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

Photo
- - - - -

Russians cure aging?


  • Please log in to reply
68 replies to this topic

#31 VidX

  • Guest
  • 865 posts
  • 137

Posted 17 September 2010 - 01:38 AM

Interview taken @ 05-12-03 (so basically 7 years ago): http://www.inauka.ru...7800/print.html


"By our request, Russian chemists at the research centers under the Academy of Sciences has successfully synthesized the extremely complex substance which proved to be a much better antioxidant than that made by Murphy. Nobody else in the world has ever produced anything like that. The amount of the substance produced is scarce, just 1 gram. The experiments on mice involving this substance are being conducted currently in St. Petersburg. It?s too early to speak of final results, a mouse?s life span is 2.5 to 3 years. So far the results are poor, the mice die anyway, our remedy has no effect on them.

More experiments are being planned. Chimpanzee is first, than man. We?ve got years of work to do. If our theories prove correct, man will live by 10 times longer, up to 800 years. No, I?m not sure at all that my assertion is right. It?s just one of the viewpoints. But I?d hate to lose that chance to find the truth."

Edited by VidX, 17 September 2010 - 01:38 AM.


#32 VidX

  • Guest
  • 865 posts
  • 137

Posted 17 September 2010 - 02:10 AM

Oxidative damage my ass. Ladies and gentlemen, how does oxidative damage accumulate in cells which have no mitochondria to generate that damage in the first place? Given this question, one might further ask WHAT reactive oxygen species (ROS) the antioxidants help to neutralize in these areas, when there are no ROS to be generated within these cells by the mitochondria.

If we speculate that free radicals form from stimuli outside the cells, such as from ionizing radiation, then what good is a mitochondrial-targeted anti-oxidant in treating this type of condition in the first place?


Maybe you'll be interested: http://protein.bio.m...l/73121641.html

To book this BIOSCIENCE ad spot and support Longecity (this will replace the google ad above) - click HERE.

#33 Ghostrider

  • Guest
  • 1,996 posts
  • 56
  • Location:USA

Posted 17 September 2010 - 05:32 PM

Oxidative damage my ass. Ladies and gentlemen, how does oxidative damage accumulate in cells which have no mitochondria to generate that damage in the first place? Given this question, one might further ask WHAT reactive oxygen species (ROS) the antioxidants help to neutralize in these areas, when there are no ROS to be generated within these cells by the mitochondria.

If we speculate that free radicals form from stimuli outside the cells, such as from ionizing radiation, then what good is a mitochondrial-targeted anti-oxidant in treating this type of condition in the first place?


Maybe you'll be interested: http://protein.bio.m...l/73121641.html


Interesting, paper talks about aging as an execution of a program...

#34 VidX

  • Guest
  • 865 posts
  • 137

Posted 18 September 2010 - 04:15 AM

For me it all seems so interconnected. The idea that mt-targeted antioxidants may affect the cells of a "specific aging-clock" is interesting one and that example with flies, who get the same result of a 2 days CR as compared to a whole life CR (they speculate that it may be due to the "resetting" of the "clock"), etc... Now I need to check the situation of the germ line cells, in context of super oxide, as I can't remember what kind of protection does they have (that must be very effective).
Very fascinating (not just this SKq) the more I read, the more interesting it gets.

#35 VidX

  • Guest
  • 865 posts
  • 137

Posted 18 September 2010 - 09:59 PM

Some more data for these interested:

http://tinyurl.com/2bnkxbr

http://www.labome.or...hev-307670.html

#36 VidX

  • Guest
  • 865 posts
  • 137

Posted 21 September 2010 - 02:46 AM

Pretty recent interview, google translate. Looks a Minister of Education and Science is the Chairmen of the commission that I couldn't understand fully (like the one who searched for a top rated scientists from around the world to fulfill/attend the "Last stage" of the project, or smth like that).. One of the richest ppl in Russia (Deripaska. One of the oligarchs. well known actually) used to fund them till' the crisis, now they have other decent supporters, like an analogue of SENS foundation, etc.. Overall - everything SEEMS to be pretty serious, and this scientist ranks as one of the best in Russia, completely legit, so to say.


It stops translating at some point. so cut and paste the text, then do it again as it's too long.
http://translate.goo...ev.html&act=url

Edited by VidX, 21 September 2010 - 02:50 AM.


Click HERE to rent this BIOSCIENCE adspot to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#37 chris w

  • Guest
  • 740 posts
  • 261
  • Location:Cracow, Poland

Posted 21 September 2010 - 12:15 PM

Thanks for posting this VidX, indeed, Skulachev seems like a down to earth guy, people expecting such inventor to be some Frankenstein persona will have another thing coming.

Though I'm not sure I understand all that he says entirely correctly, Google translator is what it is ("B. Posner: I'm sorry, I'll kill you anyway." lol ), I'm definitely less sceptical than I was at the start, all the more I fear about how those human trials that he mentioned before will pan out, would be a pitty if all they did was improve eyesight or something like that.

#38 VidX

  • Guest
  • 865 posts
  • 137

Posted 21 September 2010 - 12:45 PM

Yeah, I can read in russian to some extent, but my head started hurting after the first 10mins heh, so some details are still not clear, but overall we can have a lot better picture of what's going on there. I liked when he admitted the the overall claim, to even get some funding at the start, was way too ridiculous to be looked serious at (1.To work on basically any specie, 2.To be kind of a "panacea" drug). It really does sound very far fetched, but if he's right about programmed aging - some fundamental intervention MAY be possible, regardless of what we know already. As M.R.Rose said in one of his interviews - "there's a chance that the method to impact aging may be relatively "simple" after all.".

I guess if it will b a success - we'll witness it on the man himself (V.Skulachev).

#39 rgvandewalker

  • Guest
  • 32 posts
  • 0

Posted 21 September 2010 - 09:21 PM

I wonder what the timeline is for approval of the drug, and avialability? It sounds like the trials are quite advanced, well past animal trials and into the early human trials.

Edited by rgvandewalker, 21 September 2010 - 09:22 PM.


#40 Solarclimax

  • Guest
  • 209 posts
  • -62

Posted 07 October 2010 - 08:12 PM

lol yes -

"this technology will be added to the mark of the beast system, blind will be able to see and lame will walk but only for short"

"Am I the only person who feels that scientist should be punched in the face for this?
Society needs people to age & die." - I bet the dude is around 18.

Anyway, this article smells a bit scammy, in one sentence it says that the guy claims it will "stop people from getting old" and the last one sounds like it's just a drug to extend lifespan a little and compress morbidity ( the phrase "longer and better quality of life", kinda like "Look, grandpa is sooo healthy, he can even walk from house to the store and back" ). I still have to watch the vid though.


Why do you have Masonic symbol as profile pic ?
  • dislike x 1

#41 chris w

  • Guest
  • 740 posts
  • 261
  • Location:Cracow, Poland

Posted 08 October 2010 - 01:16 AM

lol yes -

"this technology will be added to the mark of the beast system, blind will be able to see and lame will walk but only for short"

"Am I the only person who feels that scientist should be punched in the face for this?
Society needs people to age & die." - I bet the dude is around 18.

Anyway, this article smells a bit scammy, in one sentence it says that the guy claims it will "stop people from getting old" and the last one sounds like it's just a drug to extend lifespan a little and compress morbidity ( the phrase "longer and better quality of life", kinda like "Look, grandpa is sooo healthy, he can even walk from house to the store and back" ). I still have to watch the vid though.


Why do you have Masonic symbol as profile pic ?


In hope that they invite me and in voluptous joy we will rule the humanity together, why ?
  • dislike x 1

#42 rwac

  • Member
  • 4,764 posts
  • 61
  • Location:Dimension X

Posted 08 October 2010 - 03:44 AM

In hope that they invite me and in voluptous joy we will rule the humanity together, why ?


You're wrong, silly, it's the Fabian Society that's going to rule the world.

Attached Files


Edited by rwac, 08 October 2010 - 03:45 AM.

  • dislike x 1

#43 Solarclimax

  • Guest
  • 209 posts
  • -62

Posted 08 October 2010 - 08:48 AM

lol yes -

"this technology will be added to the mark of the beast system, blind will be able to see and lame will walk but only for short"

"Am I the only person who feels that scientist should be punched in the face for this?
Society needs people to age & die." - I bet the dude is around 18.

Anyway, this article smells a bit scammy, in one sentence it says that the guy claims it will "stop people from getting old" and the last one sounds like it's just a drug to extend lifespan a little and compress morbidity ( the phrase "longer and better quality of life", kinda like "Look, grandpa is sooo healthy, he can even walk from house to the store and back" ). I still have to watch the vid though.


Why do you have Masonic symbol as profile pic ?


In hope that they invite me and in voluptous joy we will rule the humanity together, why ?


Because it symbolises mass murder, child abduction, pedophilia, And generally people with brain damage. http://www.abovetops...hread162240/pg1

Edited by Solarclimax, 08 October 2010 - 08:50 AM.

  • dislike x 2

#44 VidX

  • Guest
  • 865 posts
  • 137

Posted 08 October 2010 - 09:00 AM

Because it symbolises mass murder, child abduction, pedophilia,


Sweeet....

oh wait..
  • dislike x 1

#45 Solarclimax

  • Guest
  • 209 posts
  • -62

Posted 08 October 2010 - 09:23 AM


Because it symbolises mass murder, child abduction, pedophilia,


Sweeet....

oh wait..


Can you translate your childish remarks please ?
  • dislike x 2

#46 chris w

  • Guest
  • 740 posts
  • 261
  • Location:Cracow, Poland

Posted 08 October 2010 - 11:06 AM

LOL, ok, I see you're one of those. Since it's entirely off topic, I'm only gonna post this one and nothing more,altough it's probably futile anyway. Works ( by actual scholars, not David Icke and such ) on European hermetic and occult traditions were on my reading list in college ( comparative religion/antropology major ), I happened to be reading on the history of Freemasons ( whom I found to be a cool bunch for their times actually ) at the time I registered here, that's the whole secret, I don't buy into any of the "theories" of the NWO shit ( talk about brain damage ).

There, you' ve got nothing to worry about. At least not untill 2012. Now I'm off to my child abuse matters, have a nice day sir.

BTW, those Fabians are looking good too, I'll have to file an aplication ASAP

Edited by chris w, 08 October 2010 - 11:26 AM.

  • dislike x 1

#47 Belchement

  • Guest
  • 22 posts
  • 2

Posted 08 October 2010 - 05:41 PM

everything SEEMS to be pretty serious, and this scientist ranks as one of the best in Russia, completely legit, so to say.

in this field, sometimes it is difficult to distinguish between dreamers, charlatans and real scientists. Some "highly ranked" people think it's not so bad to create nice stories with the questionable results they have found (/reproduced/stole/imagined/desired). Some of them think: after all this is only research; and it wouldn't be the first time a research project goes nowhere; etc. For some of them, succeeding in fame and money by tricking everyone is equal to intelligence. Freemasons or similar or even not related to organizations. And serious scientific organizations are sometimes strongly suggested to invite charlatans to boards, without knowing it at first. Anyway, luckily sometimes it is too big not too laugh:

The lifetime did not extend too much, the physical process of aging got slower and sometimes it even stoppped. The animals, given our preparation, lived to old age staying in active and healthy condition, and then they died in a few days and even hours.



#48 VidX

  • Guest
  • 865 posts
  • 137

Posted 08 October 2010 - 06:47 PM

The claim that they died in a few days/hours is a kind of risky one, if they suggest that this MAY happen in humans (so we should see the obvious halt or even reversal of some of the old age "symptoms".). If they are frauding I'd suggest to say that lifespan increased so noone really will b able to test it in real life in their own life span (as noone knows how much one would live with substances like these or without them..).
The good thing is that human trials seems to be happening or about to start and we have to wait just a few years.. Not like we have much else to do anyway, eh..

Edited by VidX, 08 October 2010 - 06:48 PM.


#49 xEva

  • Guest
  • 1,594 posts
  • 24
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 08 October 2010 - 08:43 PM

I don't believe them. I think since last summer Skulachev and his son are fishing for funds. His interview with Posner and articles in newspapers are the PR moves to get investors. I don't have any proof, just a strong hunch.

Skulachev's claims are inconsistent. In one place he says that the compound is very difficult to synthesize, in another place he says that it is very inexpensive to produce. Some independent lab tested the bioactive solution of the compound and reported that no bio-molecules were found, to which Skulachev sr. replied that so little of the stuff needed that they missed those few molecules, and brought up homeopathy in support. Besides, look at Skulachev sr. He is old, why won't he try it on himself?

The "programmed" theory of aging has been long supplanted by others. I do not buy it either. Would nature need to program death when mere survival is so difficult?

Edited by xEva, 08 October 2010 - 08:46 PM.


#50 VidX

  • Guest
  • 865 posts
  • 137

Posted 09 October 2010 - 01:26 AM

XEva>Idk where've you found him bringing up homeopathy, but it'd be nice to read. And he said they bought some very expensive equipment to prove the existence of these molecules. And in one of the last interviews he talks that they have a pretty solid funding already, so...




#51 chris w

  • Guest
  • 740 posts
  • 261
  • Location:Cracow, Poland

Posted 09 October 2010 - 11:29 AM

Yeah, I think if the guy is in the process of starting human trials, then that means somebody with academic authority had to deem his work worth something at least. In Russia couple of things may be a bit on the wild side, but not like some homegrown experimentator can just enroll people to test random compounds he came up with on them. Like Vidx says - we'll just wait and see, what's there to loose ?

I too was under the impresion that the progammed theory of aging was being put to rest, seems logical given that the natural paradigm is to do things with the least possible effort so to speak, so just let body wane instead of actively pushing it, but then again was the theory totally dead ? I'm not sure.

And he actually did try it on himself with the cataract thing, altough personally that part of the story rings a little alarm in me, it sounds kind of miraculous and he deals with it strangely consisely.

I was positively suprised finding out that some of the oligarchs are interested in funding biotech science, seemed to me they're more into buying foreign estates and football clubs.

Edited by chris w, 09 October 2010 - 12:14 PM.


#52 xEva

  • Guest
  • 1,594 posts
  • 24
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 09 October 2010 - 03:43 PM

And in one of the last interviews he talks that they have a pretty solid funding already, so...

Yeah, that's what you say when PR'ing to invite the small fry to jump in.


Yeah, I think if the guy is in the process of starting human trials, then that means somebody with academic authority had to deem his work worth something at least.

Sure he is a respected figure in Russian academia. This does not change my impression that he got bought into the lifestyle that lately he cannot support, which forced him to seek the media attention in order to attract investors. At the moment, the situation in the Russian academia is such that I'd not be surprised by any impropriety. Sorry.


I too was under the impresion that the progammed theory of aging was being put to rest, seems logical given that the natural paradigm is to do things with the least possible effort so to speak, so just let body wane instead of actively pushing it, but then again was the theory totally dead ? I'm not sure.


I read most of his rather long article in support of programmed aging following one of the links above and... IMO it does not hold water. He brings up apoptosis as his main argument for genetically programmed aging of multicellular organisms (!)

For semelparous animals, IMO the cause and effect are skewed: in case of salmon death simply comes as a natural consequence of exhaustion of having to run upstream entirely on adrenaline, not a pre-programmed death by hormones. In support he says that if adrenals are removed after spawning, the salmon lives for another year. Yes, but it could be that sudden drop of adrenaline forces the fish to relax, look around and start feeding at last :)

He claims that progeria and Werner syndrome are examples of accelerated program of aging, while it is well-known that mutated, misplaced or misfolded proteins implicated in these diseases are at fault. Then he goes into discussion of various proteins involved in regulation of telomeres length or mitochondrial production of ROS, etc., claiming that they are directly involved in genetic program of aging, while admitting that at the moment it's not clear how exactly they fit into the picture.

Finally, wasn't it you who was surprised that cells that are known for their lack of mitochondria could benefit the most from the compound that minimizes the damage induced by mitochondria produced ROS? VidX posted the link to an article that was supposed to explain this strangeness, and I read it too, but was not convinced. To me it smelled like Skulachev wrote it just to pacify this sort of questions. And the long list of illustrious co-authors only made me more suspicious.

In any rate, we'll wait and see if this substance X indeed slows down or reverses some signs of aging. If it works in practice, who cares about the theory. It is his insistence on tyeing the two together that I find suspicious. He keeps on beating on the programmed theory of aging, because in Russia --I recently found out-- they largely have not heard of the later developments in the field, so it sounds reasonable and "scientific" to them.

#53 VidX

  • Guest
  • 865 posts
  • 137

Posted 09 October 2010 - 09:23 PM

xEva>Where does he talk about homeopathy? (I'm REasking this, as it's pretty significant. He'd really expose himself as a quack with that one).

" read most of his rather long article in support of programmed aging following one of the links above and... IMO it does not hold water. He brings up apoptosis as his main argument for genetically programmed aging of multicellular organisms (!) " - Well I watched one of his interviews (and I understand Russian), he does not present apopthosis as the "main argument". He "invented" a term "phenoptosis" as a way to describe a gradual "self termination". But what he does imply as his argument for prg-aging is that a gradual weakening of an organism (intended) helps to weed out the traits that are really beneficial (two young rabbits can escape from a predator with approx. the same statistical chance, but when they are older - a smarter one, or more successful in other trait, will).
Regardless, what he stated (I'm not trying to somehow "justify", just to make it clear as I really understand what he said, not by a google translator) - he assumes that manipulation in context of mt-ROS MAY be a good intervention point of that "program".

About the effect on sight - just do a search for mitochondria and these disseases. Can't find one I've stumbled upon recently, but it seems that there's nothing surprising in regard to possible effect of such a substance ('nothing surprising" in a way that mt has to do with these). And oh please don't underestimate the Russian science, c'mon it's not constructive in any way (+ he admits openly that majority of gerontologists dismiss the pr-aging theory).. And that proclaimed effect on eye-sight is easily testable on animals anyway..

Though again - the claim about sudden reversal of some of the aging traits isn't the right one if you are going to fake your way into a pharmacy world with this stuff..

Edited by VidX, 09 October 2010 - 09:27 PM.


#54 xEva

  • Guest
  • 1,594 posts
  • 24
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 10 October 2010 - 02:52 PM

xEva>Where does he talk about homeopathy? (I'm REasking this, as it's pretty significant. He'd really expose himself as a quack with that one).

I saw it several weeks ago, when I first looked into him. It was a transcript of one of his interviews in Russian. I Yandex'ed it last night but could not find it. I should take it back. In any rate, it was just a phrase said in passing and possibly meant humorously, in the same vein as he says that the lab (that could not find any biomolecules in the active solution) called it "holy water", which prompted them to buy an expensive piece of equipment in London, to prove them otherwise. So, I apologize for bringing that in.

Still, reading his interviews last night did not dispel my impression that the sole purpose of his recent media campaign was to find investors. The message is that they cured blindness in 2-3 months in several animals and are ready to begin human trials but lack financing to carry it through. He says that they submitted the article to Nature but it was rejected right away. He insists in all interviews that aging is programmed and that their super-antioxidant compound interferes with the program by preventing apoptosis triggered by ROS damage in mitochondria. In one article the interviewer brings up the fact that cancer is believed to be caused by just such failure of apoptosis in cells with damaged mitochondria, to which he replies that there are more than 10 types of apoptosis and their compound interferes with just one, not affecting others including those that kill cancer cells:

Скулачев: Как я уже говорил, существует более десятка вариантов апоптоза. Мы боремся лишь с одним, запускаемым от активных форм кислорода. Остальные остаются, в том числе и уничтожающие раковые клетки. В этом и состоит "изюминка" метода.

http://gerontology-e...2d44dd980e.html


Of course, the info from newspapers, especially russian ones, should be "divided by 10" as a russian saying goes. Last night I spotted several contradictions, which could be attributed to sloppy journalist work, but the trouble is, they mainly present his words as direct transcripts.. I just don't believe him.

#55 VidX

  • Guest
  • 865 posts
  • 137

Posted 10 October 2010 - 03:55 PM

Anyway, I guess most would agree that targeting mitochondria with an antioxidant that is capable to penetrate to it was a theoretical "holy grail" of combating one of the important "damage" type. The question now is - whether it works and how much benefit could we get from that (the amount of studies is vast, regarding effective mitochondrial function in diff. species and their varying life span.. it may be interconnected or not..). Let's just wait.

#56 Elus

  • Guest
  • 793 posts
  • 723
  • Location:Interdimensional Space

Posted 10 October 2010 - 07:46 PM

Anyway, I guess most would agree that targeting mitochondria with an antioxidant that is capable to penetrate to it was a theoretical "holy grail" of combating one of the important "damage" type. The question now is - whether it works and how much benefit could we get from that (the amount of studies is vast, regarding effective mitochondrial function in diff. species and their varying life span.. it may be interconnected or not..). Let's just wait.


Eye lens cells have no mitochondria to speak of or target.
http://www.scienceda...71020111527.htm

#57 xEva

  • Guest
  • 1,594 posts
  • 24
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 10 October 2010 - 08:28 PM

Eye lens cells have no mitochondria to speak of or target.
http://www.scienceda...71020111527.htm

That's right, and even if it did, what I don't get is how an antioxidant could reverse damage. If he claimed that it prevented blindness, that would make more sense. But he says it cured blindness dogs and a horse in 2-3 months. The whole thing just smells funny. If the stuff works as well as he says, why continuously bring up and stress the theory that only confuses the matters.

#58 Ghostrider

  • Guest
  • 1,996 posts
  • 56
  • Location:USA

Posted 11 October 2010 - 08:53 AM

Eye lens cells have no mitochondria to speak of or target.
http://www.scienceda...71020111527.htm

That's right, and even if it did, what I don't get is how an antioxidant could reverse damage. If he claimed that it prevented blindness, that would make more sense. But he says it cured blindness dogs and a horse in 2-3 months. The whole thing just smells funny. If the stuff works as well as he says, why continuously bring up and stress the theory that only confuses the matters.


Well, I think we'll find out soon enough. When will we know?

#59 VidX

  • Guest
  • 865 posts
  • 137

Posted 11 October 2010 - 10:22 AM

STill can't find the article on that, but a quick search provides these:
http://www.ncbi.nlm....les/PMC2569141/
http://journals.lww....nts_With.8.aspx
http://www.lieberton...076802760116151 (Naphthoquinone Cataract in Mice: Mitochondrial Change and Protection by Superoxide Dismutase)
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/16303963 (
RESULTS: As opposed to the clear DNA-free subcapsular and cortical areas of young adult mouse lenses, these areas in cataractous old mouse lenses were found to contain accumulations of nuclei, nuclear fragments, aggregated mitochondria, and amorphous DNA as cortical inclusions (P < 0.001 between young and old lenses). These inclusions correlated spatially with age-related cataracts and with the presence of ROS. The source of such undegraded material was a large expansion of transition nuclei in the bow region and also direct involution of surface lens epithelial cells (LECs) into the underlying cortex, frequently leaving bare patches devoid of nuclei on the surface of the anterior epithelium.)

http://www.scienceda...01218073252.htm
"The scientists discovered that putting the eye's lens under high glucose stress - similar to what happens to diabetics when their glucose levels rise - damages mitochondria in the lens' outer cells. Mitochondria are responsible for converting glucose to energy."What often happens with diabetes is that the people don't get diagnosed until they've had one or two episodes of really high blood glucose for a period of time, like a day or two," Trevithick said. "That may be enough to damage the lens."

"Antioxidants protect the mitochondria against this damage," according to Trevithick. "We think that may be one of the factors that's contributing to the lower risk of cataracts in people who have one drink a day.""



http://www.pnas.org/...2/8727.full.pdf
"BSOtreated
rats, =50% of the rats developed cataracts.
Treatment with BSO led to a substantial decline in the level
of lens mitochondrial GSH; simultaneous administration of
GSH did not affect mitochondrial GSH levels significantly,
whereas administration ofGSH monoester led to higher levels
(Table 1). The yield of mitochondrial protein from the lenses
of BSO-treated rats (per unit weight of lens) was =50% that
obtained from the controls; after treatment with BSO and GSH
monoester, the yield was -70% that of controls. Determinations
(on day 4) of citrate synthase, a mitochondrial
marker (24-26), revealed an =75% decrease in activity in the
mitochondrial fractions from BSO-treated rats [0.015 ± 0.003
(n = 3) ,tmol/min per mg of protein], as compared to the
controls [0.061 ± 0.011 (n = 3) Amol/min per mg of protein].
Citrate synthase decreased only =30% after treatment with
BSO and GSH monoester. These findings are in accord with
the electron microscope studies, which showed extensive
mitochondrial degeneration after treatment with BSO.
Electron Microscopy. Examination of the lenses of newborn
rats on the 9th day (after treatment with BSO as
described in Fig. 1) revealed dramatic changes in the epithelial
cells (Fig. 2A)-i.e., many vacuoles, apparent loss of
cytoplasm, and mitochondrial swelling and degeneration.}



And finally this (highlight on "Oxidation" part): http://books.google....hondria&f=false

Edited by VidX, 11 October 2010 - 10:25 AM.


To book this BIOSCIENCE ad spot and support Longecity (this will replace the google ad above) - click HERE.

#60 PWAIN

  • Guest
  • 1,288 posts
  • 241
  • Location:Melbourne

Posted 11 October 2010 - 11:02 PM

The experiments on mice involving this substance are being conducted currently in St. Petersburg. It?s too early to speak of final results, a mouse?s life span is 2.5 to 3 years. So far the results are poor, the mice die anyway, our remedy has no effect on them.


Am I missing something here. If the mice are indeed dieing, what has actually been achieved? This looks like a negative result to me - at least so far. There is no mention of increased lifespan for the mice.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users