19 replies to this topic

[Rib Jig]

does he stand alone in age reversing research field as the leading authority?   
who else has the same gravitas when it comes to age reversing advances?
what is latest on Tally Health biological age testing?
does David Sinclair seek human volunteers?  details? 

 

[johnhemming]

I wouldn't say he stands alone.  He is good at PR, but the idea that aging is all about methylation is clearly wrong as heterochronic parabiosis would not work if it were. I am running some experiments at the moment based upon my own theories which I think probably will give a strong steer in a particular direction.  However, methylation is consequential not a primary cause.

[Rib Jig]

> the idea that aging is all about methylation is clearly wrong as heterochronic parabiosis would not work if it were.

 

This means little to lay people.

David Sinclair has REVERSED aging in mice:
https://www.cnn.com/...ness/index.html

Mice, as in, mammals, as in, sort of like humans.  Lay people understand that.     

Has anyone else indisputably reversed aging in higher life forms?
Or has anyone at least replicated David Sinclair's results?
And don't report reducing wrinkles with wrinkle cream...

[johnhemming]

What happened with the mice is that he dedifferentiated a number of cells which then redifferentiated.

 

The problem with aging is a question of cells not differentiating properly.  

[Turnbuckle]

I wouldn't say he stands alone.  He is good at PR, but the idea that aging is all about methylation is clearly wrong as heterochronic parabiosis would not work if it were. I am running some experiments at the moment based upon my own theories which I think probably will give a strong steer in a particular direction.  However, methylation is consequential not a primary cause.

 

Heterochronic parabiosis appears to work by rejuvenating stem cells in the older recipient. Having more active stem cells means more replacement of epigenetically old cells by epigenetically young cells and a decline in epigenetic age.

 

In general, HP rejuvenated adult stem cells and their niches across tissues. In particular, we identified hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPCs) as one of the most responsive cell types to young blood exposure, from which a continuum of cell state changes across the hematopoietic and immune system emanated, through the restoration of a youthful transcriptional regulatory program and cytokine-mediated cell-cell communications in HSPCs. Moreover, the reintroduction of the identified rejuvenating factors alleviated age-associated lymphopoiesis decline. 

https://pubmed.ncbi....h.gov/35613617/

 

[kurt9]

Heterochronic parabiosis appears to work by rejuvenating stem cells in the older recipient. Having more active stem cells means more replacement of epigenetically old cells by epigenetically young cells and a decline in epigenetic age.

 

If so, then your protocol (which I can easily do by ordering stuff off of the internet) should work just as well, if not better, than anything David Sinclair is doing. David Sinclair is one of many people doing the "cellular reprogramming" thing these days.

[johnhemming]

Heterochronic parabiosis appears to work by rejuvenating stem cells in the older recipient. Having more active stem cells means more replacement of epigenetically old cells by epigenetically young cells and a decline in epigenetic age.

 

ie the methylation changes are an effect of sorting out the functioning of stem cells.

If so, then your protocol (which I can easily do by ordering stuff off of the internet) should work just as well, if not better, than anything David Sinclair is doing. David Sinclair is one of many people doing the "cellular reprogramming" thing these days.

 

It may even work better as the cellular reprogramming assumes that the cells will differentiate properly which does not always happen (and IMO is a more important element of aging than methylation changes).

[Turnbuckle]

ie the methylation changes are an effect of sorting out the functioning of stem cells.

 

 

 

Stem cells (SCs) have little methylation compared to somatic cells. An SC is a tabula rasa that is programmed de novo during differentiation, when the SC becomes a new SC and a new somatic cell. Thus the epigenetic age of the new somatic cell is very low and the average age of the organism is reduced. Since the numbers of functional SCs steadily decline with time, the numbers of aged out cells that aren't replaced increases, and the average epigenetic age increases. This is not inevitable, however. Increasing the number of functional SCs can reverse it, along with aging itself.

Edited by Turnbuckle, 10 June 2022 - 06:10 PM.

[Turnbuckle]

If so, then your protocol (which I can easily do by ordering stuff off of the internet) should work just as well, if not better, than anything David Sinclair is doing. David Sinclair is one of many people doing the "cellular reprogramming" thing these days.

 

Precisely. No need for blood transfusions or factors that could increase the risk of cancer. Besides, proliferating existing SCs is far easier than reprograming somatic cells, and this has been demonstrated in humans. The process works by taking control of mitochondria, which determine SC fate.

Edited by Turnbuckle, 10 June 2022 - 06:34 PM.

[kurt9]

It would seem so as I think bioenergetics and, by extension, mitochondria (in the case of eukaryotes) are at the root of aging.

 

BTW, Nick Lane is coming out with a new book on bioenergetics.

 

https://nick-lane.ne...life-and-death/

 

 

[Rib Jig]

this thread & similar are populated by home scientist recycling cells

& supplement devotees...?

 

but isn't that apart from clear AGE REVERSAL success of live mammals?

where are the peers of DAVID SINCLAIR & what have they accomplished...?
                             

 

 

[Turnbuckle]

this thread & similar are populated by home scientist recycling cells

& supplement devotees...?

 

but isn't that apart from clear AGE REVERSAL success of live mammals?

where are the peers of DAVID SINCLAIR & what have they accomplished...?
                             

 

 

My own epigenetic age dropped by 28 years, and I am, presumably, a mammal.

[johnhemming]

The Epigenetic age is an effect rather than a cause.  Hence just changing it is like clocking a car.

[Turnbuckle]

The Epigenetic age is an effect rather than a cause.  Hence just changing it is like clocking a car.

 

 

Epigenetic age is a measure of how screwed up your epigenetic codes are. The more screwed up they are, the more your cells produce the wrong balance of proteins and the more dysfunctional the organs in which they reside.

[johnhemming]

Epigenetic age is a measure of how screwed up your epigenetic codes are. The more screwed up they are, the more your cells produce the wrong balance of proteins and the more dysfunctional the organs in which they reside.

The Epigenetic Age is calculated by looking at methylation of the Epigenome. However, acetylation of the Epigenome also matters in terms of proteins and neither of those are the basic cause of aging although they are part of seeing the consequences.

[Turnbuckle]

The Epigenetic Age is calculated by looking at methylation of the Epigenome. However, acetylation of the Epigenome also matters in terms of proteins and neither of those are the basic cause of aging although they are part of seeing the consequences.

 

 

There are at least 11 distinct chemical modifications that comprise the epigenome, however, methylation is the most important. Without the epigenome, there would be nothing to distinguish the 200 cell types from one another as the underlying DNA is the same for all. Unfortunately, this epigenetic code is far more unstable than the underlying genetic code, and has no repair mechanism, apart from removal of old cells and replacement by new cells with freshly minted codes. Old cells cannot detect when their epigenome is screwed up, thus all cells have an inbuilt use-by date -- the telomeric clock -- that ultimately turns on the cell's suicide program and which also releases paracrine factors that instruct nearby stem cells to replace the suiciding cells (though this is not universal). Replacement is a huge job, as more than 300 billion cells are replaced daily. This process would keep things in a steady state except that viable stem cell numbers decline throughout life. If the decline in SCs can be reversed, then epigenetic aging can also be reversed. So stem cells are the key to age reversal, while epigenetic age is the best measure of success.

Attached Files

•  Stem cell decline.png   423.94KB   0 downloads

Edited by Turnbuckle, 11 June 2022 - 04:46 PM.

[johnhemming]

I would agree that both methylation and acetylation are important.  I am of the view that problems with acetylation are more significant and I think later this year I may have experimental evidence to prove this.

Edited by johnhemming, 11 June 2022 - 06:38 PM.

[Rib Jig]

My own epigenetic age dropped by 28 years...

 

As layman, I understand epigenetic to mean how your DNA is "employed, what sequences are read", right?

If willing, & asking anyone who has epigenetically lowered their age:

 

X -- Y = 28y, X = ?  Y = ?

 

what specific measurable characteristics have dropped in age & by how much?
e.g., pre & post eyesight measurements, pre & post hearing measurements

 

reporting anything that can be reduced by exercise, e.g., heart rate, blood pressure, muscle, etc.,

causes lack of clarity in epigenetic claims, UNLESS one did NO exercising pre & post epigenetic measurements, right??

thank in advance for any reality-based data...       

 

& would still like to hear names of others besides David Sinclair on the front lines of epigenetic breakthroughs

supported by irrefutable evidence...

Edited by Rib Jig, 11 June 2022 - 06:48 PM.

[johnhemming]

I agree it is a good idea to identify measurable physical characteristics linked to age based deterioration that have improved.

 

My main problem with this is that I did not measure enough when I started the process. I am, however, now doing a lot more measurement.

[Rib Jig]

My main problem with this is that I did not measure enough when I started the process. I am, however, now doing a lot more measurement.

 

Then your reports & claims are anecdotal, not scientific.

And that no one else is presenting proper scientific data

on their self-administered supplementing, makes their

criticism of true scientists like David Sinclair...hilariously hypocritical.