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

Photo
* * * - - 3 votes

C60 Toxicity Concerns and anecdotal reports


  • Please log in to reply
303 replies to this topic

#61 ClarkSims

  • Life Member
  • 232 posts
  • 36
  • Location:USA

Posted 09 January 2013 - 04:44 PM

I have been taking 40 to 50 mg per day since September. I feel fine.


Wow. Every day, you take more c60 than I've had in my entire life. I'm glad you're feeling good.


That is only about 50 to 75 ml per day of saturated solution.
.8 g / litter = .8 ml / ml

so 50 ml -> 40 mg
75 ml -> 60 mg

That is a lot less than the 1 cup = 236 ml per day that some people are taking.

Edited by ClarkSims, 09 January 2013 - 04:45 PM.


#62 YOLF

  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 09 January 2013 - 11:15 PM

Yes, please share.



This person took high doses of fluoroquinolones last year and had negative mental effects as a result (floxing syndrome). It's know that these quinolones can stay in the body for a long time, and phtotoxicity is known, though this person did not have any obvious problem with sunlight until he began taking C60 and went into the sun. Then he had a recurrance of the negative mental effects he'd had during the fluoroquinolones. They symptons came back full force more than once when exposed to the sun, even after only 30 seconds of sunlight.

He told me this three weeks ago and I haven't heard anything since, so maybe it was a coincidence.


Phew, I almost took Ciprofloxacin recently for conjunctivitis. I'm glad I decided to skip it and just take the augmentin. I would have seriously freaked out if something happened to my eyes considering crystals of the stuff stay in the eye. Yep, always better to err on the side of caution with a pharma one is not familiar with. I feel lucky!

Click HERE to rent this advertising spot for C60 HEALTH to support Longecity (this will replace the google ad above).

#63 YOLF

  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 09 January 2013 - 11:19 PM

This person took high doses of fluoroquinolones last year and had negative mental effects as a result (floxing syndrome). It's know that these quinolones can stay in the body for a long time, and phtotoxicity is known, though this person did not have any obvious problem with sunlight until he began taking C60 and went into the sun. Then he had a recurrance of the negative mental effects he'd had during the fluoroquinolones. They symptons came back full force more than once when exposed to the sun, even after only 30 seconds of sunlight.

He told me this three weeks ago and I haven't heard anything since, so maybe it was a coincidence.


Thanks Turnbuckle. This is a lot more illuminating. Maybe the caution should be "a possible interaction between having previously been floxed, C60 and sun exposure." A lot of people, myself included, have taken quinolones without any obvious problems, and I'd expect no particular danger there. The floxing reaction, on the other hand, means that some sort of homeostasis has been upended, and it's not clear that such a thing would get better, nor is it clear that it would work well with C60.


Excessive sun exposure is known to suppress the immune system. At least one theory about C60 was that some immune suppression might be a mechanism of action for life extension. So synergistic effect there?

I wouldn't necessarily discount the possible effects of herx reactions. I had one when taking resveratrol initially with skin peeling where I had previous sunburns and old injuries flaring up. It went away after a month or so and never returned. Herx has a beginning, a peak, and an end.


My more radical thought makes me wonder if it is possible that we evolved to cut corners in cellular repair because it freed up more resources for surviving the next thing and this results in some kind of marker on cells that C60 removes causing the repair to be completed. Though this assumes that the recurrent effect was a side effect of cell repair caused by the damage. Any thoughts or am I 6 months late?

#64 YOLF

  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 09 January 2013 - 11:25 PM

Herx reactions are especially severe for systemic candidiasis. The candida organism when killed by an anti-fungal ruptures and rapidly releases toxins.


Off topic, but where might I find a list of toxins from dying candida or other fungi? Anything that can disrupt them? I was thinking that the toxins they release may lead to a greater risk of reinfection.
  • dislike x 3

#65 ClarkSims

  • Life Member
  • 232 posts
  • 36
  • Location:USA

Posted 09 January 2013 - 11:32 PM

Phew, I almost took Ciprofloxacin recently for conjunctivitis. I'm glad I decided to skip it and just take the augmentin. I would have seriously freaked out if something happened to my eyes considering crystals of the stuff stay in the eye. Yep, always better to err on the side of caution with a pharma one is not familiar with. I feel lucky!


Do you have dry eyes? If so the condition can often be cured by taking vitamin D, flax seed oil and fish oil.

Here is one study about omega 3's

http://www.ncbi.nlm....les/PMC2646454/

There is a quiet epidemic of dry eye syndrome.

#66 YOLF

  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 09 January 2013 - 11:35 PM

Then he had a recurrance of the negative mental effects he'd had during the fluoroquinolones. They symptons came back full force more than once when exposed to the sun, even after only 30 seconds of sunlight.


Not to minimize his suffering, but 30 seconds? Seems obviously psychosomatic to me.


I took a Levoquin anti-biotic when I was a teenager and blacked out just long enough not fall face first onto the floor and it only happened once while taking it. It was as if someone hit a pole and the power went out for a split second. I wonder if I should watch out for a momentary blackout if I start C60?

#67 YOLF

  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 10 January 2013 - 12:11 AM

Phew, I almost took Ciprofloxacin recently for conjunctivitis. I'm glad I decided to skip it and just take the augmentin. I would have seriously freaked out if something happened to my eyes considering crystals of the stuff stay in the eye. Yep, always better to err on the side of caution with a pharma one is not familiar with. I feel lucky!


Do you have dry eyes? If so the condition can often be cured by taking vitamin D, flax seed oil and fish oil.

Here is one study about omega 3's

http://www.ncbi.nlm....les/PMC2646454/

There is a quiet epidemic of dry eye syndrome.

I used to take lutien and small doses seemed to make my eyes glint more and feel more lubricated, but yeah I could have dry eyes, they do burn from time to time when I've been reading for long hours and I read alot. I used to use visine(sp?) and it seemed to make my eyes feel better, but I eventually realized that it was bad and quit. I get alot of omega 3s from the loads of olive oil in my diet. I have flaxseed oil, but I used to take it before eating and doing cardio in the morning.

I think I got it when I disregarded the possibility of getting sick from hanging out with sick co-workers who had it in and were coughing. I suppose the wind in my eyes and windburn on my face didn't help much.

I think I stopped taking the lutien because small dose options disappeared and seemed to work fine for me. I think it was 6mg and now it's only available as 40mg which seems to be a waste of money.

#68 somecallmetim

  • Guest
  • 59 posts
  • 19
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 10 January 2013 - 12:43 AM

I get alot of omega 3s from the loads of olive oil in my diet.



Olive oils are mostly omega 9 & 6, with very little, if any, omega 3.

#69 YOLF

  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 10 January 2013 - 12:46 AM

I get alot of omega 3s from the loads of olive oil in my diet.



Olive oils are mostly omega 9 & 6, with very little, if any, omega 3.


My other concern with fish oil is that there was a study I read about somewhere where the cohort taking the fish oil all died sooner.

#70 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 10 January 2013 - 12:58 AM

I have a theoretical concern about C60. I've read that one of the possible mechanisms of demethylation of DNA, mitochondrial DNA in particular. I would assume that if it demethylates mitcohondrial DNA, then it may also demethylate nuclear DNA - although I don't know whether it enters the cell nucleus? Anyway, molecular biology isn't my forte, but its my understanding that methylation/demethylation is involved in long term memory storage and immune system adaptation, providing of kind of genetic cellular memory for specialized cells. My concern is that C60 in EVOO may more or less disrupt this poorly understood process, resulting in partial deterioration of very long term memory and loss of immunity to previously exposed pathogens. I very much want to take C60/EVOO for the possible bennefits, but this is a concern to me. On the other hand, I can also see bennefits to even to these hypothesized mechanisms, such as removal of auto-immune problems and past psychological trauma. Any thoughts?


The demethylation hypothesis is just speculation. There is no evidence to support it, and the whole idea hinges on a dubious simulation. You might see a lessening of auto-immune problems because they involve ROS-mediated inflammation, which c60-oo would be expected to help. Removal of past psychological trauma is highly unlikely. Loss of memory or immunity is also very unlikely.
  • like x 2

#71 YOLF

  • Location:Delaware Delawhere, Delahere, Delathere!

Posted 10 January 2013 - 04:06 AM

I get alot of omega 3s from the loads of olive oil in my diet.



Olive oils are mostly omega 9 & 6, with very little, if any, omega 3.


Thanks, I didn't realize that.

#72 kenorb

  • Guest
  • 62 posts
  • 1
  • Location:London

Posted 10 January 2013 - 02:34 PM

nanotoxicity of c60
C60 binds with RNA/DNA and changes natural conformation
http://www.ncbi.nlm....les/PMC3439907/



#73 ClarkSims

  • Life Member
  • 232 posts
  • 36
  • Location:USA

Posted 11 January 2013 - 02:48 AM

nanotoxicity of c60
C60 binds with RNA/DNA and changes natural conformation
http://www.ncbi.nlm....les/PMC3439907/


This is a computer simulation of c60 particles on RNA and DNA. There is a large body of research that shows toxicity for c60 particles.

IIRC, every experiment done with dissolved c60 shows no toxicity and strong anti oxidant properties.

From the article:

"Also, we note the strong association of C60 molecules with ion channels, enzyme and antibodies where the binding depends on the particle size and native protein structures (5)."

Note they talk about "particle size"
  • like x 1

#74 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 11 January 2013 - 03:32 AM

nanotoxicity of c60
C60 binds with RNA/DNA and changes natural conformation
http://www.ncbi.nlm....les/PMC3439907/


This is a hard kind of simulation to do correctly, and I don't think they did a great job with it. (I'm very familiar with MD simulation). I think this can be safely ignored. If any of their predictions are observed in an experimental system, I'd be interested. Note that this (and at least one other c60 nucleic acid simulation) are done with pristine c60, and we are using a substituted c60. That changes everything anyway.
  • like x 1

#75 motorcitykid

  • Guest
  • 276 posts
  • 68
  • Location:New York

Posted 11 January 2013 - 05:05 AM

nanotoxicity of c60
C60 binds with RNA/DNA and changes natural conformation
http://www.ncbi.nlm....les/PMC3439907/


This is a hard kind of simulation to do correctly, and I don't think they did a great job with it. (I'm very familiar with MD simulation). I think this can be safely ignored. If any of their predictions are observed in an experimental system, I'd be interested. Note that this (and at least one other c60 nucleic acid simulation) are done with pristine c60, and we are using a substituted c60. That changes everything anyway.


I assume that the C60 I ordered from the following vendor are substituted?:

https://sesres.com/Fullerene.asp

#76 James Phillip Turpin

  • Guest
  • 26 posts
  • 2
  • Location:Olympia, Washington

Posted 11 January 2013 - 09:47 AM

I don't know what precisely is meant by 'pristine' and 'substituted', but after doing some reading I'm pretty sure that C60 in olive oil is unlikely to contact the DNA molecule. Once in the oil, it tends to stay in the oil even as the solution transitions from pure lipid to regions of water in lipids and further to regions of lipids in water. I wish I could quote you the source for that but many of the site hosting journal articles haven't been loading for me today. C60 also tends to structure the oil in various ways. Anyway, if the C60 stays in oil, and the DNA stays in water and away from oil, there should be no contact. These kind of emergent phenomena may be much more difficult to compute, as they deal with not only the C60 molecule and DNA molecule, but several layers of solute moelcules around them. So I agree that the theoretical calculations aren't a cause for much concern, incomplete as they are, except to point out that especailly for self-application, we shouldn't be changing solutions, and we should minimize other nanomolecule impurities, until we have empirical evidence about them too. Olive oil might turn out to be the safest and most effective carrier for C60, and C60 might turn out to be the safest and most effective nanoparticle not found in food, precisely because its keeps its place while other particles might contact the DNA.
  • like x 1

#77 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 11 January 2013 - 02:46 PM

"Pristine" is jargon that's common in the c60 community. It just means unsubstituted. "Substituted" means that another atom or group of atoms is bonded to the c60 molecule. The word "substituted" is really a misnomer, but it's a holdover from the rest of organic chemistry where carbon compounds always have hydrogens attached to them, at least somewhere on the molecule. Many of the reactions of organic chemistry involve substituting something else for one of the hydrogens. They're called substitution reactions, and the thing that gets attached (substituted) is called a "substituent". C60, as it happens, doesn't have any hydrogen atoms. It's pure carbon. Graphite and diamond are other forms of pure carbon. Charcoal or coal is yet another, having a mixture of the types of bonding seen in graphite and diamond.

The c60 that we buy from various suppliers is pure "pristine" c60 (mostly pure, anyway...) that shouldn't have anything attached to it. When we mix it with olive oil, it doesn't just dissolve, it reacts with the olive oil, forming a new compound. The sort of reactions that occur between olive oil and c60 are called "addition" reactions, and the thing that gets added to the c60, in this case the hydrocarbon tail of a fatty acid, is called an "adduct". I suspect that the most common product is a c60 with two fatty acids attached, which we would call a "bis-adduct". (other counts would be mono-, tris-, and tetrakis-)

The solubility of pristine c60 in olive oil is low; far less than the 0.8-0.9mg/ml of total c60 content that we get with c60-oo. Since it reacts with the olive oil, the amount of pristine c60 in the final product is likely to be miniscule. One reason that we are unlikely to be affecting nucleic acids is that there are other things attached to our c60, which would prevent them from getting close to the DNA. Another reason, noted by James above, is that c60 and its adducts are hydrophobic, and localize in membranes and fat depots, while nucleic acids are hydrophilic and are only found in aqueous environments.

For what it's worth, 2012 is not the first year that humans started eating c60. We've been exposed to c60 ever since we discovered fire, since c60 is a small constituent of soot. If you barbecue a piece of meat, which contains triglycerides with the same oleic acid units that are found (in higher percentages) in olive oil, you are likely to get a very tiny amount of a c60-fatty acid adduct. You'll also get a lot of other junk that you don't want. Cigarette smoking is a similar situation- mostly junk that harms you, but you're also inhaling a tiny amount of c60. Just not enough to make up for the rest of the smoke.
  • like x 4

#78 ClarkSims

  • Life Member
  • 232 posts
  • 36
  • Location:USA

Posted 11 January 2013 - 04:05 PM

I thought this was a fun article. I think it is completely off base because c60 doesn't dissolve in water very well, and the c60 which does dissolve is not the adduct which is the strong anti oxidant. http://c60antiaging....old-health-spa/

But yes, we have been surrounded by small amounts of C60 forever without knowing it.

#79 kenorb

  • Guest
  • 62 posts
  • 1
  • Location:London

Posted 11 January 2013 - 09:19 PM

Today I had some chest pain on my left-upper side (for around 1-2h), still feel it after few hours when breathing deeply. When I did the massaging of that place, I could feel it (2-3cm above the left nipple).
Didn't do any exercise this week, didn't have that kind of pain before, it came suddenly.
Before I drunk hot chocolate, English tea (with milk), water and ate some pizza. Didn't take C60 for 2 days after taking small dosage.

Edited by kenorb, 11 January 2013 - 09:32 PM.


#80 James Phillip Turpin

  • Guest
  • 26 posts
  • 2
  • Location:Olympia, Washington

Posted 12 January 2013 - 04:46 AM

Before I even got the C60 in the mail, I took 4 fluid ounces of olive oil on Tuesday, mixed with sugar free chocolate and hot water. I wanted to experience how that felt before taking the C60 in olive oil. On Thursday I barfed about an hour after lunch. I hadn't eaten anything unusual, although I suspect that my body was somehow absorbing the active ingredient in pepperchinis more efficiently than usual, making my body heat up, and making me feel quite ill. I was perfectly well after barfing. Thursday night I went jogging. Usually after jogging I feel like being sedentary the next day. Friday (today) I took C60 in olive oil, about 5-10 mL (I've lost count unfortunately, but scaling based on the study I could take all I have in one day, so no danger there). I was going to take more, but I got a lot of energy suddenly and just had to jogging, then had cravings to eat healthy food, then I went to the rock climbing gymn, got some strange looks there because I couldn't help but dance to the music they were playing there even though I'm probably the least fit person in the room, came home and ate more healthy food, intermittently taking more C60 in olive oil. I am calling my desire to exercise and eat healthy a side effect of the C60 in olive oil.

I think I'll be buying a magnetic stirrer, because even if I only use the purply goodness occasionally, I may want to take it in pricy enough quantities to be worth cutting out a middle man.

#81 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 12 January 2013 - 12:31 PM

I think I'll be buying a magnetic stirrer, because even if I only use the purply goodness occasionally, I may want to take it in pricy enough quantities to be worth cutting out a middle man.


All you really need is a way to crush or grind the c60 (a mortar and pestle works well) before you put it in the oil. Then shake it a couple times a day for a few days. It's cheaper and faster.

#82 Lister

  • Member, Moderator
  • 390 posts
  • 131
  • Location:Kelowna, Canada

Posted 13 January 2013 - 05:50 AM

Before I even got the C60 in the mail, I took 4 fluid ounces of olive oil on Tuesday, mixed with sugar free chocolate and hot water. I wanted to experience how that felt before taking the C60 in olive oil. On Thursday I barfed about an hour after lunch. I hadn't eaten anything unusual, although I suspect that my body was somehow absorbing the active ingredient in pepperchinis more efficiently than usual, making my body heat up, and making me feel quite ill. I was perfectly well after barfing. Thursday night I went jogging. Usually after jogging I feel like being sedentary the next day. Friday (today) I took C60 in olive oil, about 5-10 mL (I've lost count unfortunately, but scaling based on the study I could take all I have in one day, so no danger there). I was going to take more, but I got a lot of energy suddenly and just had to jogging, then had cravings to eat healthy food, then I went to the rock climbing gymn, got some strange looks there because I couldn't help but dance to the music they were playing there even though I'm probably the least fit person in the room, came home and ate more healthy food, intermittently taking more C60 in olive oil. I am calling my desire to exercise and eat healthy a side effect of the C60 in olive oil.

I think I'll be buying a magnetic stirrer, because even if I only use the purply goodness occasionally, I may want to take it in pricy enough quantities to be worth cutting out a middle man.


It's going to be interesting once C60 obtains that coveted FDA approval. If these types of effects continue to be reported with little (or none that I've seen) negative obvious effects then I may need to start looking for a C60 production company to invest in.

No doubt we'll be hitting the 10 year mark before the unforeseen sterility effects start to take hold of the world population. Before you know it the planet is empty! (I suspect the rats are behind it)
  • like x 1

#83 d4shing

  • Guest
  • 30 posts
  • 22
  • Location:Hong Kong

Posted 13 January 2013 - 09:20 AM

C60 will never get FDA approval for anything unless the FDA radically changes in function and purpose, for the same reason that curcumin or st john's wort will never get FDA approval: nobody will ever be willing to pay for three multi-stage trials for a unpatented and now unpatentable compound.

#84 Watdh

  • Guest
  • 22 posts
  • 2
  • Location:Metroplex of Farmerville, LA

Posted 13 January 2013 - 10:34 AM

"Pristine" is jargon that's common in the c60 community. It just means unsubstituted. "Substituted" means that another atom or group of atoms is bonded to the c60 molecule. The word "substituted" is really a misnomer, but it's a holdover from the rest of organic chemistry where carbon compounds always have hydrogens attached to them, at least somewhere on the molecule. Many of the reactions of organic chemistry involve substituting something else for one of the hydrogens. They're called substitution reactions, and the thing that gets attached (substituted) is called a "substituent". C60, as it happens, doesn't have any hydrogen atoms. It's pure carbon. Graphite and diamond are other forms of pure carbon. Charcoal or coal is yet another, having a mixture of the types of bonding seen in graphite and diamond.

The c60 that we buy from various suppliers is pure "pristine" c60 (mostly pure, anyway...) that shouldn't have anything attached to it. When we mix it with olive oil, it doesn't just dissolve, it reacts with the olive oil, forming a new compound. The sort of reactions that occur between olive oil and c60 are called "addition" reactions, and the thing that gets added to the c60, in this case the hydrocarbon tail of a fatty acid, is called an "adduct". I suspect that the most common product is a c60 with two fatty acids attached, which we would call a "bis-adduct". (other counts would be mono-, tris-, and tetrakis-)

The solubility of pristine c60 in olive oil is low; far less than the 0.8-0.9mg/ml of total c60 content that we get with c60-oo. Since it reacts with the olive oil, the amount of pristine c60 in the final product is likely to be miniscule. One reason that we are unlikely to be affecting nucleic acids is that there are other things attached to our c60, which would prevent them from getting close to the DNA. Another reason, noted by James above, is that c60 and its adducts are hydrophobic, and localize in membranes and fat depots, while nucleic acids are hydrophilic and are only found in aqueous environments.

For what it's worth, 2012 is not the first year that humans started eating c60. We've been exposed to c60 ever since we discovered fire, since c60 is a small constituent of soot. If you barbecue a piece of meat, which contains triglycerides with the same oleic acid units that are found (in higher percentages) in olive oil, you are likely to get a very tiny amount of a c60-fatty acid adduct. You'll also get a lot of other junk that you don't want. Cigarette smoking is a similar situation- mostly junk that harms you, but you're also inhaling a tiny amount of c60. Just not enough to make up for the rest of the smoke.


So it doesn't dissolve in the olive oil it reacts- all this time I was also thinking it dissolved. I have read about "oil pulling", a method of cleaning your teeth and improving mouth health. Olive oil is the suggested oil to use UNLESS you have metal fillings. The olive oil will make the metal fillings fall out over time. So I wonder, is the olive oil dissolving the metal in the fillings or reacting with it?

#85 Turnbuckle

  • Member
  • 4,317 posts
  • 2,050
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 13 January 2013 - 11:21 AM

The c60 that we buy from various suppliers is pure "pristine" c60 (mostly pure, anyway...) that shouldn't have anything attached to it. When we mix it with olive oil, it doesn't just dissolve, it reacts with the olive oil, forming a new compound. The sort of reactions that occur between olive oil and c60 are called "addition" reactions, and the thing that gets added to the c60, in this case the hydrocarbon tail of a fatty acid, is called an "adduct". I suspect that the most common product is a c60 with two fatty acids attached, which we would call a "bis-adduct". (other counts would be mono-, tris-, and tetrakis-)

The solubility of pristine c60 in olive oil is low; far less than the 0.8-0.9mg/ml of total c60 content that we get with c60-oo. Since it reacts with the olive oil, the amount of pristine c60 in the final product is likely to be miniscule. One reason that we are unlikely to be affecting nucleic acids is that there are other things attached to our c60, which would prevent them from getting close to the DNA. Another reason, noted by James above, is that c60 and its adducts are hydrophobic, and localize in membranes and fat depots, while nucleic acids are hydrophilic and are only found in aqueous environments.


While that sounds reasonable, do you have any studies that show the reaction of C60 with olive oil and what the reaction products are?

#86 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 13 January 2013 - 04:20 PM

While that sounds reasonable, do you have any studies that show the reaction of C60 with olive oil and what the reaction products are?


Here's the abstract for chapter 13 from Cataldo's book. I think the full text is on Sarah's site. Because there are a number of regioisomers for the bis and higher adducts, it's a little tricky to pin down the precise details of structure, like you might have with an xray crystallographic study, but Cataldo has some spectral evidence and talks about the kinds of structures that could form. There was another paper from somewhere that measured specific solubility in a variety of solvents, and reported the solubility in olive oil to be a lot lower than we see; a factor of 80 or 90, IIRC. I don't know how they would have prevented reaction, though. That was posted and talked about here back in the early days, but I don't have it handy. One of our members, bcelliot, is a fullerene chemist, and was on board with the reaction concept. He said that the color of the products is typical of fullerene adducts.
  • like x 2

#87 trance

  • Guest
  • 335 posts
  • 112
  • Location:Dallas, Tx

Posted 13 January 2013 - 05:37 PM

While that sounds reasonable, do you have any studies that show the reaction of C60 with olive oil and what the reaction products are?


Here's the abstract for chapter 13 from Cataldo's book. I think the full text is on Sarah's site. Because there are a number of regioisomers for the bis and higher adducts, it's a little tricky to pin down the precise details of structure, like you might have with an xray crystallographic study, but Cataldo has some spectral evidence and talks about the kinds of structures that could form. There was another paper from somewhere that measured specific solubility in a variety of solvents, and reported the solubility in olive oil to be a lot lower than we see; a factor of 80 or 90, IIRC. I don't know how they would have prevented reaction, though. That was posted and talked about here back in the early days, but I don't have it handy. One of our members, bcelliot, is a fullerene chemist, and was on board with the reaction concept. He said that the color of the products is typical of fullerene adducts.


Entire book here: http://www.owndoc.co...enes-in-oil.pdf

From Page 332:

The new absorption band at 435 nm in the C60 spectrum has been attributed to the 1,2 addition to the fullerene cage to the fatty acid chains either across to the double bonds by a Diels-Alder addition or, more simply, by radical addition (Cataldo and Braun, 2007). Thus, fatty acid esters are able to not only dissolve C60, but also react with this molecule causing the addition of the fatty chain to the fullerene cage. In fact, the bands at 435 nm shown in Fig. 13.3 appear only when C60 is stirred at 75°C for a couple of hours in the esters of fatty acids. Only for olive oil the new band appears much weaker than in the other cases and displaced at 450 nm (Fig. 13.3B). Since this oil contains chlorophyll, the displacement may be probably due also to a charge–transfer interaction between C60 and chlorophyll or with other impurities.

Edited by trance, 13 January 2013 - 05:53 PM.


#88 zorba990

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,557 posts
  • 275

Posted 13 January 2013 - 06:14 PM

I get alot of omega 3s from the loads of olive oil in my diet.



Olive oils are mostly omega 9 & 6, with very little, if any, omega 3.


My other concern with fish oil is that there was a study I read about somewhere where the cohort taking the fish oil all died sooner.


Human study: omega-3 fatty acids delay molecular ageing . http://www.ergo-log.com/fishoillongevity2.html

#89 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 14 January 2013 - 06:53 AM

Human study: omega-3 fatty acids delay molecular ageing . http://www.ergo-log....longevity2.html


I think ergo-log overplayed that study. These were CVD patients, and there was a linear relationship between omega 3 level and degree of telomere shortening. That's not really the same thing as 'aging'. I guess they qualified it by saying "molecular" aging, but still. Also, these were people with normal omega 3 levels, not supplementers who were megadosing. People with higher omega 3 levels are likely to have better diets and a lot of other characteristics that would lead to better health. The researchers supposedly corrected for those things, but such corrections don't always catch confounders. Nevertheless, it did look like there was a relationship there, so that's pretty interesting.

The thing that cryonicsculture saw where the cohort taking fish oil died sooner was probably looking at an overdose. Fish oil, like everything that's good for you at some level, is bad for you if you get too much.

#90 ClarkSims

  • Life Member
  • 232 posts
  • 36
  • Location:USA

Posted 15 January 2013 - 11:38 PM

While that sounds reasonable, do you have any studies that show the reaction of C60 with olive oil and what the reaction products are?


Here's the abstract for chapter 13 from Cataldo's book. I think the full text is on Sarah's site.


Here is the link on Sarah's site. It is Chapter 13 of this book, which is a collection of papers.

www.owndoc.com/pdf/solubility-of-fullerenes-in-oil.pdf

It starts on page 321, of the ebook.

After I posted this, I saw that someone else posted the link also, ooops.
I don't know how to delete a post. Oh well.

Edited by ClarkSims, 15 January 2013 - 11:41 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users