Slashdot Mirror
Gene Therapy Extends Mouse Lifespan
Grond writes "ScienceDaily reports, 'Researchers at the Spanish National Cancer Research Centre have demonstrated that the mouse lifespan can be extended by the application in adult life of a single treatment acting directly on the animal's genes. Mice treated at the age of one lived longer by 24% on average (PDF), and those treated at the age of two, by 13%. The therapy, furthermore, produced an appreciable improvement in the animals' health, delaying the onset of age-related diseases — like osteoporosis and insulin resistance — and achieving improved readings on aging indicators like neuromuscular coordination.' Notably, the therapy did not cause an increase in the incidence of cancer."
But they will be divided by a contest for power, for whoever takes the head of another shall gain his might.
I just hope they don't electrocute us all.
Scientists at Harvard announced the very same thing, over a year and a half ago.
This reminds me of the "calorie restriction" guy, who found out rats live 50% longer if they are fed less food then they actually need.
So...they lived 3 years instead of 2.
So...would a human gain 35 years...or 2?
Same thing here.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Just make sure to get it before you reach the age of 1 or 2
We keep trying to live longer, but I can't see a life past 90 being very comfortable or enjoyable. I think no amount of drugs or therapies can fix the human psyche--it wasn't made to last forever. The older you get, the crazier you become in most peoples eyes.
You seem to get cursed with a very bad accent.
no cancer is a pretty good side effect, tho
how about just making some stem cells from a tissue sample, and then treating them with the telomerase virus, and then injecting them back into you?
I really don't need mice that live longer. I need them to find a gene therapy to KILL mice. What's the point of this?
you're right, there's no point in it unless we can fuck hot young women until the end.
Long Live our new cheese eating over lords!
If my comment didn't sound as good in your head as it did in mine, then I guess we all know who's to blame
They report no statistical increase in cancer, but an absence of signal is not a signal of absence, and the methods alone should clue you in.
I guess my tolerance for cute sayings as explanations has declined as my crotchetiness has increased. The phrase you are looking for is "small sample size". Glancing at the rear of the article:
Separate groups of mice were tail-vein injected with 2*10^12 (viral genomes)/animal of either AAV9-GFP, AAV9-mTERT or AAV9-mTERTDN, a catalytically inactive form of mTERT (Sachsinger et al, 2001), at 420 days (AAV9-GFP, n=14 [50% males and 50% females]; AAV9- mTERT, n=21 [52% males and 48% females]; AAV9-mTERT-DN, n=17 [53% males and 47% females]) or either AAV9-GFP and AAV9- mTERT 720 days (AAV9-GFP, n=14 [58% males and 42% females]; AAV9-mTERT, n=23 [52% males and 48% females] of age. All mice are of a >95% C57BL6 background. Longevity comparisons were always made within the same mouse cohort to avoid minimal possible differences in genetic background between the groups.
They had five samples from 14 to 23 in size. That's a bit slim for some of the claims they make such as the bit about cancer.
you're right, there's no point in it unless we can fuck hot young women until the end.
If they don't age, why would we care if they're young?
The looks and energy of an 18 year old combined with the fertility and experience of a 918 year old sounds like the perfect combination to me!
They report no statistical increase in cancer, but an absence of signal is not a signal of absence
What...the...fuck?
You took something you heard people legitimately saying about certain inferences and used in a way that is not legitimate.
Here's an example that is legitimate. A cold will sometimes, but not always, be accompanied by a cough. Therefore a researcher could be trying to examine the incidence of colds by examining the incidence of coughs. Because it's entirely possible to have colds without coughs, you may then legitimately claim that the absence of the signal, the cough, is not a signal of the absence of colds. It's sufficiently correlated that it is a useful metric, but it is not a sufficient metric to draw strong conclusions. The absence of coughs are, however, most certainly indicative of the absence of coughs
No statistical increase in cancer most certainly means no statistical increase in cancer (I'm a member of the tautology club!). It is possible that the the lack in statistical significance was an anomaly (and just how probable an anomaly that would be is quantifiable, and I'm sure is quantified in the paper in the form of a p-value), but it is certainly indicative of no increases in cancer. That is exactly what they were measuring.
Do you want to die today?
You won't tomorrow, either.
He' been saying that telomerase lengthening is a good area of research for life extension for years and years. It's good to see one of his 7 therepudic targets for immortality verified.
"The value of being first to publish is wat youre talking about."
Except that they aren't. See the Scientific American article I linked to way up above. Others have been studying lengthened telomeres (achieved by other means) for many years now, and none of them have reported any increase in cancer rates. Quite the opposite, in fact.
Some of the research suggests that short telomeres might actually be a factor in causing cancer, or helping it to grow.
I guess we'll have to increase all the milestone ages... age of concent, drinking age, voting age, and retirement age... maybe make celebacy trendy somehow... really start giving gays and lesbians huge incentives... and start heavily taxing marriage and procreation.
Marriage and procreation are taxing enough as it is.
Well there is one obvious side effect. They've lost their balls.
Bring on the advanced haptic interface now!
Todays fun actuarial fact: if you strip out all biological causes of death, your life expectancy is about six thousand years (with, obviously, large variance).
[FUCK BETA]
This story is more interesting..
From http://www.33rdsquare.com/2012/04/eating-buckyballs-double-rat-life.html
Scientists at the University of Paris and colleagues fed the molecule fullerene (C60 or “buckyballs”) dissolved in olive oil to rats and found it almost doubles their lifespan, with no chronic toxicity.
The results suggest that the effect of C60, an antioxidant, on lifespan is mainly due to the attenuation of age-associated increases in oxidative stress, according to the researchers. Moreover, the researchers speculate that a longer treatment could have generated even longer lifespans.
...
“C60 can be administered orally, and as it is now produced in tons, it is no longer necessary to resort to its water-soluble derivatives, which are difficult to purify and, in contrast to pristine C60, may be toxic.