark for a duration of 30 min on O2 when doing a chamber run.

[resveratrol]

Mikey Jackson used it all the time. What more proof do you need?

 

I'm not going to draw any conclusions based on that guy ... Dude was already f'ed up a million ways to Sunday.

I was talking to a very good podiatrist a few months ago, and he said that he finds HBO2 to be very helpful for poorly healing foot wounds in diabetics. At the time, I figured it must just be from the higher partial pressure of O2 leading to improved oxygenation. I didn't know about the stem cells. That's really interesting. This suggests that HBO2 is something akin to regenerative medicine.

 

Exactly right, niner.

 

One thing I've just realized ... I am also seeing that hyperbaric oxygen therapy massively increases angiogenesis (the formation of new blood vessels).

 

That is not a good thing where cancer is concerned, particularly in light of Dr. William Li's TED talk on anti-angiogenic foods:

 

 

So that is the first thing I'm seeing that gives me any reservations at all about hyperbaric oxygen therapy.

 

EDIT: OK, apparently my concerns are likely misplaced. The studies seem to indicate that hyperbaric therapy seems to have either no effect or a beneficial effect on cancer:

 

http://www.spinalreh...rate cancer.pdf

Edited by caliban, 15 September 2021 - 11:41 PM.

[Keyser_Soze]

hello, This is my first post.

Believe it or not, I'm one of the few freaks in this country who actually owns a hyperbaric oxygen chamber. I own a Vitaeris 320. 

new these units cost about $20,000 or more. However, used you can pick them up for about $10-$12,000. I getting mine every single day for about 60 to 90 min.

I believe for some applications these units are overhyped and overrated. However, for other issues they work absolutely incredible!

For example, one place where these units always work is when dealing with any kind of inflammation. That means cuts burns or incisions from plastic surgery.

In fact, I believe within five years, over half of all plastic surgeons will be having their patients use these units before and after surgery.

The healing process is so much improved it is easily justified. Currently, the awareness is low enough so as to suppress the demand.

The Vitaeris 320 is what's known as a mild hyperbaric oxygen chamber. it only puts you under 4 pounds of pressure. This is not to be confused with the steel medical units used in hospitals which
could you wonder, I believe, 11 pounds of pressure.

As I said, I use my unit every day. Does it produce miracles? No. However, the more I exercise, the more I noticed the benefits. Again, the key is inflammation and improving recovery from it.

for example, if I'm doing a lot of weight training and I don't going the oxygen chamber, I notice my recovery is slower than if I do.

If anyone is also a user of these chambers or has questions please let me know. I'll do the best I can to help you out.

And yes, your skin tone will always improve when using hyperbaric oxygen.

I'm not sure, but if I remember correctly, it is the equivalent of going from sea level to 6000 feet below sea level. meaning that, for pounds of pressure is the equivalent of going from
6000 feet elevation to sea level. Or sea level to 6000 feet below sea level. 

Keyser

P.S. - in regards the question about the benefits I notice from the by Vitaeris 320 hyperbaric oxygen chamber let me say the following:
I don't have any major health issues but., I notice using it on a daily basis gives me a major octane boost. Again, the more I exercise, and the more healthy things I do, the more I notice the benefits of the oxygen chamber.
skin tone improvement is one of the first things you notice, also more energy. In fact, you don't want to go in the unit at six in the evening for a quick nap or you'll be up wired till four in the morning. You'll feel great, but it will throw your sleep off. I find the best time to go in is first thing in the morning or after a walk or work out with weights.

Edited by caliban, 15 September 2021 - 11:40 PM.

[Anewlife]

I was going to do it but read it has some negative long term effect, I think oxiditation or something inbetween treatments.

[Keyser_Soze]

Controversial like anything else.
Then again, we don't know what taking all the supplements does to you after 10 or 20 years? 
I get blood work every 6 months and have seen my liver function thrown off from everything from multi vitamin packs to (recently) ginseng.

Do you know where 90% of Vitmain C in this country 'now comes from? I'll give you a hint... it's where over 20% of all organic food in this country comes from. The answer is in one word: CHINA!

In reality, I think mild HBO isn't very different from living at 6,000 ft elevation and then moving to sea level (with the exception of using an Integra Sequel Oxygen Concentrator).

The word HBO or HyperBarix Oxygen is like the word "CAR" 

 

There are a number of variables.
1.) Mild units are only 4lbs of pressure (vs. intensive units are 11lbs)
2.) Some people use an oxygenator and some don't. (*I do). 
So the actual oxygen content in the chamber is about 38% under 4 lbs of pressure.

So, it's like you are going from 6,000ft elevation to sea level and increasing the oxygen. Big deal... no different than athletes who train at 11,000 ft elevation and then compete at sea level except you are recreating the experience.

I live half the year at about 6,5000 ft and half the year at sea level and yes, I can feel the transition if I exercise. It's not the miracle people make it out to be but I have seen what it does. Where it does it's biggest improvement is for surgeries.... absolutely amazing. No comparison.

The healing is so drastically improved you'd be crazy to have any surgery and not do MILD HBO before and after.

As far as long term use... who knows... however, I know one guy who has been using is Vitaeris from age 60 to now 70. He loves it so much he takes it with him on his month long vacation to mexico (of course, he leaves the
oxygenator at home for it's too big for the plane).

The reality is this: long term we don't really know what it does... just like heavy vitamins... testosterone...growth hormone etc.

We are all gambling but... I know one thing... Being super happy, laughing my butt off, eathing mcdonalds once a day and taking NO VITAMINS
I will have far less issues than people who are working all the time, stressed, not making love to their wife enough but have all the latest supps and gadgets etc.
And this comes from somone whose spend over $50,000.00 of their own money on health issues while being misdiagnosed 3 times (laughs!)
Whatever you do... take an hour a day to completely shut your mind off and get into that mental floating state where you mind is off but your "body" is awake. 
This, in the end, has been the most profound thing I have learned and applied in the end. It costs nothing and gives the biggest return,

Like I told my friend who has been having sleep problems for years... "You don't have a melatonin deficiency anymore than you have an ambien deficiency. What you have is a spiritual energy issue. You are spiritual bankrupt. 
You have 50 things which are draining your spiritual battery each day (work, traffic, bills, family etc) but you have nothing (or maybe one thing...) which recharges your battery.

Keyser
PS- Happy New year 2013!

[shifter]

Is it wise to supplement on antioxidants while using this? It's probably a noob question, but breathing pure O2 would also increase free radical activity/potential right?

I wonder if this could work wonders for arthritis?

[Keyser_Soze]

Shifter,

There is so much we don't know.

I am not sure I am even sold on the whole "antioxidant" theory.

Look back 400 or 800 years ago what the oxygen content we were all breathing was? ANSWER: it was much higher.
When using MILD HBO you are only doing it 60 to 90 minutes a day in my case and you're NOT breating enriched oxygen.
You're either breathing inside the chamber where the OXYGENATOR is feeding in or, you're breathing via a cannula off the oxygenator while in the chamber.

If I measure the air in the chamber being supplemented by the oxygenator it is about 38%. Not sure when breathing directly' off the oxygenator.

Either way, I've seen what it does for inflammation and it's very impressive. Long term for me... maybe I'll die or I am aging fasting (I doubt it).

Like I said... have a friend whose been doing it for over 10 years. Terrell Owens and many others have been doing it a while as well.

One of the big oxygen gurus whose been around about 30 years is this guy... he'll have some opinions:

ED MCCABE
"Oxygen Therapies"
"Flood Your Body with Oxygen"

Keyser

P.S. - I rarely get hung over but it chamber works great for that as well. I'm going broke so I may end up having to sell mine.

[Adaptogen]

Wish I had enough money to blow on one...I think i would go for the more economical flotation tank before I went for one of these

[joelcairo]

Look back 400 or 800 years ago what the oxygen content
we were all breathing was? ANSWER: it was much higher.

I'm not sure about the overall benefits of hyperbaric oxygen, but this part is not true. Oxygen levels have only changed by a tiny amount in the era that humans have existed.

[niner]

Is it wise to supplement on antioxidants while using this? It's probably a noob question, but breathing pure O2 would also increase free radical activity/potential right?

I wonder if this could work wonders for arthritis?

Not a noob question in my book. I think it would be a pretty good idea to have an antioxidant on board if you do HBO therapy. My choice would be c60-oo, but NAC or C and mixed E's are other (lesser) possibilities. I don't know about working wonders, but if HBO mobilizes stem cells, then it might be helpful for osteoarthritis. I don't see an obvious mechanism for it helping RA.

[Hebbeh]

http://www.scienceda...30123144218.htm

[resveratrol_guy]

Now here's a brain twister...

 

As covered in this article, the military claims to have demonstrated that hyperbaric oxygen therapy for unresolved concussion symptoms is equivalent to sham therapy, but both are superior to no pressurized-air therapy at all. The sample size was 72, so this is moderately statistically significant. My own interpretation is that is that hyperbaric oxygen therapy works, but reaches maximum efficacy at a low multiple of atmospheric pressure. I think this actually makes sense, as the difference between decent oxygen saturation (like 98%) and perfect saturation is 2% or so, so in principle it shouldn't take much increased partial pressure of O2 to reach the latter, regardless of whether or not other normal atmospheric gasses are present.

 

"Seventy-two service members who experienced concussions (including at least 1 concussion during war-zone deployment) and were having persistent post-concussion symtoms (>= 4 months duration) were randomized to receive 40 HBO treatments (100% oxygen at 1.5 atmospheres absolute for 60 minutes 5 days per week), a sham procedure (40 equivalent sessions involving slightly pressurized room air, sufficient to induce a feeling of inner ear pressure), or routine postconcussion care."

 

"However, compared with the no intervention group (average change score, 0.05), both groups with supplemental chamber procedures showed improved symptoms on a total score (average change score, 5.4 in the HBO group and 7.0 in the sham group)."

 

The study authors claimed that these results were "disappointing", but I disagree. If anything, it means that the benefits of hyperbaric air therapy should be achievable at lower cost, and maybe even with DIY equipment of the sort used for pressurizing diving bells.

 

With reference to the above video about Dr. William Li and his work on the association between angiogenesis and cancer, I strongly disagree that hyperbaric therapy would be carcinogenic; only pathological, disorganized angiogenesis due to (epi)genetic mutations is known to be carcinogenic; normal neovascularization should enhance organ function and immune access to deeply buried cells, as I've mentioned before, which I think would actually stave off cancer. Moreover, the significance of the military study is to demonstrate that we don't need nearly so much partial pressure of O2, so by using the not-really-sham version, we can reduce the formation of free radicals which would otherwise occur due to supersaturation of the blood with more O2 than the hemoglobin can acutally carry.

 

Edited by resveratrol_guy, 18 November 2014 - 04:34 PM.

[ceridwen]

The was a video article in Science Daily that says that it works for stroke and Alzheimer's. Now I want to try it. I think it might be possible to get it in Wales

[SearchHorizon]

A link to a video on hyperbaric oxygen treatment and aging.

 

 

A link to a human study on an effect of hyperbaric oxyten treatment on stem cells:

 

http://prstemcell.co...dies_on_HBO.pdf

 

 

 

[reason]

An interesting open access paper was recently published on the effects of hyperbaric oxygen treatment on telomere length and cellular senescence in immune cells taken from blood samples. I use the word "interesting" quite deliberately, because that is exactly and all that this research is. The paper is appropriately formal and modest on that front, but this attitude doesn't extend to the rest of the publicity, unfortunately. When one runs a business based around offering hyperbaric oxygen treatment, one must make hay while the sun shines, and extract every last drop of marketing juice from every study funded. Hence there are media articles out there at the moment breathlessly telling us that hyperbaric oxygen treatment reverses aging. This is ridiculous, and only makes it harder for the better end of the industry to make progress.

Per the paper, hyperbaric oxygen treatment causes average telomere length to grow by ~20% and markers of cellular senescence to decrease by ~35% in populations of circulating immune cells. This doesn't tell us that hyperbaric oxygen treatment is an amazing rejuvenation therapy, any more than the NAD+ and mitochondrial function data for exercise tells us that exercise is an amazing rejuvenation therapy. In both cases we already know the bounds of the possible. We know that these interventions don't turn older people into notably younger people. If we're calling exercise and hyperbaric oxygen treatment rejuvenation therapies, then the term "rejuvenation therapy" is meaningless.

What this does reinforce is the point that peripheral blood immune cell parameters can be very disconnected from the overall state of aging. We know that telomere length as assessed in these cells is a truly terrible measure of aging. Circulating immune cells are prone to large variations in the pace of celular replication in response to circumstances. Immune cells replicate aggressively when provoked by the presence of pathogens or other issues requiring a coordinated immune response. Telomere length shortens with every cell division in somatic cells: in immune cells, telomere length thus has a very wide spread across individuals, varies day to day, is just as influenced by infection status and other environmental factors as it is by aging. It is just not all that helpful as a measure of aging, and downward trends with age are only seen in the statistics for large study populations.

It seems plausible that the same is true of cellular senescence in immune cells. Cells become senescent when they hit the Hayflick limit on cellular replication. Throughout much of life, the senescence of immune cells is likely more determined by replication pace (and thus immune challenges, the burden of infection) than by aging. And that is before we even get to the point that the authors of this paper used a less than standard measure of senescence, one for which it is possible to argue that it may or may not actually be representative of the burden of senescent cells in immune populations. Overall this data is all interesting, but I suspect that it tells us more about the poor relevance of the metrics chosen to anything other than the deeper aspects of immune function.

If hyperbaric oxygen treatment removed ~35% of senescent cells throughout the body, it would already be well known as a reliable therapy for arthritis, a way to reverse chronic kidney disease, a way to suppress inflammatory conditions, and an effective treatment for numerous chronic diseases of aging. In mice, removing a third of senescent cells via senolytic drugs produces reliably large and beneficial outcomes, while hyperbaric oxygen treatment does not. So clearly it is not globally clearing senescent cells - and nor should any responsible party be trying to present reductions in senescent immune cells as indicative of global senolytic effects throughout the body. What is observed here is an effect limited to the way in which the immune system is functioning. There is some evidence for hyperbaric oxygen treatment to improve resistance to infectious disease such as influenza, and that is interesting in and of itself, but I feel that much of what is going on here is an attempt by certain parties to jump onto the longevity industry bandwagon, rather than responsibly focusing on a realistic view of what can be achieved with their chosen intervention.

Hyperbaric oxygen therapy increases telomere length and decreases immunosenescence in isolated blood cells : a prospective trial

Hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) utilizes 100% oxygen in an environmental pressure higher than one absolute atmospheres (ATA) to enhance the amount of oxygen dissolved in body's tissues. Repeated intermittent hyperoxic exposures, using certain HBOT protocols, can induce physiological effects which normally occur during hypoxia in a hyperoxic environment, the so called hyperoxic-hypoxic paradox. In addition, it was recently demonstrated that HBOT can induce cognitive enhancements in healthy aging adults via mechanisms involving regional changes in cerebral blood flow. On the cellular level, it was demonstrated that HBOT can induce the expression of hypoxia induced factor (HIF), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), and sirtuin (SIRT), stem cell proliferation, mitochondrial biogenesis, angiogenesis, and neurogenesis. However, no study to date has examined HBOT's effects on telomere length and senescent cell accumulation.

Thirty-five healthy independently living adults, aged 64 and older, were enrolled to receive 60 daily HBOT exposures. Whole blood samples were collected at baseline, at the 30th and 60th session, and 1-2 weeks following the last HBOT session. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) telomeres length and senescence were assessed. Telomeres length of T helper, T cytotoxic, natural killer and B cells increased significantly by over 20% following HBOT. The most significant change was noticed in B cells. There was a significant decrease in the number of senescent T helpers by -37.30% post-HBOT. T-cytotoxic senescent cell percentages decreased significantly by -10.96% post-HBOT.

In conclusion, the study indicates that HBOT may induce significant senolytic effects including significantly increasing telomere length and clearance of senescent cells in the aging populations.

View the full article at FightAging

[ryukenden]

Has any of you tried it? Have you bought a chamber? It sounds quite expensive around $10,000

 

https://www.scienced...01120150728.htm

 

 

Hyperbaric oxygen treatment: Clinical trial reverses two biological processes associated with aging in human cells

 

 

 

 

[Turnbuckle]

In conclusion, the study indicates that HBOT may induce significant senolytic effects including significantly increasing telomere length and clearance of senescent cells in the aging populations.

 

 

So this is essentially a senolytic treatment, and the longer telomere lengths are just a byproduct of eliminating senescent cells that typically have short telomeres.

Edited by Turnbuckle, 21 November 2020 - 05:28 PM.

[QuestforLife]

So this is essentially a senolytic treatment, and the longer telomere lengths are just a byproduct of eliminating senescent cells that typically have short telomeres.

 

I agree with your analysis, however this is not what the authors are claiming:

 

These intermittent hyperoxic exposures induce an adaptive response which includes increased upregulation of antioxidants genes [32] and production of antioxidants/scavengers that adjust to the increased ROS generation causing the ROS/scavenger ratio to gradually becomes similar to the ratio under a normal oxygen environment. However, because the scavenger elimination half-life (T1/2) is significantly

longer than the T1/2 of ROS, upon return to normoxia, following repeated hyperoxic exposures, there are significantly higher levels of scavengers and increased antioxidant activity [13, 18]. Thus, similar to physical exercise and caloric restriction, a daily repeated HBOT protocol can induce the hormesis phenomenon. Single exposures increase ROS generation acutely, triggering the antioxidant response, and with repeated exposures, the response becomes protective [13, 18].

 

source: https://www.aging-us...cle/202188/text

 

Essentially they are claiming the oxidative stress triggers a hormetic response that more than makes up for the harm.

[reason]

The scientific community is very broad, and there are many groups within that community whose members intermittently produce studies that are either poorly designed, poorly conducted, or poorly presented and explained. Or all three, for all of the usual reasons. Constraints of time and funding, institutional pressure to publish, the involvement of external interests, and so forth. Bad papers do get published, provided that the authors are subtle enough. This does tend to be a self-correcting problem, when considered over a sufficiently long span of time to allow errant individuals and institutions to blacken their reputations with the community at large. Still, at any given moment, one should expect to see that some small fraction of published scientific papers are problematic, rather than merely incorrect.

The problematic paper for today's discussion was published last year, reporting on a study of the effects of hyperbaric oxygen treatment on areas of metabolism that are connected to the study of aging. At the time, claims of reversal of aging were circulating in the media. The paper itself was of poor quality, but far less offensive than the related and entirely unfounded hype. It was the usual circus of ignorant commentary, yes, but also a matter of hyperbaric oxygen treatment providers pushing claims that were completely unsupported by the evidence. Serious researchers will think twice about working with anyone who was involved in this exercise. I talked about this a little at the time, focusing as much on the ridiculous claims being made by institutions involved in the work, and by the media at large, as on issues with the study and interpretation of data. Relatedly, I see that the SENS Research Foundation team have chosen to pick apart the scientific details in a recent article. A little more shaming can't hurt in this case!

Hyperbolic Hyperbaric "Age Reversal"

Lower-quality, clickbait-hungry media outlets love sensationalist claims, but one does expect better from the public relations department of an internationally-respected research university. And it was an easy jump from the already-overstated "In First, Aging Stopped in Humans" and "treatments can reverse two processes associated with aging and its illnesses" to saying that a treatment "can reverse aging process" - and to then land in a mud-pit of self-parody with "Human ageing reversed in 'Holy Grail' study, scientists say."

The actual findings of a recent study on hyperbaric oxygen treatment (HBOT) were much more limited. Despite some intriguing indicators, the actual impact of HBOT on aging based on this study is entirely unclear, quite plausibly negligible, and in any case objectively less impressive than that of (say) regular exercise, which certainly does not "reverse aging."

The actual details of the study show that even the narrow claims of the study abstract aren't fully justified. It's not clear that blood-cell telomeres were lengthened any more than they would have been without HBOT; it's not clear that "senescent" T-cells were reduced in numbers, let alone actually destroyed; and if "senescent" T-cells had been destroyed, it would not demonstrate a senolytic effect of HBOT. Despite the fact that it's standard terminology in the immunology world, "senescent" T-cells aren't actually "senescent cells" in the sense usually used in the geroscience world. Jumping from post-HBOT reductions in the number of these "senescent" T-cells to potential effects on classical senescent cells is really just a misunderstanding of what kinds of cells are involved in each case.

Even if the study had robustly demonstrated that every one of the points above really did occur, it would not constitute "reversing aging" - or even justify the more restrained claims that "blood cells actually grow younger as the treatments progress" or "that the aging process can in fact be reversed at the basic cellular-molecular level."

View the full article at FightAging

[reason]

In today's open access paper, researchers report a modest improvement in cerebral blood flow and cognitive performance in a small study of older individuals suffering cognitive impairment as a result of sustained hyperbaric oxygen treatment over a period of months. This seems a compensatory approach to therapy, in that improvements in cerebral blood flow should be expected to improve cognitive function at any age. This is the mechanism by which exercise rapidly improves memory function, for example. A direct comparison of hyperbaric oxygen treatment and exercise would be interesting.

This result might help to inform discussions of the degree to which loss of blood supply to the brain contributes to cognitive decline in patients diagnosed with neurodegenerative conditions. Vascular dementia is an acknowledged and well-researched condition, but to what degree is the impairment of Alzheimer's patients at various stages due to vascular aging and consequent reduced blood flow to the brain, versus the harmful protein aggregation and neuroinflammation characteristic of Alzheimer's? Absent a way to remove just one of these pathologies, it is hard to answer that question.

It is worth noting that this study was conducted and published by the same groups who put together the poor study and accompanying overhyped media materials regarding the effects of hyperbaric oxygen treatment on measures of metabolism related to aging. It is most likely a good idea to treat this and any future work conducted by these researchers with an appropriately greater level of scrutiny and skepticism.

Hyperbaric oxygen therapy alleviates vascular dysfunction and amyloid burden in an Alzheimer's disease mouse model and in elderly patients

Vascular dysfunction is entwined with aging and the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease (AD), and contributes to reduced cerebral blood flow (CBF) and consequently, hypoxia. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) is in clinical use for a wide range of medical conditions. In the current study, we exposed 5XFAD mice, a well-studied AD model that presents impaired cognitive abilities, to HBOT and then investigated the therapeutical effects. HBOT increased arteriolar luminal diameter and elevated CBF, thus contributing to reduced hypoxia. Furthermore, HBOT reduced amyloid burden by reducing the volume of pre-existing plaques and attenuating the formation of new ones. This was associated with changes in amyloid precursor protein processing, elevated degradation and clearance of amyloid-ß protein and improved behavior of 5XFAD mice. Hence, our findings are consistent with the effects of HBOT being mediated partially through a persistent structural change in blood vessels that reduces brain hypoxia.

To understand whether the ability of HBOT to change CBF and affect cognitive function also applied to elderly people, we performed a human study in which six elderly patients (age 70.00 ± 2.68 years) with significant memory loss at baseline (memory domain score < 100) were treated with HBOT (60 daily HBOT sessions within 3 months). CBF and cognitive function were evaluated before and after HBOT. CBF was measured by MRI, while cognitive functions were evaluated using computerized cognitive tests. Following HBOT, there were significant CBF increases in several brain areas.

At baseline, patients attained a mean global cognitive score (102.4±7.3) similar to the average score in the general population normalized for age and education level (100), while memory scores were significantly lower (86.6 ± 9.2). Cognitive assessment following HBOT revealed a significant increase in the global cognitive score (102.4 ± 7.3 to 109.5 ± 5.8), where memory, attention and information processing speed domain scores were the most ameliorated. Moreover, post-HBOT mean memory scores improved to the mean score (100.9 ± 7.8), normalized per age and education level (100). The improvements in these scores correlate with improved short and working memory, and reduced times of calculation and response, as well as increased capacity to choose and concentrate on a relevant stimulus.

View the full article at FightAging