2189 replies to this topic

[Anthony_Loera]

I will be sending a blood sample off toward the end of this month.

It usually takes 2-3 weeks before we see the results. The Canadian Lab has mentioned I probably will not see much of a change (if any), but I am hopeful.

Cheers
A

[stephen_b]

I don't know whether the same result would have been obtained with an oligosaccharide, but in one study probiotics Lactobacillus and Bacillus cereus had a synergistic response to Astragalus polysaccharides in chicks (PMID 19211520):

The results showed that probiotics combined with APS administration in feed displayed synergistic modulation effects on immunity and intestinal microbiota, which is very important for the exploration of new prebiotics.

There you go, Anthony. You can add some probiotics to your product.

StephenB

[maxwatt]

I don't know whether the same result would have been obtained with an oligosaccharide, but in one study probiotics Lactobacillus and Bacillus cereus had a synergistic response to Astragalus polysaccharides in chicks (PMID 19211520):

The results showed that probiotics combined with APS administration in feed displayed synergistic modulation effects on immunity and intestinal microbiota, which is very important for the exploration of new prebiotics.

There you go, Anthony. You can add some probiotics to your product.

StephenB

Yes but will it work for guys as well as chicks?

[Anthony_Loera]

Nice one max....

Yogurt and Astragaloside IV? Nice find StephenB!

Hmm... just wondering if the live cultures are using Astragaloside IV and becoming a "better yogurt" for the chicks, as we already know that some of the probiotics already are considered to aid the "intestinal microflora" and provide an improvement. Yeah the chicks must dig it, but should we?

So are we benefiting the cultures and not ourselves when we take them together? Tough to say at this point. I do know that cells are quick to take advantage (in vitro) when exposed to the cycloastragenol telomerase activator, I am wondering if the non-human probiotic "yogurt" cultures are doing the same, and become far better at aiding the intestinal microflora, and not letting much be absorbed into the chicks body. (Although the modulation in the immune system may just point to a good absorption as well)

Hmm... this is a big question mark. I am not sure if it's good to take them together for benefits in telomere length because of this. Though it certainly appears to be great if you are a chick and have bad GI Issues...

A

Edited by Anthony_Loera, 19 February 2009 - 06:32 AM.

[VinceG]

Nice one max....

Yogurt and Astragaloside IV? Nice find StephenB!

Hmm... just wondering if the live cultures are using Astragaloside IV and becoming a "better yogurt" for the chicks, as we already know that some of the probiotics already are considered to aid the "intestinal microflora" and provide an improvement. Yeah the chicks must dig it, but should we?

So are we benefiting the cultures and not ourselves when we take them together? Tough to say at this point. I do know that cells are quick to take advantage (in vitro) when exposed to the cycloastragenol telomerase activator, I am wondering if the non-human probiotic "yogurt" cultures are doing the same, and become far better at aiding the intestinal microflora, and not letting much be absorbed into the chicks body. (Although the modulation in the immune system may just point to a good absorption as well)

Hmm... this is a big question mark. I am not sure if it's good to take them together for benefits in telomere length because of this. Though it certainly appears to be great if you are a chick and have bad GI Issues...

A

Anthony. Will you keep us up to date on your exploration of a cycloastragenol supplement? Also I added a relevant research reference to my blog yesterday http://www.anti-agingfirewalls.com/ on population study research that is good news for efforts to keep telomeres long. One third of a population of 959 individuals studied over a 9-11 year period experienced natural telomere lengthening.

[stephen_b]

There you go, Anthony. You can add some probiotics to your product.

StephenB

Yes but will it work for guys as well as chicks?

That was a cheep shot.

(For those slow on the uptake, note the spelling of "cheep".)

[stephen_b]

Hmm... this is a big question mark. I am not sure if it's good to take them together for benefits in telomere length because of this. Though it certainly appears to be great if you are a chick and have bad GI Issues...

The polysaccharides are not human digestible; they are only digestible by the good Lactobacillus and Bifidobacteria species. Not all fiber is beneficial in that it feeds these bacteria species. Inulin (from chickory root, for example) seems to be one of the better prebiotics (see "Pediatric applications of inulin and oligofructose", PMID 17951508).

StephenB

[Anthony_Loera]

Hi everyone,

FedEx Blood sample sent to Repeat Diagnostics today, price of telomere test is $350:
http://www.fedex.com...rs=867291101067

Hopefully we get the results in a couple of weeks to discuss if Astral Fruit had any affect after 6 months.

Cheers
A

[tintinet]

Hi everyone,

FedEx Blood sample sent to Repeat Diagnostics today, price of telomere test is $350:
http://www.fedex.com...rs=867291101067

Hopefully we get the results in a couple of weeks to discuss if Astral Fruit had any affect after 6 months.

Cheers
A

You expect it will be more emotive now?

[Anthony_Loera]

:D,

Well, I think thee will probably be no change (I have been told the test after the year may be better...) but heck, If there is a change this early, I would surely like to know.

A

[geddarkstorm]

:D,

Well, I think thee will probably be no change (I have been told the test after the year may be better...) but heck, If there is a change this early, I would surely like to know.

A

Agreed, this shall be very interesting to see, whatever the result.

Have you noticed any other affects on your body from astragaloside IV now that you've been on it for six months?

[maxwatt]

Hi everyone,

FedEx Blood sample sent to Repeat Diagnostics today, price of telomere test is $350:
http://www.fedex.com...rs=867291101067

Hopefully we get the results in a couple of weeks to discuss if Astral Fruit had any affect after 6 months.

Cheers
A

You expect it will be more emotive now?

Watch it with the comments, you grammarian!

[tunt01]

anyone order astragaloside IV from terraternal.com? any idea how long it typically takes to get product within the US (lower 48)?


they don't seem very responsive to emails and my receipt says 1-2 weeks

Edited by prophets, 16 March 2009 - 10:59 PM.

[patrikm2]

anyone order astragaloside IV from terraternal.com? any idea how long it typically takes to get product within the US (lower 48)?


they don't seem very responsive to emails and my receipt says 1-2 weeks

It took 11 days from payment to get their Astragaloside IV Cream delivered to Sweden in Europe.

[tunt01]

It took 11 days from payment to get their Astragaloside IV Cream delivered to Sweden in Europe.

Thx, i ordered some, though I kind of regret it now that I've researched astragaloside more thoroughly. I really need to have a better grasp of the p53/p16 anti-cancer functions within a cell. telomerase activation on its face is way too simple an answer, and I think this guy Michael Rae from Aubrey De Gray/Melthuselah (sp?), who was critical of just simply elongating telomere length, is right.

I may return it.


my view http://www.imminst.o...showtopic=28498 :

so i've done a lot of reading on Astragaloside/Astragalus this past week and come to the conclusion that there has to be a pretty significant uptick in cancer risk from taking this stuff. it seems to me like:

- extending the life (telomere length) of existing cells through telomerase activation greatly increases the chance of mutations accumulating before programmed death
- if you have a degenerative cardiovascular condition and your risk is cardio (stroke, heart failure, etc.) then astragaloside makes more sense
- a lot of the positive studies seem to either mitigate for cancer risk upfront (ie. mice with increased p53 checkpoint)

upping telomerase obviously doesn't create cancer itself, and in some cases maybe it prevents it. but it more than likely creates the CONDITIONS for which mutuations can accumulate within a cell and then turn cancerous later on.

anyone who has looked into this issue or people who have taken this stuff on a long-term basis come away w/ similar concerns?

it just seems risky to me to take this stuff for any extended period of time. i'm not a scientist, but that is my consensus view... anyone else look at this stuff or more closely follow Geron/TA/Sierra Sciences and have a distinct viewpoint on the cancer risks or mutation accumulation risks ?

seems like you need some very strong anti-cancer regimen on top of any astragaloside consumption, otherwise the risks could be serious particularly on a LT basis.

[Anthony_Loera]

"Upping telomerase obviously doesn't create cancer itself, and in some cases maybe it prevents it."

Your quote is correct as telomerase is not an oncogene, the rest of the "conditions" assertion you make is very vague. You are basically stating in very basic terms, if your cells live longer they will have a greater chance of developing mutations that lead to cancer...

Is that the gist of it? Please let me know if I am on the right track regarding your thoughts on this.

A

[tunt01]

"Upping telomerase obviously doesn't create cancer itself, and in some cases maybe it prevents it."

Your quote is correct as telomerase is not an oncogene, the rest of the "conditions" assertion you make is very vague. You are basically stating in very basic terms, if your cells live longer they will have a greater chance of developing mutations that lead to cancer...

Is that the gist of it? Please let me know if I am on the right track regarding your thoughts on this.

A

Yes.

The argument seems to be rationalized in my mind by a variety of statements/facts:

- Mice tend to die from cancer and do not exhaust their telomere lengths. That is, they live long enough to experience these mutations.
- A study done to examine the ability of telomerase to lengthen the lifespan of mice included an additional p53 gene to inhibit the cancer problem.
- common sense tells you that in large, multi-cellular organisms like human, junk/mutations will be accumulated over time (then later replaced with stem cells, assuming they are not neurons, etc.)

i would imagine to make telomerase effective and elongating telomeres a rational health strategy you would have to take something or do something to inhibit the cancer risk/control mutations and maintain very healthy intracellular function.


idk. the whole strikes me as too good to be true. it reminds me of HGH a bit, when that fad broke out years ago.... now proven to be basically pro-aging in most instances.

i just can't envision a scenario where lengthening a telomere in a normally healthy man doesn't increase the cancer risk profile... without some serious anti-cancer intervention or regimen to complement it.

[Anthony_Loera]

I think we talked about some of this a while back on this thread. Did you read through this whole thread?

My understanding is that a higher degree of cancer is seen because of low telomere lengths, not high telomere lengths. Mutations will be developed in cells with or without a longer telomere over time. I believe the body has genes to deal with some errors and mutations early on, and we may need to help it along as we age. Again I don't believe the issue is Astragaloside IV and telomerase, what you are trying to nail down is a strategy in addition to telomerase activation to deal with mutations that will likely happen regardless of telomere length. So even if an animal may live a longer period of time, you want to decrease the possibility of mutations in the part of the animal's life that has been extended in some way, correct?

You mentioned P53, and I will say that P53 is upregulated by resveratrol, I would also add a dietary item that upregulates P16 to the strategy as well.

So to sum up, an additional strategy you maybe looking for (I believe) would be to add things that would upregulate P53 and P16 in your diet:
Resveratrol upregulates P53, Astragaloside IV or Cycloastragenol activates telomerase, and the only thing I believe we need to add to the mix is P16 to detect issues after cell cytokenises and notify P53 so that it can make the decision to see if the cell needs to be destroyed or repaired.

Astragaloside IV or Cycloastragenaol is not the issue here, it is dealing with mutations that may develop regardless of telomere length. Of course I don't know if upregulating P53 and P16 will help a 'human animal', but we are already investing some funds to bring a supplement to market specifically for P16. Yes, it has to be custom extracted as no supplier is extracting this in any form that we can use.

I actually understand where you are coming from Prophets, and we are looking at this strategy as well. But the issue is different than the reason you may consider Astral Fruit. Regardless of whether you take a telomerase activator or not, it is an issue that will come up because mutations happen regardless of the length of your telomeres.

Cheers
A

[tunt01]

I think we talked about some of this a while back on this thread. Did you read through this whole thread?

My understanding is that a higher degree of cancer is seen because of low telomere lengths, not high telomere lengths. Mutations will be developed in cells with or without a longer telomere over time. I believe the body has genes to deal with some errors and mutations early on, and we may need to help it along as we age. Again I don't believe the issue is Astragaloside IV and telomerase, what you are trying to nail down is a strategy in addition to telomerase activation to deal with mutations that will likely happen regardless of telomere length. So even if an animal may live a longer period of time, you want to decrease the possibility of mutations in the part of the animal's life that has been extended in some way, correct?

I did read the whole thread, I actually printed it out and made notes on the paper next to several people's comments. You have more eloquently re-explained what I was trying to say. The increased telomere length and cells living longer gives them a great environmental opportunity to accumulate the mutations for cancer.

If you upregulate p53, p16, etc. I guess that risk is greatly diminished and you can enter this 'steady state' of cells living forever. Some cells like neurons or cardiac muscle live forever anyway, so maybe telomerase is helpful there... IDK.

I can't imagine a little bit of it would be harmful, but it seems like major intervention based on this 1 substance could be risky.

[geddarkstorm]

I did read the whole thread, I actually printed it out and made notes on the paper next to several people's comments. You have more eloquently re-explained what I was trying to say. The increased telomere length and cells living longer gives them a great environmental opportunity to accumulate the mutations for cancer.

If you upregulate p53, p16, etc. I guess that risk is greatly diminished and you can enter this 'steady state' of cells living forever. Some cells like neurons or cardiac muscle live forever anyway, so maybe telomerase is helpful there... IDK.

I can't imagine a little bit of it would be harmful, but it seems like major intervention based on this 1 substance could be risky.

Those are very interesting questions and concerns. Fortunately, we have some interesting answers for them from recent research. But, here's a little thought experiment real quick first:

The cells I are made out of, across my entire body, came from one single cell, provided by my mother. All my mitochondria are the same ones she had. Now, all her cells, including the one that went on to make me, came from a single cell provided by her mother. So on an so forth. All of us are an unbroken chain of replicating cells. A species is sort of like an immortal cell line. It does so by keeping the telomeres from degrading.

While that is a horribly crude way to look at it, with many defects, there are some merits. Saying that "if we live longer we'll accrue more mutations" is sort of a red herring. Yes, yes we will, so do we want to kill ourselves off early to avoid that thought? That's effectively saying "let's not live longer cause we could get cancer". It seems, at least to me, to be counter productive to not want to extend life span because we might die from something else by living long. Obviously if we want to avoid cancer we need something specific for that, that's going to be true no matter what. That is, we need to deal with any maverick cells and continue on like normal -- address cancer directly, and there are ways emerging now, very powerful ways indeed.

All cancer, without exception, ultimately results from a loss of communication with surrounding tissue and cell cycle regulation -- a lot of systems go wrong, and basically the underlying multicellularity signals are lost as cancers revert to a more single cell mentality. Some, maybe even many, cancer cells are ones that tried to go through apoptosis, weren't cleared by the body, and reverted back to a normal cells; however, ones now potentially completely detached and unregulated by the body and surrounding tissue. One thing several cancers have in common are really short telomeres (shorter the telomere correlates to increased cancer risk), far shorter than what signals for normal cells to senesce and prepare for apoptosis. It was by breaking the telomere cell cycle arrest, and other DNA damage arrest, signals that the cancer continues. By increasing telomere length (rather than just maintaining the super short telomeres in cancers as cancer activated telomerase does), it is possible it may actually reset the broken systems and allow the cancerous cell to correctly go through apoptosis and die like it should have. In fact, telomerase activity, not just lengthening of the telomeres, but the active enzyme is important for cells to correctly respond to DNA damage and resist transformation into cancer. It is inactive telomerase that apparently increases cancer risk, while active telomerase lowers it.

This is supported by the evidence that telomerase immortalized only cells fail to become tumors or cancers (so far that I know). Cancers absolutely have to activate telomerase to continue replicating (and they will on their own) or their genomes will break apart, which is why after a cell is cancerous telomerase makes a good anti-cancer target to inhibit, but the telomerase isn't itself what turned the cells cancerous, it's the loss of multicellularity. Look at stem cells and germ line cells, again, they also have telomerase active (except stem cells start to lose it and break down after about the age of 55 evidence suggests), but they do just fine and aren't automatically cancerous -- because they are still correctly regulated by surrounding tissue and other exogenous signals.

Ironically, p53 isn't all that great. You don't want it too active as it can be very harmful to the organism. In fact, overexpression of p53 is associated with some cancers too. Cancers are complex, p53 alone doesn't stop it, but it's p53 action in the proper context at the proper levels with other signals that regulates a cell correctly, and active telomerase actually may help with that, evidence suggests, at least before a cell goes cancerous. (Take a look at this, where overexpressing a human telomere binding protein in mice skin, not telomerase, caused rapid telomere loss in mice and all sorts of horrible things like cancer, and oddly p53 had to be knocked down to help protect from damage. It's a balance, too much is bad, and too little is bad)

So, activating telomerase with astragaloside IV (if it does so in vivo) would potentially help to ward off cancer, not cause it, from all the evidence we have today; and telomerase activity loss with age, including in stem cells, also nicely correlates with increasing risk of cancer. Interesting, eh?

These are quite complex matters, and its wise to question them as you have, and I'm sure there's plenty I missed here or could be wrong on. Hopefully this information will be helpful, though!

[Hotpot]

I have a curious observation to make that may or may not be related to me taking Astral fruit. I've been taking it now for a little under a month. About ten months ago, I sustained a shoulder injury in work. At the time, I left the injury in the hope that it would heal. Eventually, I realised that it was not improving. I could not lift anything and had to abandon working out with weights.i made an appointment with the doctor about 5 months ago and went to hospital for an X-Ray which did not show anything. In December, the doctor gave me an injection which did nothing to cure the problem or even alleviate the pain. So he put me on the waiting list for physiotherapy despite me wanting an MRI scan. I'm still waiting for that appointment now.

Mid February, I started taking the astral fruit supplement and within 2 weeks, noticed that my shoulder wasn't anywhere near as painful as it was. Last week, I started to work out again albeit gently. As I write this, the pain has almost gone completely and I am almost back to full function. I have ALWAYS taken other supplements but only started with Astral Fruit in February and that is the only change I have made to my lifestyle since the injury. Logic dictates to me that the astral fruit has had a postive effect on my shoulder tissue and quite frankly, I'm over the moon. I fully intend to keep taking it and see where it takes me.

Edited by Hotpot, 19 March 2009 - 06:02 PM.

[tunt01]

a lot of stuff

geddarkstorm - thanks for your feedback. it is insightful, as usual.

To a degree, I share your balanced view of the situation between optimism and risks. Though, I am a touch more skeptical. I think two counterpoints to your thoughts are as follows:

1) Correlation does not necessarily indicate causation, be careful about inferring too much.
2) A lot of data can be positively skewed by "survivorship bias".



1) Correlation does not indicate causation.

This study here makes a comment at the outset that seems very valid to me. "Short telomeres trigger DNA damage checkpoints, which mediate cellular senescence." When you lengthen these telomeres, you take away these checkpoints like p53 and that can increase your risk of a cancer developing because you are fundamentally taking down the cell's defense mechanism.


You refer to: "Telomere length, oxidative damage, antioxidants and breast cancer," but it doesn't infer that telomere length causes cancer or vice versa. to quote:

"These results provided the strongest evidence to date that breast cancer risk may be affected by telomere length among premenopausal women or women with low dietary intake of antioxidants or antioxidant supplements." This statement implies that cancer is coming from EITHER not taking antioxidants OR shortened telomere length. In my opinion, the telomere length being shorter is merely a biomarker (a coincident indicator) telling you that this person probably needs to look at taking antioxidants to reduce the oxidative stress and stop cancer.


This study also highlights the fact that, "the telomere length, but not telomerase, influences the response of human cells to [damage]." In this study, they used radiation on the cells



2) "Survivorship Bias"

I work in the investment industry and a lot of research is done on this issue. If you have a population of 1,000 mutual funds or stocks (companies) and they each perform with varying degrees around a median figure say 6%-3% returns, but you then kill off 200 mutual funds or 200 companies (bankruptcy, mergers, etc.) then your final data set of the 800 survivors skews your true results. You need to look at the full 1,000 that includes the 200 that died/disappeared.

Part of the reason that shorter telomere lengths are associated with cancers is because these mutated or "pre-cancerous" cells are damaged in the first place and being instructed by their DNA to divide. It is only when these 'pre-cancerous' cells are given an opportunity to exist longer than they naturally should be (past the hayflick limit?), that they are given an opportunity to fully mutate, begin exhibiting their own endogenous telomerase, and become a full blown cancer.

"Survivorship bias" ignores the millions of pre-cancerous cells that the body has successfully killed off telomere dividing capacity and only focusing on the few cells that do survive long enough to fully mutate into a cancerous cell.



I think your statement: "let's not live longer because we could get cancer," is somewhat missing the point. I think the question is HOW to live longer? For that, I am in the camp of Methuselah Foundation where they indicate that resupplying stocks of healthy stem cells as a method to replenishing atrophying/telomere shortened tissue is the answer, not relengthening the existing telomeres of these aging cells. It's somewhat analogous to arguing between the differences of getting a new car every 5 years (from stem cell therapy) instead of using the same car for 50+ years, repainting the outer shell every 5 years and claiming that everything is running great. Eventually the old car is just going to break down and you can keep lengthening its telomere, but eventually something you don't see on the surface will go bust.

I think this publication here speaks to that issue. Increased telomerase activity was a byproduct of resveratrol and the fundamental improvement in the health of the cell itself. Telomerase was upregulated through an Akt-dependent pathway.

Another study here shows a combination therapy which likely improves intracellular function, homeostasis and RESULTS in increased telomerase activation as a byproduct of the fundamental underpinnings of this improvement.

I guess it is a chicken and egg issue to a degree. Do you want to improve the health of the intracellular function and increase telomerase? Or do you think just increasing telomerase will improve the cellular function? I think telomerase is a byproduct and focusing on cell performance at the outset is more sensible.


Keep in mind I have ordered a bit of Astragaloside and I will be using it, though very carefully. I think there are some slight indications that in very high turnover cellular situations like liver cirrhosis that this kind of telomerase activation therapy because more ideal (though I am still internalizing the studies that claim this). I think one of the most important things I've learned from reading about it and various other supplements/diets/vitamins/exercise/etc. in the last 2 weeks is that constantly challenging the body is critical to keeping it in good shape. At this point, I intend to use Astragaloside on an infrequent, cycled basis, likely 1 day on, 2 days off, in conjunction with a supportive diet/exercise and other anti-cancer items (curcumin, etc.).

Mid February, I started taking the astral fruit supplement and within 2 weeks, noticed that my shoulder wasn't anywhere near as painful as it was. Last week, I started to work out again albeit gently. As I write this, the pain has almost gone completely and I am almost back to full function. I have ALWAYS taken other supplements but only started with Astral Fruit in February and that is the only change I have made to my lifestyle since the injury. Logic dictates to me that the astral fruit has had a postive effect on my shoulder tissue and quite frankly, I'm over the moon. I fully intend to keep taking it and see where it takes me.

No one is disputing that Astral Fruit makes you feel better. It should. Any telomerase activator should make you feel better. If you get injured and your doctor gives you human growth hormone, you will heal faster and feel stronger/better. This is almost indisputed. But you have also increased your cancer risk because you've rapidly divided cells and likely shortened your lifespan for it.

The question isn't whether or not this stuff will make you feel better, but whether it is really increasing your cancer risk long-term. A lot of other factors come into play like the other supplements you take, and obviously how long you use it.


I will say one of the most amazing things about this Telomerase enzyme is that it has an affinity for the most shortened telomeres in a cell population -- that is it seems to migrate to the most damaged cells in the first place. Maybe that's why your shoulder healed so well and quickly. The enzymes focused their activity to your most damaged tissue. In that regard, maybe it is the holy grail to short burst healing, but sustained usage on your entire body is still dangerous/dubious? I don't know the answer. Maybe something like this will replace cortisone shots, I could see that happening. It would be nice to get input from real doctors/scientists in this field.



sorry if this response is incomplete in some areas, i am going to continue to explore this issue through the weekend, but my focus is mostly on autophagy-supportive processes at this point, because these seem the most ideal for sustaining health... not telomere lengthening.

Edited by prophets, 19 March 2009 - 11:42 PM.

[Anthony_Loera]

"Short telomeres trigger DNA damage checkpoints, which mediate cellular senescence." When you lengthen these telomeres, you take away these checkpoints

Regarding healthy cell DNA:
When the telomere's are so short that DNA damage is evident, it is likely because the telomere does not contain enough DNA to allow the cell to divide with a full copy of DNA for the new cell. Remember telomere's represent the repetitive DNA that is used in cell duplication. You want the repetitive DNA to not get short because of this issue. The depletion of DNA (telomere shrinkage) beyond the limits of it to provide a full copy of DNA to a new cell, stops the cell from duplication and simply ages or kills itself. Correct me if I am wrong, but If you have the repetitive DNA (which makes up a telomere) long enough to provide new cells a complete copy you are avoiding the checkpoints because there are no issues with damage.

Regarding other DNA damage:
What needs to be worked on (I believe), again is P16 or similar gene which should help check for issues soon after a cell divides to verify that a new cell is not damaged, and that if it is damaged it gets repaired or destroyed. That's the kind of work that would likely be helpful to limit accumulation of other DNA damage that can come from other factors such as UV, mutagenic chemicals, and other nasty stuff, and are not related to telomere length. You really have to separate these types of DNA damage a bit and not confuse them.

A little hypothetical scenario:
Now lets suppose we have a cell that has divided 40 times, and has accumulated enough damage that it is considered one of your pre-cancer cells. Do we have a problem with P53, P16, or telomerase at this point? It appears P16 (and/or similar) are not detecting the errors as these genes have divided, or maybe they have, but P53 didn't try to repair or destroy the cell. Now, what happens when we lengthen the telomere in this cell through telomerase? Well, since telomerase is not an oncogene, not much. Something else has to happen for it to turn into cancer... otherwise simply getting a cold would do it as telomerase is activated by the body naturally by the immune system.

Now what happens to a healthy cell? Again telomerase may lengthen the telomere of the healthy cell, and that's about it.

Last but not least... what if we never use a telomerase activator? What would happen to this pre-cancer cell and healthy cells? They will continue to develop and divide, until something else happens that may make the pre-cancerous cell into an immortal cell. Now, since the healthy cells, such as your immune cells have declined over time you will likely have less of an ability to make lymphocytes to help your battle against the new found cancer, as the elderly generally suffer from "t-cell unresponsiveness" which was found in one attempt at a cancer vaccine. (http://www.sciencedi...995015e408b007a)

So, when it comes down to it, it's not telomerase that is the issue here. If telomerase works in humans by using an activator, then telomerase will provide longer telomere's in your immune system which will more than likely help you fight issues in the long run, and may help you not suffer from the some sort of "t-cell unresponsiveness" that appears to happen as one gets older, and the immune system falters.

I have to admit, I am missing alot of stuff in my short crude explanation, but I hope it helps.

In my opinion, the telomere length being shorter is merely a biomarker (a coincident indicator) telling you that this person probably needs to look at taking antioxidants to reduce the oxidative stress and stop cancer.

Hmm... all I will say, is that I don't agree with this statement.

But you have also increased your cancer risk because you've rapidly divided cells and likely shortened your lifespan for it.

I think you confusing how telomerase works. Telomerase will not divide cells to shorten your lifespan, it helps increase telomere length... your body naturally uses it in preparation before fighting disease. "telomerase activity is induced in the B-cell activation of the antigen specific immune response." (http://cat.inist.fr/...&cpsidt=2595787)

I am in the camp of Methuselah Foundation where they indicate that resupplying stocks of healthy stem cells as a method to replenishing atrophying/telomere shortened tissue is the answer, not relengthening the existing telomeres of these aging cells. It's somewhat analogous to arguing between the differences of getting a new car every 5 years (from stem cell therapy) instead of using the same car for 50+ years, repainting the outer shell every 5 years and claiming that everything is running great. Eventually the old car is just going to break down and you can keep lengthening its telomere, but eventually something you don't see on the surface will go bust.

Once we have the technology to do this, it will be great. However, we are still in the dark ages regarding this technology, and as I have always said when we simply didn't have the right tools for a particular job... "We have to work with the tools we have, until we develop or buy the tools we want.". Since we can't buy the technology because it doesn't exist, we must develop it. How long will it take? I don't know, so I believe we can work with what we have for now, simply for the people who are approaching their end of life or are concerned about growing old quickly.

If you are young Prophets, then you can wait as you view things from the eyes of a person that has the full optimism of a young gallant man looking at the sunrise of exploration and ideals where the sky is certainly the limit. However the closer you approach the twilight of your life, the more you will be willing to work (and try) what is offered using today's technology, even if it is not perfect. At this point, only one set of mice that have been given extra P53, P16, and telomerase genes are as close as we have gotten to the new technology and a greater lifespan without cancer, I am hoping more breakthroughs are possible in the near future.

Cheers

A

[tunt01]

geddarkstorm:

sorry i didn't completely my reply earlier, i was running out.

- the study about the young, middle age, and eldery with telomere length in EPC was very interesting. i think vascular function and EPC telomere length can be maintained through other means than astragaloside though, things like arginine come to mind and that article i posted earlier that resolved it through essential fats.

- the article about non-canonical functions is certainly interesting gives rise to potential provocative thoughts about how where else telomerase is useful other than its purported core function in telomere lengthening. i don't have access to the full article, but it seems interesting. i'm somewhat skeptical that whatever positive, fringe activity telomerase exhibits, negates any risk from seriously intervening in the life cycle of a cell by taking this stuff on an extended basis.

- the mouse study, i'm not too keen on given that they are not the best model for telomerase in humans. it was mildly interesting, but doesn't really move me.


if you or anyone has unlimited access to pubmed docs, It would be interesting to get a hold of:

Pharmacological intervention strategies for affecting telomerase activity: future prospects to treat cancer and degenerative disease
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/17945408
- Section on treating degenerative disease w/ telomerase activation is pertinent to our discussion in this thread.

Telomerase as a clinical target: Current strategies and potential applications
http://www.sciencedi...8de9962f49a5ebf
- Sections on activating telomerase for treatment of anemia, bone marrow failure, etc.

Telomerase: cellular immortalization and neoplastic transformation. Multiple functions of a multifacted complex.
http://www.ncbi.nlm....Pubmed_RVDocSum

Telomerase regulation at the crossraods of cell fate.
http://www.ncbi.nlm....Pubmed_RVDocSum

Telomere length homeostasis
http://www.springerl...33648224002878/
- provides some theory into why telomerase targets lower length telomeres


if someone has a work account or wants to spend the $ and pull them and let us know, it would be useful.

[JLL]

Pharmacological intervention strategies for affecting telomerase activity: future prospects to treat cancer and degenerative disease
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/17945408
- Section on treating degenerative disease w/ telomerase activation is pertinent to our discussion in this thread.

Telomerase as a clinical target: Current strategies and potential applications
http://www.sciencedi...8de9962f49a5ebf
- Sections on activating telomerase for treatment of anemia, bone marrow failure, etc.

Telomere length homeostasis
http://www.springerl...33648224002878/
- provides some theory into why telomerase targets lower length telomeres

The two others I couldn't get access to. I'm going to delete them after this weekend to avoid potential problems, so download them now if you want them.

Attached Files

•  telom_homeostatis.pdf   476.22KB   777 downloads
•  telom_clinic.pdf   289.97KB   370 downloads
•  telom_pharm.pdf   425.54KB   431 downloads

[tunt01]

thx jll, i pulled them. you can delete.

[TianZi]

Hi Anthony,

Maybe I missed it, but weren't you going to post test results for "astral fruit" in February regarding any change in telomere length over a 6 month period? Was there any?

[Not_Supplied]

I swallowed a whole tube of astroglide and my telemeres won't activate?????

Please advise.

[tunt01]

I swallowed a whole tube of astroglide and my telemeres won't activate?????

Please advise.

lol. on that note, i am seeking a vitamin or supplement that will help me reduce belly button lint... pls advise.

[JLL]

Could one of the navigators delete my earlier post? Because I can't. Thanks.