Researchers Accidentally Discover How To Turn Off Skin Aging Gene

BarbaraHudson sends this excerpt from The Province: While exploring the effects of the protein-degrading enzyme Granzyme B on blood vessels during heart attacks, professor David Granville and other researchers at the University of British Columbia couldn't help noticing that mice engineered to lack the enzyme had beautiful skin at the end of the experiment, while normal mice showed signs of age. The discovery pushed Granville's research in an unexpected new direction.

The researchers built a mechanized rodent tanning salon and exposed mice engineered to lack the enzyme and normal mice to UV light three times a week for 20 weeks, enough to cause redness, but not to burn. At the end of the experiment, the engineered mice still had smooth, unblemished skin, while the normal mice were deeply wrinkled.

Granzyme B breaks down proteins and interferes with the organization and the integrity of collagen, dismantling the scaffolding — or extra-cellular matrix — that cells bind to. This causes structural weakness, leading to wrinkles. Sunlight appears to increase levels of the enzyme and accelerate its damaging effects.

Comments

Just skin?

[Brad1138]

Or is the rest of the body "not aging "also?

Re:Just skin?

[Anonymous Coward]

Or is the rest of the body "not aging "also?

Probably not, but skin is a LOT of the body. Hey at the least you could end up being a completely crippled , but awfully handsome , 90yo.

Re:Just skin?

[dywolf]

its one of hte areas most prone to damage as you age. it gets thinner, its less able to repair itself, less able to protect the body internals, sun damage, skin cancer is one of the most common types of cancer, etc.

Re:Just skin?

[Lumpy]

A lot of that is directly coupled to the health of the rest of the body. Most old people eat like crap and just sit there. Look at highly active fit old people and you notice that they are not suffering the same effects. Old farmers that are well into their 80's that are still working their farm daily heal as fast as their 40 year old self.

Re: Just skin?

[mechanicaladvantage]

My grandfather is one of those old farmers, and he definitely doesn't heal as quickly as he used to. In addition, his skin is getting very thin. This is very similar to every other old farmer I've ever met. So while yes, diet and exercise will likely influence the rate of aging, it is incorrect to assume that the effects are a result of poor diet and just sitting around.

Re:Just skin?

[mrchaotica]

Since the experimental design involved artificially aging [only] the skin by exposing the mice to tanning, they probably don't know yet.

Re: Just skin?

[TWX]

I've got a family member in a similar state, he worked until he was 70 years old in a labor job and retired only because it was mandated. He works on something physical almost every day even though he's in his late eighties. His skin while not as bad as some, still clearly has deteriorated with age.

Re:Just skin?

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you have that the other way around, those lucky enough to have good genes are still able to be active as they age.

Re:Just skin?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, if I'm lucky and eat right and exercise I can look forward to debility, decrepitude, dementia, and death.

Fuck the "Golden Years"; I'm going straight to death when I've had enough.

Re:Just skin?

[skids]

Don't try to argue with culturally instilled puritancal "work ethic" a.k.a. self-hate and victim blaming, as it isn't rational, and probably won't go away for quite a few generations yet.

Re:Just skin?

[R3d M3rcury]

Hey at the least you could end up being a completely crippled , but awfully handsome [...]

Live fast, die old, leave a good-lookin' corpse.

Re:Just skin?

[antdude]

Or sexy. Eww!

Re:Just skin?

[Anonymous Coward]

Or thin, really thin, flapping around in the year 5 billion.

Seems unintuative

[Anonymous Coward]

So it's not the Sun which does direct damage to our skin its an enzyme in our own bodies creating the redness associated with sunburn?

Re:Seems unintuative

[Noah Haders]

the redness is caused by blood swelling to the damaged skin to flush out the dead stuff.

Re:Seems unintuative

[Skidborg]

Without the 'redness' of sunburn your body would simply be poisoned by the toxins that ruptured cells release.

Re:Seems unintuative

[SuricouRaven]

So they could come up with a cream that lets you remain wrinkle-free until you are past your nineties, but at the expense of being unable to tolerate prolonged exposure to sunlight?

Even if they were entirely open about this drawback, it'd still sell. A lot of people really are desperate to look young, and wouldn't mind giving up their time on the beach and having to douse themselves in sunscreen when attending outdoors events.

Re:Seems unintuative

[Kkloe]

nowhere it is mentioned that they avoided the redness with this

Re:Seems unintuative

[Skidborg]

I believe it's already known that avoiding sunlight helps prevent this enzyme from being released, and in turn keeps skin looking younger. This is just artificially lowering it even further in an attempt to to create immortal, sunlight-fearing vampires.

Re:Seems unintuative

[Chrisq]

So they could come up with a cream that lets you remain wrinkle-free until you are past your nineties, but at the expense of being unable to tolerate prolonged exposure to sunlight?

Don't tell me, the other side effect is the development of fangs and a desire to drink blood.

Re:Seems unintuative

[visavillem]

So they could come up with a cream that lets you remain wrinkle-free until you are past your nineties, but at the expense of being unable to tolerate prolonged exposure to sunlight?

Don't tell me, the other side effect is the development of fangs and a desire to drink blood.

... and sparkling in the direct sunlight... yeah, i just went there....

Re:Seems unintuative

[Anonymous Coward]

Correct.

Sunlight UV is the number 1 factor for skin wrinkling. If you look at *any* anti-wrinkling / skin rejuvenating cream you will always see them contain a sunblock component as a top ingredient.

That's the "1 weird tip" of the day for staying young looking ;)

Re:Seems unintuative

[Lumpy]

The Goth community will buy this stuff by the bucket full.

Re:Seems unintuative

[BarbaraHudson]

So they could come up with a cream that lets you remain wrinkle-free until you are past your nineties, but at the expense of being unable to tolerate prolonged exposure to sunlight?

Don't tell me, the other side effect is the development of fangs and a desire to drink blood.

To the contrary - the mice that had the enzyme blocked tolerated prolonged expose without and problems. You'd be able to stay outside a LOT longer.

Re:Seems unintuative

[Forgefather]

I think you may be misunderstanding. The summary says that it is the engineered mice that could resist the sunlight while the normal mice became prunes. In this case the cream (more likely a shot) would be what allows you to stay out in the sun without using sunscreen at all.

Re:Seems unintuative

[ElitistWhiner]

+1

"immortal, sunlight-fearing vampires"

Re:Seems unintuative

[Anonymous Coward]

Combine this with the "mechanized rodent tanning salon" and you've got yourself a GURPS campaign.

Re:Seems unintuative

[tmosley]

Not blood so much as the stem cells inside the blood. Isn't that right, Hack Man?

Re:Seems unintuative

[tommyatomic]

I believe it's already known that avoiding sunlight helps prevent this enzyme from being released, and in turn keeps skin looking younger. This is just artificially lowering it even further in an attempt to to create immortal, sunlight-fearing vampires.

If you read the article you would know that this will infact create vampires that NO LONGER fear the sun. You stated the reverse. Vampires that fear the sun are not news.

Re:Seems unintuative

[sexconker]

Correct.

Sunlight UV is the number 1 factor for skin wrinkling. If you look at *any* anti-wrinkling / skin rejuvenating cream you will always see them contain a sunblock component as a top ingredient.

That's the "1 weird tip" of the day for staying young looking ;)

Inside! One Anonymous Coward's Weird Tip to Fight Aging Skin

Dermatologists Hate Him!

Re:Seems unintuative

[Anonymous Coward]

I live in the Pacific NW (USA) and always wondered why I look so young and feel the impulses of a vampire at times ;-)

+1 "immortal, sunlight-fearing vampires"

Re:Seems unintuative

[skids]

Oh noes! Daywalker Goths!

Now we have to look at all those gross piercings in the full light of day? Ick.

Re:Seems unintuative

[Anonymous Coward]

Great, enabling more day walkers. The wonders of science ...

Re:Seems unintuative

[neurovish]

I think you may be misunderstanding. The summary says that it is the engineered mice that could resist the sunlight while the normal mice became prunes. In this case the cream (more likely a shot) would be what allows you to stay out in the sun without using sunscreen at all.

TFS makes it sound like the mice are still susceptible to sunburns (and probably skin cancer), but that their skin is no worse off looking after the burn heals. I'm just curious what the unintended consequences of that would be. Our skin probably gets old and wrinkly for a reason.

Re:Seems unintuative

[SuricouRaven]

It grants them unprunability. That doesn't imply cancer-resistance. It's quite possible that aspect of sun damage would be worsened, as you're shutting down one of the evolved damage-mitigation mechanisms.

Re:Seems unintuative

[BarbaraHudson]

+1

"immortal, sunlight-fearing vampires"

Actually, with this, the vampires wouldn't fear sunlight any more.

Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[Anonymous Coward]

Billions of women (and men) around the world paying TRILLIONS for cosmetic product for what?

To heal their internal organs?

Skincare is the number one profit making venue for many cosmetic companies, big and small, all around the world

Even the Islamic women who bound themselves up like mummies still pay top dollar for lotions that 'protect their skin ', even if they are prohibited to show any (skin) to anyone except their husbands

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[NotInHere]

Billions of women (and men) around the world paying TRILLIONS for cosmetic product for what?

Skincare is the number one profit making venue for many cosmetic companies, big and small, all around the world

So, will the cosmetic companies let stupid progress destroy their revenue stream? Uh, I guess no. They will buy the researcher's startup for a shitload of money, and then suprise suprise it turns out the method wasn't so promising after all. And they will keep all patents on the technology so that nobody else can release a competing product.

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[TheRaven64]

Why would they do that? If you're a cosmetics company and you can buy a startup that owns the patents on a technique that actually works, then you'd be stupid to keep competing on a level playing field when you could be the only company that's selling the real thing. Even if you multiply your normal profit margin by a factor of ten, you're still going to be selling huge quantities and raking in the money.

The problem with these conspiracy theories is that they assume that people with large entrenched interests and lots of money somehow have an aversion to turning their big pile of money into an enormous pile of money.

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[NotInHere]

You can see on the example of Uber that taxi companies rather try to forbid the app than sell off their cars and develop and offer competing apps, or focus on rich people who don't want to travel with unprofessionals. But I admit, in this example you may be right, as you don't have to fear competition.

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[Anonymous Coward]

The difference is, these huge cosmetics manufacturers have both the know-how and the resources to mass-produce this thing and cash in on a level you and your mother can't even begin to fathom. So, on account of the profit motivation, it would be extremely idiotic to think that they will pass up such an opportunity.

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[Anonymous Coward]

eg, Viagra.

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly. These two products would not compete based on price.
You keep selling your current line as is but create a new product that "has been scientifically proven to work" for a metric shit ton of money per drop.

Downside is that you need to hire more accountants to count all that money ....

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[Anonymous Coward]

... and taxes. Let's also hire a few lobbyist to pressure our elected officials into lowering taxes.

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[azcoyote]

Exactly. What people don't understand is that economic interests are not fundamentally opposed to the progress of technology--they actually drive it. We like to think that technology soars as high as our aspirations, but invention costs money and at the end of the day, commercialism pays the bills. We are constantly promised flying cars and cities on the moon, but the real tangible products only arrive when they become economically viable in some sense. There were mp3 players before the iPod, but only the iPod really pushed the market forward such that technological innovation went from better and better mp3 players, to smart phones, to tablets, etc. This is because, on the one hand, the iPod was surrounded by excellent marketing, and on the other hand, the product itself was shaped by economic interests to target the then-current market in a superior way. Hence it may not be that the iPod was the best and newest technology that could be produced, but it was perhaps the best blend of innovation, marketing, and economic viability for the situation, and thus because of its marketability it drove future innovation in the direction of handheld wireless devices.

Back to the situation at hand, companies that sell skincare products do have a vested interest in bad skin, but only to the extent to which it enhances the marketability of their products. They might be able to form a conspiracy network and hide such a miracle product only if human nature were not what it is, and economics were not driven by competition. One company still has to compete with another, and so one company will likely invest in high-tech means of skin care in order to dwarf another. Thus there will be no conspiracy to bury this new technology. Rather, one company will promote the technology enough to gain an upper hand in a high-end market (e.g. not cheap Suave products like I buy), but cost and convenience will prevent this technology from eliminating the skin care industry altogether.

Human genetic engineering could change the situation, but that will involve complex issues (patented genes?) and other economic and political factors that will be external to the skin care industry in itself. Like all other technologies, human genetic engineering will be driven by the economy, no matter how much transhumanist idealism pushes for it as the supposed next step in human evolution. In the meantime, this particular discovery will more likely lead to lesser technologies that purport to target Granzyme B without eliminating it genetically.

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[Anonymous Coward]

Short term us, long term, they would want this out and gone before their patents on it expired unless they know they can effectively pull a Walt Disney and extend their stuff till they end of time.

If the company is thinking short term only, they would jump on this and make a killing for the full duration till others managed to make generics that matched it close enough to work but not be infringing, afterward, this would effectively corner the market for whomever sold it the cheapest.

If the company is thinking long term, they would buy and mothball this as it would replace too much of their existing lines and make sure to patent it as well, to make sure you could slam anyone before they made enough progress to find out about it and stop them.

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[JudgeFurious]

Exactly right and if you're the company with the one, true "cure" for skin aging then you have to look at the population of the world and think "I've got an endless supply of customers!" This isn't something an entire industry would shut down. It's something they'd go into a crazy bidding war to possess.

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[Lumpy]

"or focus on rich people who don't want to travel with unprofessionals."

WE have always had that, It's called hiring a town car. In any town you can make a call and hire a personal drive in a nice BMW 5 or 7 series or Lincoln or other luxury car to drive you everywhere you want and be at your beck and call.

And during "peak uber" pricing, it's cheaper to call a town car company and ride in class instead of some fat guys prius.

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would they do that? If you're a cosmetics company and you can buy a startup that owns the patents on a technique that actually works, then you'd be stupid to keep competing on a level playing field when you could be the only company that's selling the real thing. Even if you multiply your normal profit margin by a factor of ten, you're still going to be selling huge quantities and raking in the money.

The problem with these conspiracy theories is that they assume that people with large entrenched interests and lots of money somehow have an aversion to turning their big pile of money into an enormous pile of money.

When the emerging product has the power to displace even your own reliable revenue streams from your several dozen "hack" products for skincare, you might wisely think twice about how you market and deploy it, even if you own the technology.

It may make far more sense to keep this "magic" in a bottle and reserve it for licensing through only the worlds most exclusive salons rather than put it on a shelf.

And if this technology works as well as it appears, this easily has the capability to disrupt billions in current revenue.

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[Anonymous Coward]

You forgot the fact that many of these companies are part of the same groups, and most of these groups are led (in various ways) by people who went to school together and enjoy regular parties together, or have mutual friends or influential friends of friends who do. Many such people even have interests in multiple of these groups.

Even without those facts, "disruptive" evolutions tend to be frown upon by most "leaders" in most cases in today society (they've been trained that way), so they do not even need to agree explicitly on hiding, not investigating, or slowing them down. You will also have many "pressure" groups of various sorts, who will use various means to try to hide, stop the investigation, or slow down evolutions.

Tons of other factors are at "play" for all this. Fights for money control, fear of exposure to vengeances and extremisms, fear of legal troubles, many inertias everywhere (starting from the people who may make less money, or will be required more effort, but who you may well still require for the development, production, or distribution of your product...), etc.

Anyway, you talk about an "high-end market"... But what if this evolution is actually very cheap to develop and produce? Or could be made cheap to produce by simple will and investments with little risks, that these companies could easily afford? Well it is a fact in most cases, "leaders" today will tend to prefer "sell little at a high price", rather than "sell a lot at a low price", even if the balance is the very same, or in favor of selling low. You see it in almost all industries today, with very little exceptions (most often with a completely artificial and very significant drop in quality wasting it). That is already of course a major restriction on progress, if it could still be called it, being so restricted... Progress has a significant connotation of universality, or at least some amount of it (as in, "at least accessible to middle class Western people and those from a few other countries elsewhere"...).

Even without all this, the monopolization of knowledge and its application, is obviously already a major restriction on progress. That today society has been made in part inadequate for more freedom and cooperation is in now way a justification for a monopoly.

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[matbury]

So the prophesy is coming true. All hail our great prophet Mike Judge for it is he who spoke the truth in his movie, Idiocracy! http://www.imdb.com/title/tt03... And yay, it shall come to pass that scientists will no longer interest themselves in saving lives and making the world a better place and shall instead devote their attention to preventing hair loss and prolonging erections... and delaying the effects of aging, "leaving your skin feeling visibly younger."

This post was brought to you by Brawndo, the thirst mutilator. Brawndo, it's got electrolytes.

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[TWX]

Plus the driver from the sedan service probably has a lot more experience and is paid to be professional, the car is well-maintained, and the company has proper commercial insurance. The fat guy in the prius may as well be, "ass, gas, or grass, no one rides for free."

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[Lumpy]

The two times I used a towncar service it was great. Typically they know the best routes through the city and they pay attention to rider comfort above all else, they do not drive like maniacs and intentionally slow down smoothly. The towncar I used in Chicago 4 years ago did not even have a GPS, he knew the city, something that is rare now.

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[cyberchondriac]

You forgot the fact that many of these companies are part of the same groups, and most of these groups are led (in various ways) by people who went to school together and enjoy regular parties together, or have mutual friends or influential friends of friends who do.

and you just know this, how? Bottom line is, something like this that actually works (for a change) would be a cash cow. Like a real cure for baldness. Everyone ages. It's not like only a few selective people will want it. A bit like the undertaker business, you don't have to worry about running out of customers. Nearly everyone will want this, and the more affordable it is, the more people can and will buy it - economies of scale.

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[Anonymous Coward]

It's simple. You never produce a product that fixes it because people won't use it often.
You provide something that helps but never fixes the underlying problem. That way people keep on purchasing the product.

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[Anonymous Coward]

Good! I want lower prices and don't want corporations as tax collectors for the government. (Of course fascists and authoritarians love to have corporations collect taxes for them - it helps them dupe the weak-minded.)

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[Xenx]

All lowering taxes on a business guarantees... is they make more money. The savings only get passed on to the customer if they feel they need to lower prices to better compete. It doesn't mean it won't happen, but it also doesn't mean it will. In this particular case, it almost certainly wouldn't get passed on to the customer.

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[Anubis IV]

A few decades back, I knew a researcher/university professor who had developed a ready-for-market, one-day yeast infection treatment when seven-day (or longer) treatments were still the norm. A major pharmaceutical showed extreme interest, purchased the rights from him, then sat on it for the better part of a decade, much to the consternation of the researcher, who was hoping society could benefit from the treatment more rapidly.

What he didn't know at the time was that the pharma company had already developed a three-day treatment that they were getting ready to introduce within the next year or two. They stood to gain a significant competitive advantage in introducing the three-day treatment, since they'd be the first-to-market with it. When they saw the researcher's one-day treatment, they realized that a competitor could leapfrog them if it got ahold of the treatment, so they knew they had to buy it out, but rather than introduce the one-day treatment immediately (i.e. leapfrog themselves) and give up any advantage the three-day treatment could have afforded them in the market, they decided to sit on the one-day treatment for several years. Doing so allowed them to benefit from being first-to-market with the three-day treatment, giving them a few years of market dominance, and then as their competitors started to catch up, they were able to be first-to-market with a one-day treatment which they could sell at a premium price. In essence, it allowed them to double the length of their lead in the market and command a higher price for the faster treatment.

All of which is to say, these aren't conspiracy theories. You're absolutely correct that these companies want to make even more money than they already have, but there are plenty of sound, financial reasons for them to sit on better technologies rather than introducing them immediately. I've highlighted merely one of them here.

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[sconeu]

Brawndo has what plants crave!!!!!!!

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[matbury]

It's got electrolytes!

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[sexconker]

"or focus on rich people who don't want to travel with unprofessionals."

WE have always had that, It's called hiring a town car. In any town you can make a call and hire a personal drive in a nice BMW 5 or 7 series or Lincoln or other luxury car to drive you everywhere you want and be at your beck and call.

And during "peak uber" pricing, it's cheaper to call a town car company and ride in class instead of some fat guys prius.

BMWs are for the middle class wannabe rich fuckers.

What's the difference between a BMW and a porcupine?
With the porcupine, the pricks are on the outside.

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[BarbaraHudson]

Or deploy it at a slightly higher (or even lower) price and eat the competition alive. So, when the patents expire, who's left standing? And that gives you lots of money to spend on further research to improve the product, as well as the biggest marketing budget.

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[BarbaraHudson]

And yay, it shall come to pass that scientists will no longer interest themselves in saving lives and making the world a better place and shall instead devote their attention to preventing hair loss and prolonging erections... and delaying the effects of aging, "leaving your skin feeling visibly younger."

Doesn't match the facts. They were looking for ways to have less internal scarring on major blood vessels, and now their first product will be to treat lupus.

Lupus is a chronic inflammatory disease that occurs when your body's immune system attacks your own tissues and organs. Inflammation caused by lupus can affect many different body systems — including your joints, skin, kidneys, blood cells, brain, heart and lungs.

Lupus can be difficult to diagnose because its signs and symptoms often mimic those of other ailments. The most distinctive sign of lupus — a facial rash that resembles the wings of a butterfly unfolding across both cheeks — occurs in many but not all cases of lupus.

Some people are born with a tendency toward developing lupus, which may be triggered by infections, certain drugs or even sunlight. While there's no cure for lupus, treatments can help control symptoms.

There's more ... lots more.

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[Spugglefink]

We gots them too. If'n you call them town car folks 'round here that feller picks you up in a four-door dualie with "POWERED BY CUMMINS" wrote across the back winder. If you pay extra, that feller takes a hose to wash off most of the cow shit before he picks you up.

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[Grishnakh]

The several times I used Uber, it was great too. They picked me up in luxury cars (Mercedes, BMWs) and had much nicer cars than the towncar services I tried. They used GPS and took me by the most direct route, while the towncar service took weird back roads that took a lot longer. The towncars were also older and in poor shape, whereas the Uber cars were rather new and clean.

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[Anonymous Coward]

I doubt it was as simple as that, while I don't doubt the Pharma company didn't want anyone else with a quicker treatment, you cannot just buy a patent/license and then issue it the next day.

For Pharma, there is a huge amount of tests and trials they have to go through, and while I am sure your researcher knew his stuff, I doubt much that he had done whatever tests were needed for your 'FDA - if you're American I guess or whatever the rest of the world's Drug test laws are. So yes it might have given them advantage down the line, I seriously dobt they would have 'sat on it' as you say.

There would be no point. To get it to market would have probably taken then at least a couple of years from when they started.

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[Anubis IV]

Oh, no doubt there would have been additional tests necessary, so a delay of a few years would certainly make sense and would be warranted. What we saw instead, however, was a delay well beyond when the tests would have been completed, and which was in place simply due to marketing reasons. After all, if you're already ahead of your competition, why tip your hand for what's still two generations out? Why not instead simply dominate the market for two generations?

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[i.kazmi]

Idiot

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[cwsumner]

BMWs are for the middle class wannabe rich fuckers.

What's the difference between a BMW and a porcupine?
With the porcupine, the pricks are on the outside.

BMWs are for people that drive the car -themselves-. The prics don't drive.
Hell, you can still get a BMW with a -manual- transmission, doesn't that tell you something? 8-)

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[ChrisMaple]

BMWs are for youngish frustrated wannabes. They take out their frustrations in arrogant, aggressive driving. Hence the porcupine comparison.

Re:Skin deep, but that's where the money is !

[matbury]

NSF budget = ~$7Bn, Cosmetics industry buget = ~$170Bn

I'll put my money and sense of humour on preventing hair loss, prolonging erections, and "leaving your skin feeling visibly younger." :P

Anti-Aging is a Fraud Magnet

[retroworks]

On the one hand, this could be huge. On the other hand, let's see the peer reviewed articles. Remember "resveratrol"? After seeing resveratrol covered by CBS 60 Minutes, etc, I bought some tablets, based on the similar mouse aging claims. Interesting history in Quackwatch.com describes how the mouse aging study led to $720M investment by GlaxoSmithKline. Once the money started rushing in, it went quacky...

"In 2012, the University of Connecticut announced that it had concluded that Dipak K. Das, Ph.D., a professor in its Department of Surgery and director of the Cardiovascular Research Center, was guilty of 145 counts of fabrication and falsification of data and that the university had notified eleven journals about this problem [20]. In recent years, Das had gained attention for his reports on allegedly beneficial properties of resveratrol. As of March 2014, journals had retracted 20 of his papers, many of which were repeatedly cited by others [21]. Das died in 2013."

Some interesting research is still going on, tangentially from the resveratrol research. But the way anti-aging anything gets marketed, suspicion always seems warranted.

http://www.quackwatch.com/01Qu...

Re:Anti-Aging is a Fraud Magnet

[Anonymous Coward]

On the one hand, this could be huge. On the other hand, let's see the peer reviewed articles. Remember "resveratrol"? After seeing resveratrol covered by CBS 60 Minutes, etc, I bought some tablets, based on the similar mouse aging claims. Interesting history in Quackwatch.com describes how the mouse aging study led to $720M investment by GlaxoSmithKline. Once the money started rushing in, it went quacky...

"In 2012, the University of Connecticut announced that it had concluded that Dipak K. Das, Ph.D., a professor in its Department of Surgery and director of the Cardiovascular Research Center, was guilty of 145 counts of fabrication and falsification of data and that the university had notified eleven journals about this problem [20]. In recent years, Das had gained attention for his reports on allegedly beneficial properties of resveratrol. As of March 2014, journals had retracted 20 of his papers, many of which were repeatedly cited by others [21]. Das died in 2013."

Some interesting research is still going on, tangentially from the resveratrol research. But the way anti-aging anything gets marketed, suspicion always seems warranted.

http://www.quackwatch.com/01Qu...

This isn't the U.S.

Re:Anti-Aging is a Fraud Magnet

[Anonymous Coward]

If you can point to any pharmaceutical investment at UBC over and above development of pharmaceuticals, this was a fluke discovery, I would be surprised. There is no comparison here to the fraudulent claims that GlaxoSmithKline invested in. This is a wholly good and valuable discovery.

Re:Anti-Aging is a Fraud Magnet

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem is that as aging is not a disease anti-aging pills are not medicines and are much easier to put on the market. I'm not sure whether aging should be seen as a disease or not by the legislators, but at least it would put an end to these scams.

Re:Anti-Aging is a Fraud Magnet

[Chalnoth]

I'd also add that even if this research is valid, and even if stopping the action of this protein reduces skin aging in humans, there is a very good chance that the protein does other things that are quite important for health. It's conceivable, for instance, that you might have great skin, but a weakened immune system or have your digestion of certain important nutrients stunted. So even if there's no fraud, there's a lot of reason to remain skeptical.

Re:Anti-Aging is a Fraud Magnet

[PolygamousRanchKid]

My skin cream is not only anti-aging, but it can also be used to power my home cold fusion power generators!

The next version will also be able to do teleportation via quantum entanglement.

I challenge any Slashdotter to come up with a better product than that!

Re: Anti-Aging is a Fraud Magnet

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's see about that. If somebody patents it and/or makes money from this discovery, I would say there is something fishy going on. If not, then great!

Re:Anti-Aging is a Fraud Magnet

[Anonymous Coward]

If an effective product is developed from this, the side effects probably contain something like: " may accelerate the onset of Alzheimer's or Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease."

Re:Anti-Aging is a Fraud Magnet

[Anonymous Coward]

Wouldn't this possibly help prevent skin cancer?

Re:Anti-Aging is a Fraud Magnet

[fractoid]

My mixture of natural herbs recommended by a Madagascan witch-shaman will not only reverse aging completely but it lets me use ad-hominem as a legitimate logical argument.

Beat THAT.

Re:Anti-Aging is a Fraud Magnet

[eulernet]

In fact, you have a beautiful fur, but you can only eat like a mouse.

Re:Anti-Aging is a Fraud Magnet

[Buchenskjoll]

Das died in 2013."

So, the man who allegedly invented anti-aging has died? Talk about bad PR.

Re:Anti-Aging is a Fraud Magnet

[RivenAleem]

I suspect it is part of the scarring/regeneration trade off. This collagen scaffolding action possibly helps skin heal faster after a cut, the trade off is wrinkles. Slower healing skin, but doing so blemish-free was not likely a good survival trait when a break in the skin barrier would increase chance of infection.

With modern medicine, infection risk might be abated by antibiotics/antiseptics.

This might also be awesome for burn victims (assuming you can keep infection at bay)

Re:Anti-Aging is a Fraud Magnet

[Rei]

Usually most aging-preventing discoveries cause cancer. For example, the p21 knockout mice that gained almost salamander-like regeneration also gained a high tumor rate. Usually processes in your body involving the stopping of growth and areas dying off are things that help prevent cancer from forming or growing.

Re:Anti-Aging is a Fraud Magnet

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd also add that even if this research is valid, and even if stopping the action of this protein reduces skin aging in humans, there is a very good chance that the protein does other things that are quite important for health. It's conceivable, for instance, that you might have great skin, but a weakened immune system or have your digestion of certain important nutrients stunted. So even if there's no fraud, there's a lot of reason to remain skeptical.

Since when have side effects stood in the way of profits or common sense?

The percentage of humans on this planet who give a shit about themselves at this level is shockingly small, even for the superficial ones who prioritize looks above all. You might find your skeptics, but it will have about as much impact as protesting sports violence at the Superbowl.

Re:Anti-Aging is a Fraud Magnet

[liquid_schwartz]

With modern medicine, infection risk might be abated by antibiotics/antiseptics.

Not for long with the current over usage of antibiotics.

Re:Anti-Aging is a Fraud Magnet

[q4Fry]

Oh, right. I was reading about that. It was developed by North Koreans from the tears of those unicorns they found.

Re:Anti-Aging is a Fraud Magnet

[Nethemas the Great]

This enzyme apparently plays a role in cellular apoptosis. I'm not credentialed in the field but, from my armchair I can't help but wonder if taking away this enzyme might not give people ageless, beautiful, carcinoma.

Re:Anti-Aging is a Fraud Magnet

[skids]

Antiseptics are not so impacted, and are the more likely agent to be used for a skin cut.

Re:Anti-Aging is a Fraud Magnet

[BarbaraHudson]

The problem is that as aging is not a disease anti-aging pills are not medicines and are much easier to put on the market. I'm not sure whether aging should be seen as a disease or not by the legislators, but at least it would put an end to these scams.

First definition of disease:

a disorder of structure or function in a human, animal, or plant, especially one that produces specific signs or symptoms or that affects a specific location and is not simply a direct result of physical injury.

Aging IS a disease, and a fatal one at that.

Re:Anti-Aging is a Fraud Magnet

[Anonymous Coward]

Mine gives me time travel capabilities, which allow me to go back in time and patent any of your products before you even think of them.

AND it lets me redefine the term Ad-Hominem so that I can win any argument that you thought it would let you win.

Re:Anti-Aging is a Fraud Magnet

[ChrisMaple]

My recollection is that wrinkles are caused by partially damaged cells that can't be removed by normal repair and waste removal processes. One way to approach the problem is the enzyme bromelain, which breaks up some proteins, allowing/forcing repair to take place. Ever notice the corner of your mouth getting sore after eating raw pineapple? That's bromelain in action.

Home made inhibitor?

[__aarvde6843]

Does anyone know how to make an inhibitor for this Granzyme B enzyme?... Before pfizer patents it and charges $10.000 per drop?

Re:Home made inhibitor?

[Chikungunya]

Find out the gene, make a few interfering RNAs candidates, blast it into the skin cells (not as hard since its a surface tissue), choose the ones that did not knock down other similar proteins and BAM! you got it.

Re:Home made inhibitor?

[Anonymous Coward]

This discovery from a a publicly and provincially funded institution may allow for more international investment, especially considering patents do not apply and allow that price to drop in 5-7 years. Take.

Re:Home made inhibitor?

[BarbaraHudson]

Does anyone know how to make an inhibitor for this Granzyme B enzyme?... Before pfizer patents it and charges $10.000 per drop?

This is what they were experimenting with to see if they could protect large arteries from scarring. It's in TFA, which now appears to be slashdotted.

As Seen On TV?

[Anonymous Coward]

I have seen it! Catherine HasDaNerve to bullshit all the desperate, all the lonely. Ageless skin, IN A BOTTLE! Okay, maybe a jar. Or maybe a tube. Real small. ONLY $120 for a 6-month supply.

There is just one side effect to treatment

[Anonymous Coward]

There is 40 percent chance that once you die after this product gives you cancer, you will turn into a zombie. So please weigh the risks.

Re:There is just one side effect to treatment

[codeButcher]

There is 40 percent chance that once you die after this product gives you cancer, you will turn into a zombie. So please weigh the risks.

A zombie with beautiful skin... what's not to like?

Re:There is just one side effect to treatment

[Anonymous Coward]

Especially fitting considering the "I Am Legend" zombies aversion to UV light...

Re:There is just one side effect to treatment

[Nethemas the Great]

blow jobs

Accident report

[hcs_$reboot]

Researchers accidentally discover ... ... couldn't help noticing that mice had beautiful skin at the end of the experiment

Who buys that? Did they really find something and hide the truth about how they did it, or are they just looking for some ways to get media attention?

Re:Accident report

[Kkloe]

or they say that to troll with the conspiracy theories idiots

Re:Accident report

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd say most 'discoveries' are people looking at OTHER results and being "huh... thats weird... "

By saying what you did, its obvious you have never done experiments and tried to learn something new from them ... (beyond what young children do, obviously)

Re:Accident report

[fractoid]

Skin-care professionals do hate them. Learn their one simple trick!

Why is it there?

[thePowersGang]

Interesting, but I can't help wonder if this enzyme exists for a reason. I presume these scientists are working hard to determine what evolutionary role it fills (before working on selling it as part of an anti-aging cream)

Re:Why is it there?

[Skidborg]

It sounds like it's part of the system that removes damaged cells and toxic material after a sunburn. It causes some collateral damage, but it might be better than being poisoned.

Re:Why is it there?

[Charliemopps]

Interesting, but I can't help wonder if this enzyme exists for a reason. I presume these scientists are working hard to determine what evolutionary role it fills (before working on selling it as part of an anti-aging cream)

I hear this a lot... There seems to be a lot of misconception about evolution and the body. We gain and lose traits when they affect our ability to reproduce... and at no other time. So, at some time, this enzyme increased our ability to reproduce in some way. It did not need to increase our chances of survival because, evolution only cares about getting us to reproductive maturity. So, whatever reason that enzyme helped us in the past may be long gone and it's just a vestige of that time. It'll not be bread out of us until it hurts our chances at reproduction and since "Wrinkly skin" isn't going to hurt that until we're in our 40s, well outside of normal reproductive age, there's no reason it would become an evolutionary disadvantage. What I'm saying is, Evolution doesn't care if you get ugly, contract cancer and die in your 50s. If this thing doesn't make you less attractive or hurt your chances to make it into your teens and early 20s, evolution doesn't even notice it.

Re:Why is it there?

[Anonymous Coward]

So, at some time, this enzyme increased our ability to reproduce in some way.

Even that isn't necessarily true; the presence of the enzyme could be completely incidental. It just needs to have not affected our ability to reproduce in a significantly negative way.

Re:Why is it there?

[Anonymous Coward]

while I dont disagree with most of your post, this particular protein does have real current functions in our immune system.
I am a little shocked that so far not one link to the damn wiki page has been posted.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granzyme_B
the short of it is, lymphocytes and NK cells use it to tell other cells to die. Other cells could be cancer cells, cells infected with viri....
Mice may look nice after a short experiment in a clean room, but this would be very tricky to do in humans.

Re:Why is it there?

[Richy_T]

Perhaps the advantage this enzyme gives is by wrinkly skin being an indicator of age. For women, it might signal that a woman is past her best breeding years and the male should invest his resources elsewhere (that would be more of a tribal advantage). And for men (though this is a stretch), it might indicate that the man has survived longer (having good genes) and maybe has more resources, meaning he can better support his offspring.

Loads of flaws there, I'm sure :)

Re:Why is it there?

[micahraleigh]

By "evolutionary role" you are delving into religion too shameful to be embraced as such.

I'm going to consult my phylogeny chart to see if I should eat a donut ...

Re:Why is it there?

[nbritton]

Evolution doesn't care if you get ugly, contract cancer and die in your 50s. If this thing doesn't make you less attractive or hurt your chances to make it into your teens and early 20s, evolution doesn't even notice it.

Yes it does care, children need parents to raise and protect them. Furthermore, grandparents can help raise and protect their grandchildren. Both of these increase the odds that their offspring will reproduce.

Re:Why is it there?

[Anonymous Coward]

All very well, until you realise that you start getting wrinkles in or before your 20s.

Re:Why is it there?

[Areyoukiddingme]

It did not need to increase our chances of survival because, evolution only cares about getting us to reproductive maturity.

Well yes, but humans have a long maturation period. Getting us to reproductive maturity necessitates keeping our parents alive as well, not just us. A human with at least one parent who survives 15 years after its birth has a decided evolutionary advantage over a human with no parent surviving a year after birth. A human with two present parents surviving at least 20 years after birth has an even bigger advantage. A human with two present parents surviving at least 20 years after birth plus at least one grandparent surviving at least 20 years after birth has the biggest advantage evolution has yet found.

Characteristics from the human lifespan to human sex drive can be explained in these evolutionary terms. Humans live approximately 60 years in good health, which is their own maturation period plus the maturation period of one offspring, plus the maturation period of that offspring's offspring. The male human sex drive and the female's ability to accommodate him year round (extremely rare in mammals) have been described as the evolutionary mechanism that ensures not just two surviving parents, but the presence of two surviving parents.

Evolution may not care if you get ugly after your 20s, but evolution does care if you contract cancer and die at 35. It's a disadvantage to your offspring.

(Pedants who want to complain about us anthropomorphizing evolution are invited to take a long walk off a short pier. It's shorthand.)

I, for one

[Anonymous Coward]

welcome our new handsome mice overlords

Re:I, for one

[NotInHere]

New?! They controlled us all the time. At least since our ancestors arrived at this planet.

Re:I, for one

[neurovish]

New?! They controlled us all the time. At least since our ancestors arrived at this planet.

And they have now tricked scientists into a discovery that will keep them youthful looking with incredible skin!

viDA Therapeutics hopes to make this a skin cream

[Anonymous Coward]

viDA Therapeutics, a company co-founded by Granville, is currently developing a Granzyme-B inhibitor based on technology licensed from UBC. The company plans to test a topically applied drug within two years on people with discoid lupus erythematosus, an autoimmune disease worsened by sunlight that can lead to disfiguring facial scarring. (The musician Seal has such a condition.)

If the drug proves effective in preventing lupus-related skin lesions, there is potential for a cosmetic product to prevent the normal, gradual aging of the skin, which is mostly caused by sun exposure. But the drug might also be used for life-threatening conditions, such as aneurysms and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, caused by the breakdown of collagen and other proteins that provide structure to blood vessels and lung passages.

Why aging and death is good for society

[Anonymous Coward]

No matter how rich or poor you are it is safe to assume that you will be dead within 100 years of your birth. Now what if there was a way for someone to cheat aging and live indefinitely. Now picture what life in the world would be like if the people who believed in slavery, segregation, and those who opposed suffrage for women were still alive and running the government and industry. A society where the people in power are over 100 years old would cease to socially evolve.

Re: Why aging and death is good for society

[Anonymous Coward]

Opinions change.

Re: Why aging and death is good for society

[Anonymous Coward]

Russia?
Just because you think something is good doesn't mean anything.
The only thing woman's sufferrage leads to is more men in prison, more lawsuits, higher age of marraige as women outlaw the competition. That is not good for men.

Re:Why aging and death is good for society

[BarbaraHudson]

No matter how rich or poor you are it is safe to assume that you will be dead within 100 years of your birth. Now what if there was a way for someone to cheat aging and live indefinitely. Now picture what life in the world would be like if the people who believed in slavery, segregation, and those who opposed suffrage for women were still alive and running the government and industry. A society where the people in power are over 100 years old would cease to socially evolve.

At the beginning of the last century the average age at death was 47. When, 19 1935, FDR signed the law that allowed social security plans to start at 65, they figured almost nobody would be around to collect, so it would be easy to fund.

Now we're living a LOT longer. And we're continuing to increase our average life expectancy. And that's in the face of increases in diabetes, hypertension, and obesity.

Re:Why aging and death is good for society

[Anonymous Coward]

This nonsense has been debunked so many times, for so many years, that it's really not funny anymore. Life expectancy at birth has changed dramatically due to improved neonatal care and widespread treatment and vaccination against deadly illnesses such as tuberculosis, polio, smallpox, measles, and type 1 diabetes, but life expectancy at 65 has only increased modestly. Most advances in medicine for the elderly don't let them live longer so much as they improve quality of life in their remaining years. The looming payout rate that Social Security has to grapple with is based almost entirely on the overall population growth rate, which has been going down ever since the baby boom. If not for immigration, the US population would actually be shrinking, since the fertility rate is below the replacement rate (~1.9 vs. ~2.1).

Likewise, we aren't getting older in spite of increases in type two diabetes, hypertension and obesity. To a large extent we're getting increases in type two diabetes, hypertension, and obesity because we're getting older. It's not a coincidence that age is a primary risk factor for all of those (if obesity is taken to mean central obesity, which is the type that is really relevant to prognosis; having some extra flab on your arms isn't exactly a big heart attack risk).

Re:Why aging and death is good for society

[BarbaraHudson]

When you wrote "Most advances in medicine for the elderly don't let them live longer so much as they improve quality of life in their remaining years" you stated something that is easily disproved.

The old are living longer than ever before.

It wasn’t until the 20th century that mortality rates began to decline within the older ages. Research for more recent periods shows a surprising and continuing improvement in life expectancy among those aged 80 or above.

The progressive increase in survival in these oldest age groups was not anticipated by demographers, and it raises questions about how high the average life expectancy can realistically rise and about the potential length of the human lifespan. While some experts assume that life expectancy must be approaching an upper limit, data on life expectancies between 1840 and 2007 show a steady increase averaging about three months of life per year. The country with the highest average life expectancy has varied over time. In 1840 it was Sweden and today it is Japan—but the pattern is strikingly similar. So far there is little evidence that life expectancy has stopped rising even in Japan.

Older people are living longer. It's a trend that has been going on for a century. This has nothing to do with reduced infant mortality, since we're talking specifically about aging within the population that is 80 years old and more.

Re:Why aging and death is good for society

[Anonymous Coward]

Life expectancy for the elderly is going up, but not for any obvious reason (which is why it's surprising) and not so rapidly that it's a game-changer for Social Security forecasts.

Re: Why aging and death is good for society

[ChrisMaple]

Woman's suffrage has had many other bad results. Voting starts about the same time women leave their parents, and they tend to vote in a manner that gives them a government to replace daddy (especially if they're not married). In any close election where dependence on the welfare state or general irresponsibility is at issue, women provide the margin to the side of personal weakness.

Re:Why aging and death is good for society

[ChrisMaple]

Over the last hundred years, additional life expectancy at age 40 in the US has increased from about 29 years to about 40. That means from living 4 years beyond 65 to 15 years beyond 65, increasing the burden on social security by a factor of 3 to 4. (OK, that's not exactly what the figures mean, but it does dramatically affect Social Security.)

Coming soon to a Weird Old Trick near you!

[Anonymous Coward]

And in other news, researchers have discovered how to block the penis-degrading enzyme Granzyme P, causing your dick to grow as big as a horse's, but it has the side effect of turning it black.

Right..

[Anonymous Coward]

"enough to cause redness, but not to burn"

I may not be a rocket scientist, but they must be causing a similar degree of damage to a burn if it is turning the skin of the mice red. You really shouldn't try to justify hurting animals in this way.

Mod points

[Roodvlees]

I have mod points, but when I read comments there are no drop down lists for me to comment.
They only appear after I've commented, on that thread, at which point I'm no longer able to moderate that thread.
Very annoying, any way to get the moderation options to always show up?

Re:Mod points

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't post in articles you want to moderate. Once you post, you lose that ability.

Re: Mod points

[Anonymous Coward]

They just said they don't get the option until after they post and asked how to get it without posting. Try reading.

Re:Mod points

[BarbaraHudson]

I have mod points, but when I read comments there are no drop down lists for me to comment. They only appear after I've commented, on that thread, at which point I'm no longer able to moderate that thread. Very annoying, any way to get the moderation options to always show up?

Just go to another story and spend your mod points there.

Re:Mod points

[Roodvlees]

It's not just at this one story. It's always when I haven't posted on a story yet.
Actually when I start writing a post the mod options appear, so I guess from now on I'll just press "Post" when I want to mod.

Re:Mod points

[Roodvlees]

Actually I just tried this at another story and it din't work :(

Re:Mod points

[BarbaraHudson]

Are you using slashdot classic or BETA?

relevant link to this story

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.vidatherapeutics.com/investors.html

I believe in Darwin

[monkeypushbutton]

If this enzyme is truly responsible for skin aging, I bet that knocking it out has nasty and unintended consequences, or it would be selected against pretty heavily.

Re:I believe in Darwin

[Anonymous Coward]

That was also my first thought. I can't believe this enzyme is there by chance, it must have some function, and completely blocking it may be a seriously bad idea. From a quick and dirty internet search, it seems to my (admittedly very basic) understanding, that this enzyme is an important part of our body's immune defence, so blocking it may be a nice idea in the lab, but probably not so much in real life.

Re:I believe in Darwin

[Anonymous Coward]

As you say, maybe getting rid of it entirely is a bad idea but there may be a way of blocking it from getting to the skin or collagen. It's far too early to yay or nay the idea. Huge grants heading their way in 3... 2...

Re:I believe in Darwin

[hawkinspeter]

It's quite likely that it would have some consequences (our bodies are very complicated systems), but it wouldn't have been subject to selective pressure if it only has a major affect after child-bearing age. There's no advantage (in terms of gene replication) in a 60 year old having perfect skin if they're not going to be having any more offspring.

Re:I believe in Darwin

[sempir]

There is every advantage to over 60 year olds having a perfect skin. In my case it would be to catch more 'chicks' of my age...or younger. Reproducing is not on my mind - just getting more of what's good for you will do me fine!

Re:I believe in Darwin

[RivenAleem]

I believe it is there to help skin heal faster, with a scar, after injury. Faster, but scarred, healing is something we decided was more useful to survival than flawless regeneration (see Salamanders). Skin provides protection from infection, having that heal quick and dirty was very important before antibiotics and antiseptics.

Re:I believe in Darwin

[hawkinspeter]

You might find that an advantage, but the genes only care about reproduction. Maybe if perfect skin helped you take care of younger relations, then it could be selected for.

Re:I believe in Darwin

[Anonymous Coward]

Evolutionary pressures strictly affect reproduction and not the ability of the individual within a species to survive. Maybe the presence of the enzyme only serves to encourage people to reproduce at a younger age, which would have the benefit of reducing the likelihood of inter-generational defect brought about by sperm mutation.

Re: I believe in Darwin

[Anonymous Coward]

And as the parent has already stated, that has nothing to do with evolutionary pressure.

I for one welcome

[future assassin]

our pale smoooooth skined mice overlord.

The Grand Budapest Hotel's quote

[AchilleTalon]

M. Gustave: [to Mme. Celine's corpse] "You're looking so well, darling, you really are... they've done a marvelous job. I don't know what sort of cream they've put on you down at the morgue, but... I want some. "

increased risk of cancer?

[kinko]

given that tumour cells (for solid tumours) normally have defects in extra-cellular matrix related genes (eg genes in the collagen family are sometimes mutated in advanced gastric cancer) that help the tumour invade and spread through tissues, I wonder if using such a treatment increases the chances of either tumours forming, or tumours becoming higher grade/more serious more quickly...

Re:increased risk of cancer?

[Anonymous Coward]

Tumors are aneuploid, meaning they are messed up in a giant number of ways at the DNA level. Messing with just one aspect of the network does not seem to be enough to cause the "bad behaviour".

Re:increased risk of cancer?

[holmstar]

Actually, it sounds like this enzyme increases the break-down of collagen, so decreasing it would tend to make it harder for cells to move around, but as others have said, would probably slow healing. Healing quickly would have been a big evolutionary advantage. Smooth skin in advanced age? Not so much.

Cancer

[drooling-dog]

It seems that wrinkling may be the price we pay for clearing potentially cancerous UV-damaged cells from the skin. It might be a bargain.

Perfect

[ThatsNotPudding]

Instead of trying save people from the ravages of heart attacks, they'll all be golden parachuting into their new startup selling this crap to vain and insecure one-percenters at immoral levels of profit.

Re:Perfect

[geekmux]

Instead of trying save people from the ravages of heart attacks, they'll all be golden parachuting into their new startup selling this crap to vain and insecure one-percenters at immoral levels of profit.

Before completely writing it off, perhaps we wait and see what useful things could also come of this technology, to include funding the original research with "immoral" profits.

Aging

[kilodelta]

Is effectively a syndrome. Cellular DNA has telomeres and with each division those telomeres shorten until the cell line finally undergoes apoptosis. But in cancer, a compound called telomerase shuts off the aging of the telomeres and allows cancers to grow uncontrollably.

But this is interesting - so in essence if we can repair cell damage and suppress this factor then youth is maintainable for a period. Nice!

mechanized rodent tanning salon

[Anonymous Coward]

you had me at "mechanized rodent tanning salon".

We will still die

[Huge_UID]

But we will look great when we do.

Re:viDA Therapeutics hopes to make this a skin cre

[Anonymous Coward]

It's never lupus.

They don't mention the mice portraits in the attic

[DutchUncle]

... getting burned and wrinkled . . .

not quite

[Chirs]

We gain and lose traits when they affect our ability to reproduce... and at no other time.

This isn't quite accurate. We can gain/lose traits randomly and if they don't impede our ability to reproduce they could get passed on. Also, some traits are genetically linked to more desirable traits, so they get dragged along by the other traits even if they're not necessarily desirable in and of themselves.

Re:what's not to like?

[denis-The-menace]

Indeed!
Pros as a Zombie:
-Immortal provided head stays connected
-No sleep
-NEW: Beautiful skin!

Cons:
-Ugly
-No dates
-No sleep
-only has one goal in life: eating Raw Human hagass

Tradeoffs: Lowred Immunity and Tumor Suppression

[Anonymous Coward]

Searching ncbi with enzyme name returns these at the top...

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22084442 - Granzyme B regulates antiviral CD8+ T cell responses.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12752668 - Granzyme B: a natural born killer

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24101526 - Granzyme B degradation by autophagy decreases tumor cell susceptibility to natural killer-mediated lysis under hypoxia.

Walmart, Amazon, eBay, Google exist in your world?

[raymorris]

Do Walmart, Amazon, eBay, and Google exist in your world, or does everybody shop at niche boutiques, who "sell little at a high price, rather than sell a lot at a low price"?

In my world, Costco sold $100 billion last year, and Walmart $473 billion. Google brought in $60 billion by giving stuff away free, to anyone who wants it - the most extreme form of "a lot at a low price" one can imagine.

In my world, the "sell little at a high price" places normally provide a job for the owner and nothing more, no profit.

Perfect

[Anonymous Coward]

Instead of trying save people from the ravages of heart attacks, .

Heart attacks are trivially avoidable. Just pay attention to what you eat. No trans fat, and no excessive obesity. Easy enough, if you can live without cheap fried stuff.

Re: Walmart, Amazon, eBay, Google exist in your wo

[boa]

In most cases, Google doesn't sell to you. Instead, it sells you. Google sells you and me to advertisers, trend analysers and whatnot. That's why Google's services are "free". Bait is always free.

Re: Walmart, Amazon, eBay, Google exist in your wo

[Anonymous Coward]

Bait is always free.

I'll be sure to tell the owner of the fishing gear (and bait) shop that he owes me a refund next time I'm in there...

Umbrella Corporation

[ravenscar]

I'm pretty sure I played a video game that started out just like this. Maybe they'll do Dobermans next. The fact that I live north of Seattle leads makes me a little unnerved about Vancouver as Raccoon City. On the bright side, who doesn't want the chance to waste some zombies?

Remodling side effect

[Anonymous Coward]

GranB is used by the Immune system to fight disease, a side effect is its tears up the nice smooth concrete sidewalk like material of the upper dermis.

The end result is health, but a rapidly degraded surface and the destruction of an orderly matrix.. leading to fragility.

Its rather like "tilling the soil" over and over and that produces wrinkles.

If repairs proceeded unimpeded as in youth the remodling would take care of the wrinkles over time, assuming GranB wasn't upregulated.

The problem is repairs do not proceed and wrinkles are a good sign of declining health over time.. its a "tell" or "marker" for an organism.

Anything that hides or abates this marker (Cosmetics) is a logical beneficial for socialization and reproduction.

Its risk benefit ratio in the near past was obvious, today in the modern world its much more risk than benefit.. downregualting or controling it with a lotion or drug is probably warranted. Like many things there are tradeoffs and potential risks.. but its skewed quite heavily towards more benefits than risks in this particular (rather unique) case. This is one drug or treatment that will be well adopted and quite visually beneficial.

Re: Walmart, Amazon, eBay, Google exist in your wo

[TheRaven64]

You misunderstand. It might not be free for you, but it's free for the fish...

the sociology of accidents

[epine]

The only "accidental" discovery in science is the discovery one could have stretched out over a great many more research grants if one had better anticipated the scientific windfall.

Of course, we do tend to refer to the outcome of bad planning as "an accident" concerning our hominid prime directive, so perhaps there's no help for language after all.

We are designed to age

[Anonymous Coward]

Your body is a car. Your soul is the driver. And the purpose of this life is to experience life, and presumably gain something from the experience. Then we move on.

Life contains pleasure and pain- good and evil. We KNOW this. Yet their can be no 'good' maths formula or 'evil' physical rule in the otherwise 'clockwork' universe. Life alone is MEANING- semantics. The clockwork Universe, and its maths based rules, is purely syntactical- no 'morals' or 'pleasure' and 'pain can be found in clockwork mechanisms.

Grab enough 100-sided dice, set them all so 6 is uppermost, and you've broken the statistical rules of the clockwork you inhabit- creating an outcome impossibly unlikely given the supposed life of the Universe. You can do this because you have FREE WILL, and that lies outside ANY possible clockwork contraption. Amazingly, Betas are taught that it is NOT a contradiction of mathematical probability when life causes such an unlikely outcome because of "hand waving. mumbled, pseudo-science sounding buzzwords". Turing and Gödel do NOT allow you to 'break' probability if your 'mind' is clockwork also.

But this is about ageing- or at least the ageing of skin. And why? Because evil Alphas attempt to convince Betas that 'immortality' would be some kind of ultimate goal. Yes, we can 'tinker' with the 'car'- replace parts- soup it up- make it 'prettier', but what is the real goal of doing so? Are the 'vain' happier? Are those that obsess about 'perfect' breasts, 'perfect' lips, a 'perfect' nose etc any more contented when they live in a nation that provides the resources to offer such options?

We age, and that is the point. The 'good' and 'evil' principle seems to justify wanting to create good health for as many Humans as possible, but their is a difference between this HEALTHY goal, and the mental collapse we see particularly in Americans when fascination about appearance becomes paramount.

Look, anyone who has reached a certain age in life will agree with the old adage "youth is wasted on the young"- I certainly do, BUT in a wistful philosophical way that comes from looking back on one's own life. And no-one with a love of technology can deny an ongoing curiosity about 'what comes next?' But we must TRUST the purpose of life- trust why we are here in the first place, and why we will move on after out allotted years.

Genetic engineering is NOT a good thing. Giving the worst of Mankind the ability to HACK the life machines themselves cannot end well. We THINK. When we perfect our ability to hack virus and bacteria and prion and fungi, the evolved defences of our body won't stand a chance. We have half a planet of Human bodies suffering less than optimal function because of the simplest of resource issues. If we don't give a f**k about fixing THAT issue, the laughable excuses quoted for the 'humanitarian' value of genetic hacking are obviously exposed for the lies they really are.

Re: Walmart, Amazon, eBay, Google exist in your wo

[Coren22]

I know likely that this was a joke, but I couldn't resist.

The fish doesn't pay for the bait.

Citation?

[alimo20]

Have these labrats (pun intended) put together a study for this and if so, where can I find it?