635 replies to this topic

[Allen Walters]

This says that c60 and dmso have a strong reaction and form c60-DMSO adduct.http://www.publish.c...d=SA0402264.pdf

[niner]

This says that c60 and dmso have a strong reaction and form c60-DMSO adduct.http://www.publish.c...d=SA0402264.pdf

I'd expect that to form a complex, but not a covalent adduct. Charge transfer complexes aren't typically tightly bound. If there was really a strong reaction, I'd expect the solubility to be better, but the only thing I've seen about the solubility of C60 in DMSO says it's very poor. CT complexes are usually strongly absorbing in the UV/Vis region, so they wouldn't need much of a concentration to get a spectrum. Maybe it's going in at a micromolar level? If you try it, see if it forms a colored solution.

[hav]

Here's a study done back in 2008 that involved, among other things, dissolving C60 in DMSO and investigating its impact on the glutathione S-transferase gene of zebra fish.:

Solution Preparation

C₆₀ was obtained from Sigma Aldrich, WI (99+%) and dissolved in 100% dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO). The stock solution of 50 ppm C₆₀ was sonicated for 1.5 hours to ensure a uniform dispersion and size distribution.

And apparently this team is currently in the process of replicating the above study in part and comparing results with simple water-stirred c60/dmso solutions. Near as i can determine, the amounts the current team seems to be working with are between 0 and 30 mg of c60 mixed with between 200 and 190 ml of water and between 10 ml and 200 ul of dmso.

Howard

[orion602]

Max - this is virtually impossible - the wistar rats (not mice,note) used in lab experiments are genetically homogenous to a high degree. That is the whole point of using a specific type, specially bred for experiments - to reduce this variable to a negligible level.

The chance of all the rats taking OO fullerene having a quirk is so vanishingly remote as to be not worth considering.

I think what maxwatt might have meant is that ALL Wistar rats have such a quirk engendering amazing response to both C60 and olive oil, which while still extremely unlikely, at least isn't virtually impossible, like only the six in the C60 arm having a genetic abnormality would be. I'd really like to see C60-oo in some different species.

mmm.. it might have something to do with the fact that they are albinos.or maybe not.. . Im wondering what would be the survival rate of wistars in the wild. Maybe it would be worth doing same study but with common Rattus norvegicus rats or at least with some non imbred strain which wasn't developed for medical research (+ larger n). At least there would be much more genetic variability and results more relevant to human population.

[orion602]

Except, once again, we don't know if the active molecule is fullerene itself, or an olive -oil -fullerene adduct.

...

These two things strongly suggest that the active species is the adduct, not pristine C60.

One more factoid for us to chew: I store my C60-olive oil in the freezer.
It froze with a yellowish color, except for a thin top layer that was an intense dark red color. So it should be possible to isolate and concentrate the C60 adduct, and maybe cap it without all that olive oil.

However, the OO alone mice did see a 30% increase lifespan,and we do not know if the olive oil is necessary for the adduct to have a live-extending effect.

More mice, please.

great. any idea what is mostly concentrated in the top layer after freezing? Linoleic acid (?) + polyphenols?or something else?

Could anyone try freezing oil before adding c60 and then use just top layer (say 1cm) to test c60 solubility in it? this shouldn't be a problem if it doesn't work (no increased solubility capacity, speed, whatever) then you can just add the rest and continue as usualy.. or maybe test solubility in both parts separately
just an idea maybe it won't do anything useful

Edited by orion602, 09 September 2012 - 06:35 PM.

[hav]

Except, once again, we don't know if the active molecule is fullerene itself, or an olive -oil -fullerene adduct.

...

These two things strongly suggest that the active species is the adduct, not pristine C60.

One more factoid for us to chew: I store my C60-olive oil in the freezer.
It froze with a yellowish color, except for a thin top layer that was an intense dark red color. So it should be possible to isolate and concentrate the C60 adduct, and maybe cap it without all that olive oil.

However, the OO alone mice did see a 30% increase lifespan,and we do not know if the olive oil is necessary for the adduct to have a live-extending effect.

More mice, please.

great. any idea what is mostly concentrated in the top layer after freezing? Linoleic acid (?) + polyphenols?or something else?

Could anyone try freezing oil before adding c60 and then use just top layer (say 1cm) to test c60 solubility in it? this shouldn't be a problem if it doesn't work (no increased solubility capacity, speed, whatever) then you can just add the rest and continue as usualy.. or maybe test solubility in both parts separately
just an idea maybe it won't do anything useful

Been trying to find info on freezing olive oil and most of what comes up on google seems to flow from this article:

http://www.oliveoils...rozen-olive-oil

Sounds like the most you might achieve by pre-freezing olive oil before c60 mixing is the formation of crystal structures composed of long-chain fatty acids and waxes. And less so if the oil has been "winterized" by the manufacturer. No mention of any layering. Maxwatt's discovery sounds like a behavior very different from freezing ordinary olive oil.

Howard

[zorba990]

Except, once again, we don't know if the active molecule is fullerene itself, or an olive -oil -fullerene adduct.

Indeed we don't, but since there are so many other positive side effects of C60 in EVOO, expect the value of C60 in limonene to be quickly ascertained by intrepid users.

Limonene has some interesting effects. Loading up on Limonene C60 might be a good thing before Cryo...
http://www.cryonet.o...p.cgi?msg=33348

[caliban]

People finding out interesting things about fullerene - such as dissolution in Limonene -D and the layering seen when the olive oil solution is frozen - it would be good if you could photograph your observations, and post them here.

The frozen OO could be cut as a slice and photographed before it melts, showing the layering.

Limonene-D could be photographed using time lapse if it dissolves so fast.

I second the request. Please try to share more objective data? Lots of speculation and anecdotal reports in the C60 threads here at Longecity, but hardly anything objective. Huge kudos to AgeVivo and his mouse experiment (pictures and documentation) and the fellow keeping us posted on his C60 chickens.

MODERATION NOTE

The thread was split weeks ago to disentangle scientific discussions from anecdotal reports.

Whereas almost the whole of this sub-forum is flooded with the latter, this is the thread for the former.

 

You can discuss do-it-yourself science here (personal use), here (equipment), or in fact anywhere suitable in this forum. 

 

As indicated in the first post for this topic, I will delete (not move, not split, not archive) 

1- any further posts posts in this thread that contain, reference or incorporate personal observations (whether it is to how they are feeling, how their hair is growing back in measurable increments, what the mixture looks like in their home fridge or how your mice are faring).

2- any posts that mix proper scientific references and theory-making with the type of stuff under (1)

3- any posts commenting on this policy in any way

If this means that this thread receives no further posts, it might illustrate that scientific discussion which does not rely on home-brew experiences has been exhausted.

Edited by caliban, 13 September 2012 - 01:40 AM.
sarcasm o.O

[somecallmetim]

I don't think this study has been discussed yet. If so, then I apologize.

Japanese researchers administered various amounts of C60 (some as high as 1,000mg/kg) for 29 days to rats to examine toxicological effects, and concluded that no toxic effects were found. The C60 was mixed w/corn oil the day before it was given to the rats. There was, of course, aggregates in the mixture and the researchers believe that the aggregates were not absorbed by the intestines, and rather, they were excreted and did not pose any health concerns. This could potentially be good news for those of you who are filtering in order to remove the aggregates.

http://astp.jst.go.j...C60 in rats_N/A

[somecallmetim]

Here is a better link to that study. Just scroll down and click "Full Text PDF."

https://www.jstage.j..._2_353/_article

[zorba990]

I don't think this study has been discussed yet. If so, then I apologize.

Japanese researchers administered various amounts of C60 (some as high as 1,000mg/kg) for 29 days to rats to examine toxicological effects, and concluded that no toxic effects were found. The C60 was mixed w/corn oil the day before it was given to the rats. There was, of course, aggregates in the mixture and the researchers believe that the aggregates were not absorbed by the intestines, and rather, they were excreted and did not pose any health concerns. This could potentially be good news for those of you who are filtering in order to remove the aggregates.

http://astp.jst.go.j...C60 in rats_N/A

It certainly sounds good. What would be even better would be if they could verify that no aggregates were found in the blood stream, or that the aggregates themselves are not harmful. I'm guessing the latter, since I see know reason why a small number of C60s stuck together (2,3, etc) would not be absorbed. A long enough aggregate would be less likely to absorb, I would think.

[niner]

I don't think this study has been discussed yet. If so, then I apologize.

Japanese researchers administered various amounts of C60 (some as high as 1,000mg/kg) for 29 days to rats to examine toxicological effects, and concluded that no toxic effects were found. The C60 was mixed w/corn oil the day before it was given to the rats. There was, of course, aggregates in the mixture and the researchers believe that the aggregates were not absorbed by the intestines, and rather, they were excreted and did not pose any health concerns. This could potentially be good news for those of you who are filtering in order to remove the aggregates.

http://astp.jst.go.j...C60 in rats_N/A

It certainly sounds good. What would be even better would be if they could verify that no aggregates were found in the blood stream, or that the aggregates themselves are not harmful. I'm guessing the latter, since I see know reason why a small number of C60s stuck together (2,3, etc) would not be absorbed. A long enough aggregate would be less likely to absorb, I would think.

I don't think anyone is filtering at less than 0.2 microns, which is 200 nm, or about 200 times the size of a C60 molecule. So there could still be aggregates in the solution after filtration, and at that size, centrifugation wouldn't touch them. The only hope, if one truly wants to avoid aggregates, is that the small aggregates left after filtration will quickly react. They might also be insoluble soot. That's probably not the end of the world, since the world is awash in submicron particulates. They aren't good to breathe, because it's possible for them to get so far down in the lungs that they are too deep for the cilia to sweep out, and they get stuck. However, I've never heard anything about them being a particular problem in the digestive tract. There could be submicron particulates in tap water, soft drinks, beer, or food; how would we know? They're invisible. I think given the environment we evolved in, a few particles in our gut aren't going to do much. The paper from the Japanese group has been mentioned here before, but it's not bad to revisit it. It gives me at least some degree of confidence that c60 particulates aren't a huge problem. It shows us that at least the large particles are eliminated in feces. It can't really say much about the effect of the submicron particles, other than acute effects.

[Freebytes]

There have been many hypotheses included within this thread, but with some experimentation, we might be guided to what would work in these circumstances. Using the hypotheses that have been expounded in the discussions and the observations we have seen (both personally and through reports elsewhere), can we formulate possible experiments that we should try?

I have seen many comments end with "if only we could" or "if someone gets around to" in regards to testing some of the guesses about how or if certain treatments are effective, but I also believe that we should honestly just get some rats (or other shorter lived species) and start testing. AgeVivo is on the right track with his mice studies. If the mice all died after one month, we would have a reason to be worried; nonetheless, I would like to see an experiment with controls. I am not talking about human testing since that fits the criteria for most of the threads in this section of the forum unless those tests can be controlled and fit within the guidelines of testing for one of the hypotheses.

Are we merely limited to discussing the hypotheticals? Now, I know how this may end. It may be anecdotal responses that are basically a rehash of exactly what we see in the remainder of the forum so perhaps we should formulate possible tests with each of our hypotheses and then form a new thread if anyone decides to take on the challenge of actually experimenting that is dedicated to those particular experiments.

We could possibly even have a "Please Test This" type thread where we list experiments we would like to see. This could then be a combination of the subjective results against controlled experimental results. The primary issue I see is that someone needs to reproduce the rat experiment, but then again, waiting four years for an answer is crazy for impatient people that want to discuss what interests them at this very moment. If you can find old rats that share the same precise age and species, it might be a good starting point, though.

[Turnbuckle]

I don't think anyone is filtering at less than 0.2 microns, which is 200 nm, or about 200 times the size of a C60 molecule. So there could still be aggregates in the solution after filtration, and at that size, centrifugation wouldn't touch them. The only hope, if one truly wants to avoid aggregates, is that the small aggregates left after filtration will quickly react...

I'd expect that small aggregates in a compatible solvent (ie, oil, not water), once filtered, would not occur in a solution that is substantially below saturation. This would be a surface area effect. The smaller particle, the larger the surface area per volume, and thus the higher the solution rate.

[niner]

I don't think anyone is filtering at less than 0.2 microns, which is 200 nm, or about 200 times the size of a C60 molecule. So there could still be aggregates in the solution after filtration, and at that size, centrifugation wouldn't touch them. The only hope, if one truly wants to avoid aggregates, is that the small aggregates left after filtration will quickly react...

I'd expect that small aggregates in a compatible solvent (ie, oil, not water), once filtered, would not occur in a solution that is substantially below saturation. This would be a surface area effect. The smaller particle, the larger the surface area per volume, and thus the higher the solution rate.

Yeah, I think you're right. This raises a question: What is the solubility of the C60 adduct in olive oil? I don't know if this has really been determined. As far as I know, Moussa's group are the only ones who've actually determined the concentration chromatographically, but I don't know that they made a big attempt to reach saturation. Isn't Sarah Vaughter saying that her stuff is 0.9mg/ml? If so, I don't know how that was determined; maybe just by putting 900mg in a liter and stirring until there's no sediment? I'm thinking about trying to make a truly saturated solution, using ground C60 and heat. I probably won't get around to it for a while though, so if anyone else tries it, let us know how it turns out.

[AgeVivo]

0.9mg/ml?

Moussa's group reach 0.8 with their technique.

[niner]

0.9mg/ml?

Moussa's group reach 0.8 with their technique.

Yes, but we don't know if that's at equilibrium or not.

[Andey]

As I told already in HydratedC60 topic Grigoriy Andrievsky told me about his theory how C60oo works.
I hoped that he share it yourself but it appears that he is very busy in work to go for forums and etc )

I could give only the idea, because its was too scientific to me, conversation was on phone with some terms that I cannot reproduce )
He think that C60oo works not because of oil as it is and gives example of Japanese study with corn oil (if I understand him right he was reviewer for this study). This study didnt show any sugnificant benefit for rats health.
Oil are mostly the same except for that virgin olive oil have some chlorophylle structures in it. And this structures contains ...I completely forgot what is name of that substance ) Grigoriy says that this substance is known to form colloid structures in water.
Also whole direction of Grigoriy work with C60 based on that the positive effects of C60 can be achivable only by creating colloid structures in cells that can be a ultimate antioxidant. Simple direct or soluted administration of C60 gives nothing - C60 was removed from body in few days in exact quantity and that proved but numerios studies.

Its far away from traditional pharmokinetics way of thinking so some/many/majority of people can be very sceptical about it. ) For me it makes sense and in C60 example we have logical confirmations to it.

If its really true - its interesting is the structures from C60oo and hydratedC60 are the same or not ? May be this structures are beneficial in someway similar but have different bioavailabilty ways and be synergestic to each other.

[hav]

As I told already in HydratedC60 topic Grigoriy Andrievsky told me about his theory how C60oo works.
I hoped that he share it yourself but it appears that he is very busy in work to go for forums and etc )

I could give only the idea, because its was too scientific to me, conversation was on phone with some terms that I cannot reproduce )
He think that C60oo works not because of oil as it is and gives example of Japanese study with corn oil (if I understand him right he was reviewer for this study). This study didnt show any sugnificant benefit for rats health.
Oil are mostly the same except for that virgin olive oil have some chlorophylle structures in it. And this structures contains ...I completely forgot what is name of that substance ) Grigoriy says that this substance is known to form colloid structures in water.
Also whole direction of Grigoriy work with C60 based on that the positive effects of C60 can be achivable only by creating colloid structures in cells that can be a ultimate antioxidant. Simple direct or soluted administration of C60 gives nothing - C60 was removed from body in few days in exact quantity and that proved but numerios studies.

Its far away from traditional pharmokinetics way of thinking so some/many/majority of people can be very sceptical about it. ) For me it makes sense and in C60 example we have logical confirmations to it.

If its really true - its interesting is the structures from C60oo and hydratedC60 are the same or not ? May be this structures are beneficial in someway similar but have different bioavailabilty ways and be synergestic to each other.

Hi, Andey. I looked up Grigoriy Andrievsky and he seems to have done quite a bit of research on hydrated C60.

Not sure if you are quoting his statements to you above on how all oils are alike. But here's some info on the chemical makeup of corn and olive oil:

olive oil: http://www.oliveoils...characteristics
corn oil: http://fats-and-oils...f-corn-oil.html

The difference in study results between the Baati evoo/c60 and corn oil/c60 studies seems likely to me to be a result of fundamental difference between olive oil and corn oil. The most substantial difference is in the Oleic Acid content. This is a mono-unsaturated fat. Olive oil has up to 83%. Corn oil is about 25%.

The next most striking difference is that corn oil is mostly made up of poly-unsaturated fatty acids (puffa) which is highly prone to oxidation. Olive oil in comparison might have a total pufa content as low as 3.5%, depending on the region its from and the type of olive. To get an extra-virgin rating, olive oil must have less than .9% alpha-Linolenic Acid (a pufa) and less than .8% total free fatty acids.

Occam Razor analysis would suggest that Oleic Acid/C60 adducts are the most likely key.

Chlorophyll content, by the way, may be prized by olive oil connoisseurs and supplement buffs, due of its appearance, boquet, flavor and polyphenol content. But it is not a requirement to qualify as extra virgin olive oil. It can be maximized by choice of olive type, harvesting the olive early while it is still green, and care in handling and crushing. It gets minimized, by the way, by refining and filtering. For a number of these reasons I doubt the Chlorophyll or related polyphenol content plays into the results in the Baati study. The oil used in pictures posted earlier in this thread looked yellow, not green, and was heavily centrifuged and filtered which would have minimized that content even if it was present to start with.

Howard

[Andey]

...
Occam Razor analysis would suggest that Oleic Acid/C60 adducts are the most likely key.

Chlorophyll content, by the way, may be prized by olive oil connoisseurs and supplement buffs, due of its appearance, boquet, flavor and polyphenol content. But it is not a requirement to qualify as extra virgin olive oil. It can be maximized by choice of olive type, harvesting the olive early while it is still green, and care in handling and crushing. It gets minimized, by the way, by refining and filtering. For a number of these reasons I doubt the Chlorophyll or related polyphenol content plays into the results in the Baati study. The oil used in pictures posted earlier in this thread looked yellow, not green, and was heavily centrifuged and filtered which would have minimized that content even if it was present to start with.

Howard

I understand your point )
Grigoriy theory is just a guess and may be because of that it was not checked he wasnt share it for public ) This is also true for your thoughts too, nobody knows how it wokrs until it studied and proved.
But for me its still some logical preconditions for Grigoriy guess. He studied and proved that HyC60 working on human body with concentrations about 1000000 times less and daily dose is 10000 less than in olive oil. So if C60 works similar way as HyC60 than concentration of active substance in C60oo is very low - it could be easily in chlorophyll (sorry I didnt recall yet name of substance that Grigoriy mentioned).
There are a lot of suggestions and speculation here that C60 works in mitos, that it was absorbed in liposomal membranes and so on. This all was repeated numerously through forum and it gives some legitimateness to it, but until it proved it could be easily false. Even some data that contradicts with this 'common knowledge' was ignored - that C60 was excreted soon from living body and in same amount (it obviously means that it is not bioavailable that way)

I am far away from pretend that this is true in the last instance ) I think Grigoriy also didnt. But it is a different approuch and can be true )

[Logic]

If its really true - its interesting is the structures from C60oo and hydratedC60 are the same or not ? May be this structures are beneficial in someway similar but have different bioavailabilty ways and be synergestic to each other.

Thx Andey

I have been wondering this since starting the hydrated C60 thread.

I do hope Grigoriy takes the time to post here.
This site could do a lot for Hydrated C60...

[Andey]

I do hope Grigoriy takes the time to post here.
This site could do a lot for Hydrated C60...

I hope so )

[niner]

He think that C60oo works not because of oil as it is and gives example of Japanese study with corn oil (if I understand him right he was reviewer for this study). This study didnt show any sugnificant benefit for rats health.
Oil are mostly the same except for that virgin olive oil have some chlorophylle structures in it. And this structures contains ...I completely forgot what is name of that substance ) Grigoriy says that this substance is known to form colloid structures in water.
Also whole direction of Grigoriy work with C60 based on that the positive effects of C60 can be achivable only by creating colloid structures in cells that can be a ultimate antioxidant. Simple direct or soluted administration of C60 gives nothing - C60 was removed from body in few days in exact quantity and that proved but numerios studies.

Its far away from traditional pharmokinetics way of thinking so some/many/majority of people can be very sceptical about it. ) For me it makes sense and in C60 example we have logical confirmations to it.

If its really true - its interesting is the structures from C60oo and hydratedC60 are the same or not ? May be this structures are beneficial in someway similar but have different bioavailabilty ways and be synergestic to each other.

Franco Cataldo has published spectroscopic evidence that C60 reacts with oleic acid, and alkenes in general. I don't think this has anything to do with chlorophyll. The Japanese paper was a short term study where the animals were sacrificed after about six weeks, so you can't say anything about life extension from that. There have been a number of papers showing health benefits from a variety of substituted fullerenes. Grigoriy has reported health benefits from his preparation of C60, but has he ever done any structural characterization of it? If water is really forming defined clusters around C60, it should show up pretty strongly in a neutron diffraction pattern, though the equipment needed to do that is not common. You might be able to tell something from an MD simulation of C60 in water. At any rate, I haven't yet seen any evidence of the formation of these structures in water. How do we know that the fullerene isn't hydroxylated? Has there been any demonstration of HyFn showing a powerful ability to deactivate ROS? For example, has it been shown to dismutate superoxide in vitro?

[Andey]

He think that C60oo works not because of oil as it is and gives example of Japanese study with corn oil (if I understand him right he was reviewer for this study). This study didnt show any sugnificant benefit for rats health.
Oil are mostly the same except for that virgin olive oil have some chlorophylle structures in it. And this structures contains ...I completely forgot what is name of that substance ) Grigoriy says that this substance is known to form colloid structures in water.
Also whole direction of Grigoriy work with C60 based on that the positive effects of C60 can be achivable only by creating colloid structures in cells that can be a ultimate antioxidant. Simple direct or soluted administration of C60 gives nothing - C60 was removed from body in few days in exact quantity and that proved but numerios studies.

Its far away from traditional pharmokinetics way of thinking so some/many/majority of people can be very sceptical about it. ) For me it makes sense and in C60 example we have logical confirmations to it.

If its really true - its interesting is the structures from C60oo and hydratedC60 are the same or not ? May be this structures are beneficial in someway similar but have different bioavailabilty ways and be synergestic to each other.

Franco Cataldo has published spectroscopic evidence that C60 reacts with oleic acid, and alkenes in general. I don't think this has anything to do with chlorophyll. The Japanese paper was a short term study where the animals were sacrificed after about six weeks, so you can't say anything about life extension from that. There have been a number of papers showing health benefits from a variety of substituted fullerenes. Grigoriy has reported health benefits from his preparation of C60, but has he ever done any structural characterization of it? If water is really forming defined clusters around C60, it should show up pretty strongly in a neutron diffraction pattern, though the equipment needed to do that is not common. You might be able to tell something from an MD simulation of C60 in water. At any rate, I haven't yet seen any evidence of the formation of these structures in water. How do we know that the fullerene isn't hydroxylated? Has there been any demonstration of HyFn showing a powerful ability to deactivate ROS? For example, has it been shown to dismutate superoxide in vitro?

I am not doing advocacy for Grigoriy ) I hope he will join this discussion )

But for me its interesting are your arguments complete - from your words I understand that substance forms from C60+oil is proved to be antioxidant in cells ? "For example, has it been shown to dismutate superoxide in vitro?"
Its not an offense of any kind) I am just curios now - real info is shattered throughout the forum and I dont really understand what is proved, what is speculation and what is probable cause and effect explanation. Even Turnbuckle theory about C60 is kind of evolution agent for mitos - if C60oo is proven cell antioxidant then Turnbuckle is probably wrong.

For a practical side of view I am thinking about add Grigoriy HyC60 to my regimen - what do you think about it ? could C60oo and HyC60 compliment each other ?

[niner]

Franco Cataldo has published spectroscopic evidence that C60 reacts with oleic acid, and alkenes in general. I don't think this has anything to do with chlorophyll. The Japanese paper was a short term study where the animals were sacrificed after about six weeks, so you can't say anything about life extension from that. There have been a number of papers showing health benefits from a variety of substituted fullerenes. Grigoriy has reported health benefits from his preparation of C60, but has he ever done any structural characterization of it? If water is really forming defined clusters around C60, it should show up pretty strongly in a neutron diffraction pattern, though the equipment needed to do that is not common. You might be able to tell something from an MD simulation of C60 in water. At any rate, I haven't yet seen any evidence of the formation of these structures in water. How do we know that the fullerene isn't hydroxylated? Has there been any demonstration of HyFn showing a powerful ability to deactivate ROS? For example, has it been shown to dismutate superoxide in vitro?

I am not doing advocacy for Grigoriy ) I hope he will join this discussion )

But for me its interesting are your arguments complete - from your words I understand that substance forms from C60+oil is proved to be antioxidant in cells ? "For example, has it been shown to dismutate superoxide in vitro?"
Its not an offense of any kind) I am just curios now - real info is shattered throughout the forum and I dont really understand what is proved, what is speculation and what is probable cause and effect explanation. Even Turnbuckle theory about C60 is kind of evolution agent for mitos - if C60oo is proven cell antioxidant then Turnbuckle is probably wrong.

For a practical side of view I am thinking about add Grigoriy HyC60 to my regimen - what do you think about it ? could C60oo and HyC60 compliment each other ?

The only compounds I know of that were shown to be SOD mimetics (i.e. able to dismutate superoxide) were the tris- and bis-malonate substitued C60s from Laura Dugan's group. From my reading of their papers, it looks like all C60 compounds have the ability to do this, but that some are a lot better than others, depending on substitution. If the malonates are deprotonated, they work poorly, which you'd expect because the negative superoxide would be repelled by the highly negative charge (-6) of a fully deprotonated tris-malonate. At lower pH, where the malonates are at least partially protonated, they work a lot better, which Dugan says is due to the superoxide intermediate being stabilized by H-bonding with the carboxyl proton. If that's the case, most any hydroxyl substituent ought to work.

Grigoriy has a theory that says the the concentric shells of water around HyFn are involved in its behavior toward ROS, which sounds like he thinks that the ordered water might act like Dugan's malonate protons. I'm just wondering if he's looked at this in vitro; is it just a hypothesis or is there evidence for it? Once the C60-oo adduct is in the aqueous environment of the body, it should also form a similar ordered shell of waters, for what it's worth, though it would be disrupted by the (presumably) oleic acid substituents. In either the case of C60-oo or HyFn, I'm also wondering if there aren't some hydroxyl substituents that are formed.

In the end, there are several different kinds of of questions. One is "What are the effects of the compound in the body?" Another is mechanistic- How does the compound function in the body? Another is pharmacokinetic- How much of the compound do you need to see an effect, where in the body is it localized, and how long does it last? Regarding effects, we have the report from Baati that C60-oo dramatically increases the lifespan of Wistar Rats. As far as I know, HyFn hasn't shown much life extension, at least not in mammals, but I haven't read most of Andrievsky's papers because I can't speak Russian. Regarding mechanism, all the experimental information I've seen is consistent with ROS detoxification (antioxidation) being the primary mode of action for essentially all fullerenes, though the effectiveness of any given fullerene compound will depend on its substituents (or lack thereof) and the tissue distribution and pharmacokinetics that results from that structure. I suspect that C60-oo is primarily located in membranes, particularly mitochondrial membranes, which optimally positions it to catch most ROS production at the source. We still need solid experimental evidence of this, for example via a C14 label. I'm not sure where Grigoriy thinks HyFn is localized, and would like to hear what he thinks about that, and what if any experiments he's run to show it. He finds that the effective doses are like 100 or more times smaller than the doses everyone is using for C60-oo, so it would be really nice to get an explanation of why that is.

[Andey]

Thank you for such comprehensive answer.
Honestly, I read first paragraph 3 times, then read wiki and then starting to understand a little )

For practical reasons I got that...at that time hard to said anything with strong confidence because C60 in body is mostly unstudied.
So we need to make our own decisions and hope that in few years science tells us why we are doing it right..or not)

P.S. I still hope that Grigoriy joins us. When we talk by phone he seems to me very open about any scientifical info. I dont know why he is not here yet )

[clairvoyant]

This is my explanation on how C60 in olive oil works.

As you know cell metabolism produces ROS such as superoxide (O2-). The organism counteracts it with the enzyme SOD and turns it to hydro peroxide (H2O2), which in its turn is converted to oxygen and water by the enzyme catalasa. There are also ROS such as hydroxyl radical (OH-). Superoxide can not attack normal molecules because its free electron has reversed spin but can attack other radicals which is also bad.
It is proven that rats without the enzyme SOD die at 8^th embryonic day but external ADDITION of it does NOT increase the life span much. The drug Tempol is SOD actually.
Thus, I think that C60 does not act like SOD.
C60 does not work like catalasa, too. I put C60 into H2O2 and it did not make bubbles as it does on an wound or over bacteria.
The case with all defending enzymes is the same: if you take more of them, it will not increase you lifespan significantly.
The problem with these enzymes is that they miss to neutralize ALL the ROS. Some ROS escape and do the damage. That is why aging occurs. The so called lipid peroxidation is caused by hydroxyl radical (OH)-. See the picture.

file:///C:\DOCUME~1\batpesho\LOCALS~1\Temp\msohtml1\01\clip_image002.gif

The end product (non radical) of this process is lipid peroxide L-(-O-OH). This is your rotten flesh (hanging fat tissue) like the rancid oil. The most vulnerable lipids are unsaturated PUFA, MUFA. If the cell and mitochondrial membranes PUFA become rancid your metabolism slows, you cannot run faster for example.

According to me:

C60 + L-(O-OH) = C60 + Normal lipid + something else.

C60 possibly takes the hydroxyl radical, then the oxygen and at the end a proton (H+) from ETC repairs the lipid.

C60 acts like catalyst and is not spent. C60 repairs damaged lipid, included but not limited to cell and mitochondrial membranes.
That is how we can explain improvement of the Turnbuckle’s skin and hair. It is so called Turnbuckle effect.
To me C60 not only stops the time (aging) but reverses it, too. To turn back the hands of time is equal to rejuvenation.
My deepest inside hope is that if C60 is not discontinued, taken regularly in small, normal doses, with some pauses; will lead to an order lifespan increase.

P.S.

To check if C60 interferes with DNA, we can see whether the chicken of the woman who feeds them with C60 have normal progeny.

[Andey]

This is my explanation on how C60 in olive oil works.
...
C60 acts like catalyst and is not spent. C60 repairs damaged lipid, included but not limited to cell and mitochondrial membranes.
That is how we can explain improvement of the Turnbuckle’s skin and hair. It is so called Turnbuckle effect.
To me C60 not only stops the time (aging) but reverses it, too. To turn back the hands of time is equal to rejuvenation.
My deepest inside hope is that if C60 is not discontinued, taken regularly in small, normal doses, with some pauses; will lead to an order lifespan increase.

Hi )
Thank you for such descriptive post - its time to mr to recall some chemistry from school)

Why do you think that there are some need for pauses on C60 intake ?

[Turnbuckle]

This is my explanation on how C60 in olive oil works.
...
C60 acts like catalyst and is not spent. C60 repairs damaged lipid, included but not limited to cell and mitochondrial membranes.
That is how we can explain improvement of the Turnbuckle’s skin and hair. It is so called Turnbuckle effect.
To me C60 not only stops the time (aging) but reverses it, too. To turn back the hands of time is equal to rejuvenation.
My deepest inside hope is that if C60 is not discontinued, taken regularly in small, normal doses, with some pauses; will lead to an order lifespan increase.

Hi )
Thank you for such descriptive post - its time to mr to recall some chemistry from school)

Why do you think that there are some need for pauses on C60 intake ?

Most everyone here seems to believe that it works as a super antioxidant, even though no antioxidant has ever been shown to extend the lifespan of rats. My theory is that it acts as a demethylating agent, in which case it is similar to procaine, which has also been shown to extend the lifespan of rats and is sold as a longevity supplement. C60 concentrates in the mitochondria, and if it demethylates the mitochondrial DNA, this would turn on genes that had been turned off and essentially act as a reset. If, however, some of those genes are better turned off for optimal functioning, then you could go too far with the treatment. If you take too much, for instance, or take it every day, you might wipe out all the epigenetic programming of the mtDNA and not be able to get it back.

I've posted a more complete explanation on my profile page--under "3. C60 theory."

[Andey]

My deepest inside hope is that if C60 is not discontinued, taken regularly in small, normal doses, with some pauses; will lead to an order lifespan increase.

Why do you think that there are some need for pauses on C60 intake ?

Most everyone here seems to believe that it works as a super antioxidant, even though no antioxidant has ever been shown to extend the lifespan of rats. My theory is that it acts as a demethylating agent, in which case it is similar to procaine, which has also been shown to extend the lifespan of rats and is sold as a longevity supplement. C60 concentrates in the mitochondria, and if it demethylates the mitochondrial DNA, this would turn on genes that had been turned off and essentially act as a reset. If, however, some of those genes are better turned off for optimal functioning, then you could go too far with the treatment. If you take too much, for instance, or take it every day, you might wipe out all the epigenetic programming of the mtDNA and not be able to get it back.

I've posted a more complete explanation on my profile page--under "3. C60 theory."

But most people here beleive that C60 is accumulating in cells and this point look proven for some degree because C60 effects are not dissapear immediatly after canceling its intake.
Do you think that small rest periods are enough for C60 removal from mitochondria ?
And what pause duration do you think optimal ? Once a week intake ? Two times per week ? Every other day ?

Edited by Andey, 29 October 2012 - 11:12 AM.