120 replies to this topic

[Mind]

In case you didn't notice, the most vigorous forum discussion right now is about the C60/Olive Oil study in rats. on the surface it looks like a blockbuster longevity study but there are some problems. The study was designed to test toxicity not longevity, there were some errors in the data/publication which I am not sure have been resolved, and the sample size was pathetically small.

I propose Longecity help replicate this study. No doubt there are other people in the world who are also moving on this, but it is usually the case that large government or university funded studies move at a glacial pace. I suspect Longecity could raise the money and get moving on this a lot quicker.

As far as we know, C60 might only work to slow aging, not rejuvenate, but if the health extending benefits in rats are real, then it could be a promising substance for humans.

wccaguy has volunteered to lead a fundraising effort for this project. Also, we have a handful of members who are already producing the substance, so it might be more synergistic for Longecity to run this than other orgs/labs.

Edited by caliban, 05 July 2012 - 01:16 PM.

[HighDesertWizard]

wccaguy has volunteered to lead a fundraising effort for this project. Also, we have a handful of members who are already producing the substance, so it might be more synergistic for Longecity to run this than other orgs/labs.

[HighDesertWizard]

I look forward to working with others at Longecity on this project!

First things first, it's always a good idea to refresh our memories about essential goals. At a minimum, we will attempt to replicate the following C60/Olive Oil Study.

The prolongation of the lifespan of rats by repeatedoraladministration of [60]fullerene

Countless studies showed that [60]fullerene (C60) and derivatives could have many potential biomedical applications. However, while several independent research groups showed that C60 has no acute or sub-acute toxicity in various experimental models, more than 25 years after its discovery the in vivo fate and the chronic effects of this fullerene remain unknown. If the potential of C60 and derivatives in the biomedical field have to be fulfilled these issues must be addressed. Here we show that oraladministration of C60 dissolved in olive oil (0.8 mg/ml) at reiterated doses (1.7 mg/kg of body weight) to rats not only does not entail chronic toxicity but it almost doubles their lifespan. The effects of C60-olive oil solutions in an experimental model of CCl4 intoxication in rat strongly suggest that the effect on lifespan is mainly due to the attenuation of age-associated increases in oxidative stress. Pharmacokinetic studies show that dissolved C60 is absorbed by the gastro-intestinal tract and eliminated in a few tens of hours. These results of importance in the fields of medicine and toxicology should open the way for the many possible -and waited for- biomedical applications of C60 including cancer therapy, neurodegenerative disorders, and ageing.

→ source (external link)

[HighDesertWizard]

I believe it will be easier to raise required funds if the project's objectives include, not only replication of the existing study result but, also advance our knowledge about open issues that the existing study entails. I propose, then, that we expand the statement of objectives of the project.

Having a list of formal objectives to discuss, add to, delete, and/or refine is always a good thing. Here's a first cut.

Project Objectives (Draft)

• Replicate the essential Fullerene C60/Olive Oil study conditions to ensure that the sample size of study, as well as any other errors that may have occurred did not distort its findings.

• Establish new knowledge about the relative effects of the existing independent variable substances used in the study (Fullerene C60s and Olive Oil).

In previous studies, both Fullerene C60s and Olive Oil have been implicated, directly or indirectly, as having an effect on life span. In addition to replicating the initial study, then, it would be valuable for us to determine the independent as well as the synergistics effects of the two substances. Among other things, achieving this objective will entail doing a vagotomy on at least one group of study animals.

• Establish new knowledge about whether repetition of study substance dosing changes the initial study's finding about substance effects on life span.

The Fullerene C60/Olive Oil Study consisted of a single, limited in duration, dosing period of the Fullerene/Olive Oil Formula. Assuming that the essential findings of that Study can be replicated relatively closely, it would be beneficial for us to learn whether additional dosing periods provided more or less benefit, measured in terms of positive effects on study animal life spans.

Edited by wccaguy, 29 May 2012 - 09:41 PM.

[niner]

Simply replicating Baati et al. would be an achievement. That would take up to four years, however, which is kind of long. I would hope that Baati's group already has a second study in the wings that is well under way. It has probably been a couple years since they had the earliest indications of unusual lifespans, so that wouldn't be unheard of. Because of the time involved in doing a rat lifespan study, not to mention the expense, it might be worth thinking about other shorter-lived species.

It would be good to nail down exactly what you get when you mix C60 with olive oil. Is it C60 dissolved in oil, a reaction product in which C60 is covalently bound to a long chain fatty acid ester, or some mixture of these? This is just an analytical chemistry problem, and it probably wouldn't take long in the appropriate lab.

A smaller, cheaper, shorter-lived species would allow us to ask questions like what is the optimal oil or what is the optimal dosing schedule.

Using radio-labeled C60, we could look at tissue localization and the kinetics of clearance. The effects that extend far beyond the last dose suggest an exceptionally long residence time; it would be nice to confirm or refute that hypothesis. This could be done more quickly than a lifespan study.

[HighDesertWizard]

Simply replicating Baati et al. would be an achievement. That would take up to four years, however, which is kind of long. I would hope that Baati's group already has a second study in the wings that is well under way. It has probably been a couple years since they had the earliest indications of unusual lifespans, so that wouldn't be unheard of. Because of the time involved in doing a rat lifespan study, not to mention the expense, it might be worth thinking about other shorter-lived species.

It would be good to nail down exactly what you get when you mix C60 with olive oil. Is it C60 dissolved in oil, a reaction product in which C60 is covalently bound to a long chain fatty acid ester, or some mixture of these? This is just an analytical chemistry problem, and it probably wouldn't take long in the appropriate lab.

A smaller, cheaper, shorter-lived species would allow us to ask questions like what is the optimal oil or what is the optimal dosing schedule.

Using radio-labeled C60, we could look at tissue localization and the kinetics of clearance. The effects that extend far beyond the last dose suggest an exceptionally long residence time; it would be nice to confirm or refute that hypothesis. This could be done more quickly than a lifespan study.

All great thoughts. I take their import to be that several smaller projects would move us forward faster than a single project aimed at replicating Baati et al even if a few other findings were included.

• From a post by Anthony Loera in that other thread, I take it that he may have contacts who know people on the Baati et al team. Perhaps, we could get Anthony to find out what they're up to.

• I especially like the idea of a small, initial project to determine what happens when C60 is mixed with Olive Oil. My initial thought is that the lab which determined that GPR40 "directly mediates" Olive Oil-"induced secretion of cholecystokinin" (CCK) would be a good candidate lab to do this. Perhaps, because of their previous experience, they could resolve the C60/Olive Oil bonding question as well as the question of what happens to that bond following CCK secretion.

• Getting at the explanation for the effects that extend far beyond the last dose would be a profound achievement. As I understand it, there are at least two hypotheses for those long lasting effects.

the C60s have an exceptionally long residence time in tissue (although Baati et al say the time for clearance was measured in "tens of hours")

from a Turnbuckle post, the C60 "acts to strip methyl groups from the mitochondrial DNA"

I don't know enough to know whether these are the only two hypotheses which might explain the long lasting effects. Are there others?

• Do you have a thought about what animal(s) might be appropriate to try the formulation with rather than rats?

These are great ideas niner. I like them even more now that I've slept on them before posting this reply!

Edited by wccaguy, 30 May 2012 - 11:46 AM.

[Anthony_Loera]

It appears AgeVivo is the one to talk to.
According to Edouardo, he posts here on Longecity as AgeVivo.

Cheers
A

[hav]

I believe it will be easier to raise required funds if the project's objectives include, not only replication of the existing study result but, also advance our knowledge about open issues that the existing study entails. I propose, then, that we expand the statement of objectives of the project.

I think the original study started out with 100 rats. But they used up most of them with groups devoted to toxicity testing. And used only 18 rats for the part that yielded the interesting longevity data... 6 controls, 6 on olive oil, and 6 on olive oil + c60. First thing we need to decide is what N would be sufficient. And 2nd, how many different groups we might need. I think everyone agrees that n=6 was a little low. But the more groups we have, the quicker the the total grows. If we cut back to 2 groups (leaving out the olive oil only group), we could get more N for the buck. It all boils down to how many test animals we can afford.

Howard

[Turnbuckle]

That would take up to four years, however, which is kind of long.

Not necessarily. Not if you could find some old rats. Even rats from some other finished study might be good enough if they were all the same age and you randomized them.

[zorba990]

Not necessarily. Not if you could find some old rats. Even rats from some other finished study might be good enough if they were all the same age and you randomized them.

Very interesting idea. And, in fact, much more relevant to many of us here. IOW start with rats at the end of their average lifespan minus one year and go from there. Then repeat at minus 2 years, etc, thus gathering data more relevant to people who need the life extension benefits more. This way each year we would have more data instead of waiting for five or more years for it all...

[AgeVivo]

It appears AgeVivo is the one to talk to.

I am planning to start giving C60+olive oil from the authors of the study on 3 mice this week-end (hopefully), aged 18 months (will check this week-end). However not in the best conditions (eg on bread rather than by gavage). Will regularly put pictures on longecity so that you can follow it.

Concerning late-onset-life-extension-studies, it is something that is now being used regularly and that I've investigated quite much. In http://agevivo.com/stats/LOLES.html you have the "N" you need considering the expected life extension. This is however for "usual" life extensions. If the life extension is very big (eg doubling), one mouse if sufficient. Warning: depending on the country (I don't know which country allows what) you can or can not buy laboratory strains (check by calling Harlan laboratories, or Charles River laboratories or any other) and therefore getting old animals may not be obvious. To reproduce the C60 study, you should anyway start at 10 month old (the idea being that perhaps if you start later you get less benefits (perhaps...)

I highly support this thread because
-- I don't know what my N=3 will do without controls etc. Ideally the person(s) doing the study would do it is a regular lab with an animal comittee approaval and with gavage, in order to publish the results. If not easily feasible, alternative routes (like mine) may exist and still be great.
-- I think that if we can have a big community of lifespan testers then science on aging will go much faster (the Mprize@home concept). Not sure however how big it can get: there are many people online, but not many serious persons.

[niner]

Not necessarily. Not if you could find some old rats. Even rats from some other finished study might be good enough if they were all the same age and you randomized them.

That's a good idea. It would take four years to replicate Baati, if they lived that long. More even- 56 months if you start at ten months. If we started later, it would be less time to see an effect, but probably the effect would be smaller. If the MOA is slowing of mitochondrial aging, then the earlier you start, the bigger effect you should see.

[Turnbuckle]

That's a good idea. It would take four years to replicate Baati, if they lived that long. More even- 56 months if you start at ten months. If we started later, it would be less time to see an effect, but probably the effect would be smaller. If the MOA is slowing of mitochondrial aging, then the earlier you start, the bigger effect you should see.

If the MOA is the slowing of aging, then giving it to old rats will have relatively little effect, but if the MOA is the resetting of mitochondria, then the effect will be dramatic. In that case, a short course of treatment given to old rats will be rather more dramatic than giving the same treatment to young rats. So if you had an old and a young population initially, you could distinguish the likely MOA. Alternatively you could treat two initially identical populations at different ages, but the first scenario gets you information faster.

Edited by Turnbuckle, 01 June 2012 - 10:02 PM.

[niner]

If the MOA is the slowing of aging, then giving it to old rats will have relatively little effect, but if the MOA is the resetting of mitochondria, then the effect will be dramatic. In that case, a short course of treatment given to old rats will be rather more dramatic than giving the same treatment to young rats. So if you had an old and a young population initially, you could distinguish the likely MOA. Alternatively you could treat two initially identical populations at different ages, but the first scenario gets you information faster.

It would be a quick win to dose an old rat, in that you could test the 'reset' hypothesis quickly. It would be reasonable to look at at least some old animals. AgeVivo's mice are 18 months old, which is already beyond the half way point for c57bl/6; perhaps way beyond, given that their lifespan varies a lot according to living conditions and diet. However, without controls, the only definitive outcome would be lifespans in excess of the species maximum. If they live the 'normal' amount, we don't really know what that means- it might mean that they lived a year longer than they would have otherwise, or it might mean nothing. I guess if they die early, that's telling us it didn't do any good.

[HighDesertWizard]

In order for us to approach potential project sources of funds, we need various kinds of materials describing the Projects.

I think we've discussed issues in sufficient detail to begin work on draft documents providing an Overview of the Entire Set of Projects. I've begun work on a Presentation, which I'll upload relatively soon, I hope, to Google docs. Access will be public. Other Community Members involved in the discussion will get Write access.

That presentation should include a Project Overview Slide providing a view of Projects we think might be useful, hope to do, and/or must be done to achieve Longecity Project Objectives. Because the discussion has been informative, detailed, and intense, I wanted to publish Draft Version 0.001 of that Slide so we have plenty of time to discuss, delete, add to, enhance it.

Any and all changes are welcome, whether they be typo correction, suggested format changes, Slide Title changes, project list changes, etc. I'm certain I've missed some types of projects because of poor memory. Please let me know what projects should be added.

Or maybe there is a better way to organize the matrix within which the project lists appear. Once we get the format and content of this slide "good enough" by consensus I'll publish it along with the Project Presentation described above.

So here it is, Draft Version 0.001 of the Project Lists by Type and Phase...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edited by wccaguy, 05 June 2012 - 01:26 AM.

[zorba990]

In order for us to approach potential project sources of funds, we need various kinds of materials describing the Projects.

I think we've discussed issues in sufficient detail to begin work on draft documents providing an Overview of the Entire Set of Projects. I've begun work on a Presentation, which I'll upload relatively soon, I hope, to Google docs. Access will be public. Other Community Members involved in the discussion will get Write access.

That presentation should include a Project Overview Slide providing a view of Projects we think might be useful, hope to do, and/or must be done to achieve Longecity Project Objectives. Because the discussion has been informative, detailed, and intense, I wanted to publish Draft Version 0.001 of that Slide so we have plenty of time to discuss, delete, add to, enhance it.

Any and all changes are welcome, whether they be typo correction, suggested format changes, Slide Title changes, project list changes, etc. I'm certain I've missed some types of projects because of poor memory. Please let me know what projects should be added.

Or maybe there is a better way to organize the matrix within which the project lists appear. Once we get the format and content of this slide "good enough" by consensus I'll publish it along with the Project Presentation described above.

So here it is, Draft Version 0.001 of the Project Lists by Type and Phase...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is there going to be any kind of testing to make sure the olive oil is not rancid/oxidized? It's my understanding that with UFAs this can occur even without any detectable odor.

[HighDesertWizard]

Is there going to be any kind of testing to make sure the olive oil is not rancid/oxidized? It's my understanding that with UFAs this can occur even without any detectable odor.

zorba990... Here's the simple answer to your question and every other question like it...

Every question relevant to Longecity Project Objectives vis-a-vis C60/Olive Oil studies is IN until its OUT. By that I mean, we add the Idea to the Project Idea List. Whether it later gets added to the list of projects we think are worth doing and then added to the list of projects we actually do is another question.

One things for sure... If it doesn't get added to the Project Idea List, it will never get done. So Thank You for bringing the Idea up!

Edited by wccaguy, 05 June 2012 - 09:48 AM.

[Logic]

As it seems to be fashionable to totaly ignore my amaturish posts; Im loth to mention this idea and have a good idea ignored!

It occured to me that there must be a lot of people out there who already have pet rats of all different ages.
A quick search confirms this:
http://www.google.co...iw=1245&bih=595

So why not contact some of these groups and organise with them to do some experimenting with C60/OO sent to them?
There may be issues where they just cant resist giving their beloved, old and dying, 'control' some too and general unscientific behavior, but one should soon get some idea of whether this stuff actually works with a very large and very cheap N.

I think the people in these groups would love the idea of doing some science and there may even be some that take this seriously and give good scientific results.

Also there are probably other groups with mice, hamsters etc.

[HighDesertWizard]

So here it is, Draft Version 0.001 of the Project Lists by Type and Phase...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

John Kenneth Galbraith once wrote that "there's no such thing as good writing, only good rewriting." And I'm already thinking that the format of this slide, intended to provide an overview of projects triggered by the finding in Batti 2012, doesn't cut it.

• The distinction between in-vitro and in-vivo is important. But that can be indicated by using a different typeface for the two study types.

• The concept of Phases also isn't quite right because it implies chronological sequence, On the other hand, the distinction between in-vivo studies we can do that are actual attempts to determine Life Extension effects vis-a-vis those we can do quickly to assess biological effects is one I think gets at something.

This question about how we conceptualize all the projects as a whole is an important one. We want to provide potential funding sources with some simple concepts around which to organize thinking about what the projects are. More important than that, actually, we need good concepts ourselves to organize our own thinking about them.

And there is a practical implication here... The more projects we can push into the "Quick Hitters" category the better because then we don't have to do complete Life Span experiments to determine whether the Experiment Hypothesis can be Falsified.

So... the next version... in-vitro vs. in-vivo distinction indicated by typeface and a reworking of the Phase concept... but how?

Edited by wccaguy, 05 June 2012 - 11:01 AM.

[HighDesertWizard]

As it seems to be fashionable to totaly ignore my amaturish posts; Im loth to mention this idea and have a good idea ignored!

It occured to me that there must be a lot of people out there who already have pet rats of all different ages.
A quick search confirms this:
http://www.google.co...iw=1245&bih=595

So why not contact some of these groups and organise with them to do some experimenting with C60/OO sent to them?
There may be issues where they just cant resist giving their beloved, old and dying, 'control' some too and general unscientific behavior, but one should soon get some idea of whether this stuff actually works with a very large and very cheap N.

I think the people in these groups would love the idea of doing some science and there may even be some that take this seriously and give good scientific results.

Also there are probably other groups with mice, hamsters etc.

I agree. I don't think your post is amateurish. You make a good point. I was thinking of projects like the ones you mention with the bullet point reading "Extension in older animal studies" because I was thinking of what AgeVivo's up to. But that choice of phrase doesn't really make the point you're making.

So, Thank You! Your post will impact the next draft. If you don't see your point well reflected in the next draft then, please, bang on me about it because it means I've forgotten to make the upgrade.

An additional point about this... Before Longecity can "formally suggest" individuals do certain and specific kinds of experiments as part of the larger Community set of experiments, we need to have a framework for organizing the kinds of projects needing doing. We want to ensure the organization isn't harmed by loose thinking and too casual encouragement of people doing crazy things so that the Organization, Our Community, takes a reputation hit. Also, we don't want people doing crazy things that might harm themselves in the first place...

Let's say we had 10 people willing to follow our recommendation about replicating the study. Or 25, who knows? But the question is, what do we want them to actually do? It's not optimal to have them all doing the same thing. So it's best to think a bit first...

If we all spend just a little time reflecting on how to Conceptualize what we Need to do and we Want to do, it won't take long to develop a framework for placing the Organization/Community in a context, vis-a-vis this effort, that can be reasonably defended for years to come...

Edited by wccaguy, 05 June 2012 - 11:29 AM.

[Logic]

I agree. I don't think your post is amateurish. You make a good point. I was thinking of projects like the ones you mention with the bullet point reading "Extension in older animal studies" because I was thinking of what AgeVivo's up to. But that choice of phrase doesn't really make the point you're making.

So, Thank You! Your post will impact the next draft. If you don't see your point well reflected in the next draft then, please, bang on me about it because it means I've forgotten to make the upgrade.

An additional point about this... Before Longecity can "formally suggest" individuals do certain and specific kinds of experiments as part of the larger Community set of experiments, we need to have a framework for organizing the kinds of projects needing doing. We want to ensure the organization isn't harmed by loose thinking and too casual encouragement of people doing crazy things so that the Organization, Our Community, takes a reputation hit. Also, we don't want people doing crazy things that might harm themselves in the first place...

Let's say we had 10 people willing to follow our recommendation about replicating the study. Or 25, who knows? But the question is, what do we want them to actually do? It's not optimal to have them all doing the same thing. So it's best to think a bit first...

If we all spend just a little time reflecting on how to Conceptualize what we Need to do and we Want to do, it won't take long to develop a framework for placing the Organization/Community in a context, vis-a-vis this effort, that can be reasonably defended for years to come...

Thx Wccaguy

I have looked at some of the sites in my link and it seems that these people really love their rats... To put it mildly!
I get the feeling that they would be in two camps on this:
Those who dont trust the study and wont give any to any of their pets; and those that will give it to ALL of them.
So I feel that their input may be valuble in telling us what regular dosing starting at different ages will do, but dont expect there will be any 'controls'.

I dont feel that I am the best qualified to post anything on their forums/approache them, but am eager to help.

[tweedlover]

Brilliant idea to try to use the power of the internet to accelerate testing. I'm not a medical expert but I do have some project experience and get the feeling this could work well.

I would be slightly wary of involving a pet site without testing the waters first. There is a real danger of this being perceived the wrong way, particularly among sensitive animal owners, and creating a lot of negative press.

My vote would be for creating a set of guidelines - i.e. saying 'if you want to do a longecity-style study and qualify for longecity funding you need to do it this way'. Suggested guidelines starter for ten!

Rat A type (Wistar), B years old (over 12 months?)
Solution strength C (SV's?)
Dosage D per day for E days (same as study?)
Feeding method F (Bread balls?)

To encourage people, the forum could fundraise for a pool of money to mitigate costs of solution to those who produces a full set of results fitting the guidelines? Could we partner with Sarah Vaughan in some way? I'd publicise it on sympathetic health forums.

This would essentially be AgeVivo's study with a larger sample size and a regularised solution.

It would be very helpful to record data in a regular way. We could create a form for participants to fill in, but it would be ideal to have a web-based platform like they do on patientslikeme. In fact, PatientsLikeMe's trial on Lithium for ALS produced some important evidence very quickly. I've emailed them to see if they would accept results about animal health - does anyone have any experience of websites that would allow this?

Slightly off topic, but HappyPhysicist who I think is a Longecity forum member and ALS patient has actually already started a thread about C60/Olive oil for ALS on that site. There are other Longecity forum members who could provide important data points. This is potentially something to think about alongside making best use of as well.

http://www.patientsl...ts-and-efficacy

http://www.patientslikeme.com/research

[niner]

I agree that there's a danger of being perceived as some sort of evil vivisectionists if we approach pet owners. To take that risk for a totally uncontrolled experiment seems like a bad bet. We could set up a larger scale, controlled version of AgeVivo's mouse experiment for very little money; all we would need is someone to take care of the mice. That's a non-trivial thing to ask, by the way. Whoever did it would never be able to leave home for longer than a day or two unless they arranged for someone to care for the mice.

This begs a bigger question: For all the science that we propose, where will it be done? How much would that cost? To do everything on the first slide will already take many of the capabilities of a small pharmaceutical company.

[Logic]

I think the best way of getting data from pet owners is to do it very informally.
Contact them 'incognito' with a message something like this:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi

I thought you may be interested as you love your rats(/mice etc) so much.

Some scientists were testing a new substance on rats to see how poisonous it was.
Guess what: The rats lived twice as long! LOL!! Talk about an experiment backfiring!

The substance is carbon molecules in a soccer ball shape known as C60 Fullerene or Carbon Buckyballs dissolved in Olive oil.

There is a big discussion on it here:
http://www.longecity.org/forum/topic/55651-buckyballs-in-olive-oil-double-lifespan-of-wistar-rats/

Some people have even started taking the stuff themselves and their pets with good results and others are beginning to produce it.
Links to producers

The people on that site are pretty keen on replicating the study; so if you post there someone may offer to send you some Buckyballs in Olive Oil for free.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

This way you avoid all the complications as the persons interested will feel that its their idea.
Some may buy from suppliers and post results however informal, while others may want free product and we will then be able to have a little more control over said experiment.
This idea won’t give publishable results, but we should know pretty soon if rats start to live significantly longer.

[AgeVivo]

Hi,

with mice or rats, no need to take care of them everyday. One a week and even once every other week is fine.
The only thing is to use clean water so that you don't have to change it every 2 or 3 days. I use a water cleaner for fish water; labs generally use acidified water (this is what the international testing program does), but many systems exist (chlore, or irradiated water, etc). Harlan laboratories.

having one person handle many animals is one's house is feasible BUT
- the air of the room should be rapidly renewed if you don't want your place to smell terrible. you should buy a VMC (don't know the name in English; like what moves the air from your rooms in your house) to take the air from the cages to outside. Don't put the animals in a cave where you don't control the temperature: you don't want them to freeze in the winter.
- be very careful of the diseases : if your mice get a disease it is not dangerous to people around but it ruins the whole experiment. The most common disease in animals in labs in murine hepatitis virus (MHV). No cat should be around. You should ensure that the place where animals are is *extremely* clean (eg before putting them somewhere clean very well the place, and ensure that the place will remain very clean). This being said if you don't have too many contacts with the animals (you can even wear gloves) everything should happen well

=> This is why the distributed Mprize at home idea is I thing a robust thing: the condition is not one speicfic condition, it is a pool of conditions: there are many houses, and each house has 2 cages: a treatment and a control. Even to test rapamycin for example, I think it could have complementary value to what the ITP does.

In France I know a group of rat lovers. I could email them to know if they would like to participate in such an experiment. I don't know how many they are actually, so it might be better to find more similar groups.

Edited by AgeVivo, 09 June 2012 - 09:14 PM.

[smithx]

Most people here may not have done scientific studies, although I'm sure that there are a few who have. I have, so let me give a piece of advice:

What you want is a double-blind placebo controlled study. This means that no one knows who is getting the control and who is getting the C60, while the experiment is running. This is the gold standard of clinical studies, and is the only kind of study which is considered definitive.

To make this happen, set it up like this:

Sample Creation:

• We need a control substance which looks exactly like the test substance, or as close as possible. Experimenting with food coloring and olive oil should allow this to be created.
• One person or a couple of people create the C60 samples and placebos. There should be an equal number of both, and they should be placed into identical containers. The containers should have control numbers on them which correspond to a database (or spreadsheet) indicating which samples are placebo and which are C60.
• The sample numbers should be randomly assigned to C60 and placebo samples.
• The spreadsheet which indicates which are placebo and which are C60 should stay with the trustee who is in charge of sample creation and not be shared with anyone until the end of the experiment.
• The samples should be given all at once to the test administrators.

Test Administration

• An online set of survey forms should be created to implement the test. I suggest using http://www.limesurvey.org/ software because it is usable and free. I can assist in setting it up, if needed.
• The test administrators should obtain a list of willing participants. To verify that these people will comply with the test, they should be required to enter information into a test form before starting the test. In fact, I suggest that they be required to fill out a survey on the condition of their animals twice over the course of a month before being sent any sample material. Then the sample material should be sent only to those participants who complied by filling out the surveys at the correct intervals (they will be reminded by emails).
• The participants should be mailed one bottle of sample each. Other variations are possible, but they require more record-keeping and are likely to cause errors.
• The participants should be required to fill out surveys monthly indicating any changes to the health status of their animals.
• The test should run for a defined period of time.

Results tabulation:

• At the end of the time period, the raw results should be tabulated and published online by the Test Administrators.
• At the same time (a specified date and time), the spreadsheet containing the key to which samples were C60 and which were placebo should be published online by the Sample Creation Trustee.
• The key should then used to determine if there is any statistical correlation between the results and the C60.
• The final results should then be published.

Edited by smithx, 10 June 2012 - 05:41 AM.

[HighDesertWizard]

These latest responses are all great. I will work them into a new version of that projects overview page over the next several days. Keep the ideas coming.

[AgeVivo]

Yes those doing C60oo at home should try to see how to make their simple olive oil solution (control) look like the one with C60, without adding dangerous things (nor c60 ;-). For such Mprize@home tests Sven (s123) had agreed to be the one to centralize such solutions and the correspondance with cage members (each participant would have 2 cage of mice at home: a control and a treatment; but he won't know which solution is the control and which solution is the treatment: he will have numbers on solutions; numbers chosen by Sven). Indeed Sven is someone we can trust.

The other thing is that xe need to have participants, willing to have 2 cages at home, ans to follow the instructions (during 4 years if then can, less if for some reasonthey have to change homes). Who is a participant? I guess partiipants will start havze mice in, say, 2 months.

[AgeVivo]

N=1. I am willing to be a participant (have 2 cages of mice at home and follow instructions)

[smithx]

Results are more likely to be reliable if each participant ONLY gets EITHER the C60 or the placebo. That way there is no chance of them mixing them or giving the wrong ones to either cage, and no way they can guess which one is the real sample and fudge results accordingly.

Also, it is important that one group mix and randomize the samples and keep the key as to which are C60 and which are placebo and ANOTHER group take the samples, not knowing which is which, and distribute them to the participants and collect the data.

This way, again, there can be no fudging of data, consciously or subconsciously.

Please read my suggested protocol above, it deals with these issues.