Slashdot Mirror
Scientists Discover Possible Anti-Aging Gene
werelnon writes "The BBC is running an article about researchers who seem to have discovered a gene which controls aging. By stimulating this gene, which when malfunctioning causes premature aging, scientists have managed to prolong the average life span of lab mice from 2 to 3 years. Because a very similar gene is present in humans it is quite possible it will do the same thing for people." From the article: "But there may be downsides with Klotho. The long-lived mice in the new experiments tend to be less fertile. And the gene may also predispose people to diabetes. The trick for researchers will be to find ways of getting the life-enhancing results of Klotho while avoiding the drawbacks."
Human life expectancy has been increasing overall for a long time now, and we have come to expect certain diseases and conditions including lack of fertility and diabetes along with many others (see Geriatrics).
Could the issues that these mice are having be similar to what we as humans are experiencing by exceeding the lifetimes that generations previous had?
But there may be downsides with Klotho. The long-lived mice in the new experiments tend to be less fertile.
Good thing, or we'd be overrun by mice! If you live longer, you better breed slower. Imagine if elephants bred as often as rabbits?
- Adam L. Beberg - The Cosm Project - http://www.mithral.com/
Now, it will be interesting to compare this gene with previously covered longevity gene discovered in fruit flies - Indy. What proteins do they encode, what are their roles etc?
1 5082220.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2000/12/0012
Running a quick and dirty comparison analysis using Genebank BLAST shows no obvious similarities.
Stem cells can cure aging like osteoperosis and arthritis.
Seems like antiaging to me without messing with genes .
The article fails to specify what is meant by "anti-aging". Is it keeping a very old living being alive longer? Or does it also have the added benefit of decreasing visible and physical signs of aging to the subject in question? If all that this drug can do is keep a very very old-looking person alive a bit longer, but not feel or look as old as they are, I say big deal. If I'm that old and weak, I'd probably want to die soon anyway.
Hero of Allacrost, a FOSS RPG for *NIX/*BSD/OS X/Win
I think the reason humans live longer is because they have enough money to buy medicine. The only way to actually live healthier is to change your consumption, and Americans are one of the least healthy countries in the developed world. Our quality of life is among the lowest, and we don't even live the longest. Basically we have enough money to buy life extensions.
Diabetes is common now, so is heart disease and cancer. The reason these diseases are so common is because many of the food companies and industries deliberately create products which in tests on mice are known to cause diabetes, cancer, and heart disease. If mice die from high fructose corn syrup, why are humans being given high fructose corn syrup in every product?
Food companies like to blame the problem instead of the cause. They will blame obesity for poor health instead of the quality of their products. If we want better health we need a more advanced food industry which actually designs foods to be as health as possible instead of food that is plain addictive. Otherwise our healthcare costs will continue to rise forever while food companies continue to put junk in foods to give us new diseases of the future.
Grow your own food, or buy organic. Buy supplements. Look out for your own health, be your own doctor, and help fund research for new supplements, help fund organic farmers and shop at the stores which sell quality.
Long sick lives are not as good as long health lives.
between humans? Esp. humans of different races? It seems to me that Asians(esp. East Asians) actually tend to age much less than caucasians. Japan especially tends to have a lot of very old people, I remember in 2003 the oldest person in the world was Japanese, they died, and then again the oldest person in the world was Japanese. In China, esp. rural China, you buy your own casket at age 60 or 70, but it's not uncommon for one to use it as a piece of furniture for 20 or 30 years!
Even in very poor parts of Asia, such as Pakistan, centarians(sp?) are not nearly as rare as they are in the US and Europe. Is this due to the same gene? Is it due to diet/exercise? Or is it a combination of factors?
Monstar L
It would be logical, then, if evolution had produced a direct link between aging and fertility. This does not mean it has, only that such a link would be entirely reasonable. We also know, from other work in genetics, that direct links exist in countless places between all sorts of characteristics - even ones you wouldn't necessarily expect.
Sexual reproduction evolved quite late on and different species have very different numbers of X and Y chromosomes. The Duck-Billed Platypus has 5 X chromosomes, 5 Y chromosomes and a determination system that simply isn't understood at all. It would seem likely, then, that this is a product or extension of aging. Again, this would make a lot of sense, as there is really nothing else that would make sense.
I would imagine there to be multiple links, too. Genetic material is damaged over time, so a later adaptation would presumably have been to put the energy and effort into a timeframe where damage is within acceptable limits. It is also possible that, in species with simple-enough genetic material, this might even be leveraged - a small amount of damage would maximize diversity through subtle mis-copies of the genetic code. The genes would need to be fantastically fault-tolerent for this to work, but it is certainly within the realms of the imaginable.
The upshot of all this is simple enough - tweak one parameter and it WILL impact people in other ways. Rather than regarding this as a problem, it may prove very helpful, as not all parameters are going to be directly or easily controllable. There may be other ways to tweak them, if you exploit these kinds of side-effects.
Of course, they still have to find a way to alter genetic material safely. Existing mechanisms use modified retroviruses that embed desired sequences into the infected person. This method has a moderate-to-high risk of a rare form of leukemia. It is also unclear what impact (if any) the old code remaining present will have.
The problems are not well-understood and the complexity of human genetic code is still too great to be subject to detailed analysis. However, the fact that results are being obtained at all shows that these are very bright people with a good understanding of their subject. It'll be interesting to see how far this goes, over time.
One final note - this might be a way to help revive long-lived species on the edge of extinction. If increasing longevity decreases fertility for the reasons I've suggested, then decreasing longevity should increase fertility. It may be possible to use this (in conjunction with other fertility treatments, if any are usable) to help rebuild populations where the genetics would normally work against them.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
I disagree. There is no single industrial system although we do tend to refer to is as such. There is, instead a culture of corporate convenience which, as everyone pretty much already knows, pushes any system, or product that enhances their ability to get more product sold for a lesser price.
This works just fine for extracting oil (not always but that's a different environmental discussion), or making little toys or automobiles, but if it's discovered that stabilizing oil for use in margarine merely requires that we alter its structure, then terrific right? The shareholders will reap the benefits of enhanced productivity.
This scenario has been played out more times than anyone wants to really know at the risk of our health. Then when it's discovered the health benefits are a slow deterioration of health, it's been so long in coming that the money has been made.
I can't see how there is any solution to nutrition for the planet other than the simplest, most basic one. Corporate researchers have so far demonstrated to me that they do not have the wisdom or foresight to handle this responsibility. Not that productivity cannot be enhanced within organic farming/growing practices - but just not by altering the structure of food every time it seems like it will solve a problem - we're so adept at taking a short cut just because it suits the boardroom.
Our increased lifespans so far, have come about because of improved sanitation, childhood vaccinations and treatment, and to some degree, availability of nutrition. But as it's already been documented, the children of the United States are about to experience the first ever decrease in life expectancy - not other countries (AFAIK) - mostly due to the same "nutrition" and lack of exercise.
Every single substance western civilization classes as a mind altering drug is chemically similar to a natural brain chemical, but is specifically not identical.
Heroin and all the other opiates get handled the same way in the brain as the natural endorphins. At some point in their breakdown process, they have a methyl group or other such feature sticking out that's different, the body slows down in handling it, or doesn't naturally produce nearly enough of some enzyme, and all sorts of related brain (and sometimes the rest of the body's) chemistry levels fluctuate wildly, producing both the enjoyable and unpleasant side effects. Levels of the natural brain chemical associated always display a damped sine wave curve as measured over the next few hours to several days.
LSD, Mescaline, Peyote etc, all pass through the system that regulates Serotonin, and all jam up the works somewhere in the process. The specific sticking points and the necessary solutions to keep these drugs from gumming up the works permanently on the part of the body are different, but the typical effects on brain chemestry are all at least roughly similar for that class of drugs. Note that the other, general body effects are all also at least roughly similar, and again a damped sine wave curve is produced.
All the amphetamines, E, and PCP have some effects on the adrenaline pathway for at least part of their breakdown. Again, all have at least roughly similar psychotropic and long term health effects, although Ecstasy and to a lesser extent PCP also spend some of their time affecting enzymes associated with the Serotonin pathway and have some effects in common with the classic 'halucinogens'. the damped sine wave curve can be observed for both Serotonin levels and for adrenal activity in the case of some of these drugs.
Alcohol is a brain affecting chemical. It fits the same pattern. The body produces an enzyme called Alcohol Reductase, because small amounts of alcohol are naturally produced from food in the digestive process. People who consume more alcohol than they can easily metabolize become drunk until the excess can be eliminated.
It's because of the cyclic over and under production of natural brain chemicals effect that people whose bodies adapt easily and swiftly to produce much greater quantities of reductase don't escape the long term health effects of excess consumption. Instead, if they become steady drinkers, they rapidly become the classic model alchoholics, and have huge long term risks of organic damage to the brain and general body functions even as their adaptability in reductase production may temporarily protect some other organs. The damped sine wave pattern is seen in several brain chemistry areas, including the blood sugars resulting from breakdown, the adrenaline pathways, and the sleep regulating chemicals.
Sugar (glucose) is a brain affecting chemical found in the bloodstream. Processed sugar (Dextrose) from sources such as cane syrup is a compound not found in nature in nearly such large amounts, and its metabolism requires first breaking the chemical bond that makes dextrose a double sized sugar. This is a bond that the body does not appear designed to deal with in nearly such quantities (as the average amount consumed per serving in western society these days). The levels of blood sugars actually found in the blood after consumption fluctuate in a manner and with amplitudes similar to endorphin, adrenaline or serotonin levels in drug use and abuse cases, and very distinctively different from the sort of fluctuations seen for most foods. Given that, the conclusion is that processed sugar is an abusable drug. Bulk observation of actual human subjects shows with what frequency potential for abuse turns or doesn't turn into an actual problem.
Who is John Cabal?