3585 replies to this topic

[Mind]

Also, mice do not have much natural internal anti-oxidant defense as humans. So a strong anti-oxidant will probably have a larger effect in mice.

[hav]

Niner:

My recollection of the supplemental info obtained from Dr Moussa, one of the Baati study authors, was that all of their controls in their study died with evidence of tumors while none of their c60-treated rats did. And I thought someone here with knowledge of Wister rats indicated that they usually die of malignant tumors. Didn't try to verify that fact myself before but it seems consistent with this source:

Profile of Early Occurring Spontaneous Tumors in Han Wistar Rats

 WistarRatsCOD.jpg   265.36KB   17 downloads

Granted, not dying of the usual cause extended their lives. But the study can't tell us how long a control that died of old age would have lived without c60 because there weren't any. Which is a pretty convincing fact. Perhaps we could draw some inferences if there were some general data on the lifespan of Wistar rats who do not die of cancerous tumors and were treated just like in the Baati study with gavages and all, and fed and cared for similarly. But that wouldn't be as convincing as in a proper controlled study.

But I do think I agree with your initial suggestion that if a c60 for life treated group outlived another c60 for 6 months treated group... that would prove c60 postponed death from old age. I'm just not that optimistic.

Howard

Edited by hav, 19 March 2013 - 09:22 PM.

[Kevnzworld]

So we don't need at least one study, we have that. What we need are a few more to confirm or deny the observations of Baati.

It's been over a year since Baati.. Do you ( or anyone else ) know if there are any new C60 longevity studies currently in progress ?

[Marty D]

My recollection of the supplemental info obtained from Dr Moussa, one of the Baati study authors, was that all of their controls in their study died with evidence of tumors while none of their c60-treated rats did. And I thought someone here with knowledge of Wister rats indicated that they usually die of malignant tumors. Didn't try to verify that fact myself before but it seems consistent with this source:

The study you mention seems to be geared toward cancer but you may be right. Another quick search turns up a lot of references regarding cancer. There is this quote on Sarah Vaughtner's sight:
http://shop.owndoc.c...lls-in-oil.html

All rats that received C60 in olive oil died of old age and the last remaining one was killed by the experimenters (from an interview with Fathi Moussa by Anthony Loera) - highly unusual, roughly half of Wistar rats normally die of cancer, the rest of mainly pneumonia.

But I really couldn't say with any kind of certainty one way or the other. So, for what it's worth.

[anagram]

Well, Resveratrol may have some potent effects however its anti-estrogenic effects are short of "OK" in the view of human health, lucky C60-oo lacks carcinogenic potential and kills cancer using a persons immune system. I wonder which is more likely to lengthen a humans life span.

Edited by anagram, 19 March 2013 - 11:14 PM.

[niner]

So we don't need at least one study, we have that. What we need are a few more to confirm or deny the observations of Baati.

It's been over a year since Baati.. Do you ( or anyone else ) know if there are any new C60 longevity studies currently in progress ?

You mean aside from the three that are being run by longecity members? (AgeVivo's mice, the chickens, and the large placebo-controlled rat study)

[niner]

My recollection of the supplemental info obtained from Dr Moussa, one of the Baati study authors, was that all of their controls in their study died with evidence of tumors while none of their c60-treated rats did. And I thought someone here with knowledge of Wister rats indicated that they usually die of malignant tumors. Didn't try to verify that fact myself before but it seems consistent with this source:

Profile of Early Occurring Spontaneous Tumors in Han Wistar Rats

Granted, not dying of the usual cause extended their lives. But the study can't tell us how long a control that died of old age would have lived without c60 because there weren't any. Which is a pretty convincing fact. Perhaps we could draw some inferences if there were some general data on the lifespan of Wistar rats who do not die of cancerous tumors and were treated just like in the Baati study with gavages and all, and fed and cared for similarly. But that wouldn't be as convincing as in a proper controlled study.

But I do think I agree with your initial suggestion that if a c60 for life treated group outlived another c60 for 6 months treated group... that would prove c60 postponed death from old age. I'm just not that optimistic.

Wistar rats (and rodents in general, I think) are susceptible to cancer, and in Wistar strains it does appear to be the most common cause of death, though not the only one. Pneumonia and nephrotoxicity also occur, among other things. The paper you linked was a carcinogenicity study, so those animals were getting dosed with carcinogens. In both rats and humans, you see an age-dependent increase in cancer. These can be thought of as diseases of aging because their incidence is age-dependent. I'm not really sure what it means to "die of old age", since organisms always die of something, and it is usually something that has an incidence that increases with age. In either rats or humans, there is a small set of categories of disease that cause most deaths. I guess what you're getting at is maybe c60 just prevents disease but it doesn't present organisms from showing all the signs and symptoms of aging? If that's what you're getting at, I'd say that it probably does slow the development of the typical aging phenotype. Moussa could probably clarify as to the condition of the treatment arm in later life. We should have more information eventually as the current animal experiments progress.

[Kevnzworld]

You mean aside from the three that are being run by longecity members? (AgeVivo's mice, the chickens, and the large placebo-controlled rat study)

I know about Agevivo's mice and the chickens...I didn't know about the large placebo controlled rat study. Where can we get more info about that.?
Are there any other non longevity studies?. I would think that Mousa and Batti would be trying like hell to replicate and expand on their discovery ...

[niner]

I didn't know about the large placebo controlled rat study. Where can we get more info about that.?
Are there any other non longevity studies?. I would think that Mousa and Batti would be trying like hell to replicate and expand on their discovery ...

Discussions are a bit spread around, but the current stuff is in the C60@home forum. The placebo-controlled experiment with 30 rats is in the thread by Crevetterbelle.

I'm actually kind of appalled that Moussa didn't get something started years ago. They must have known that they were seeing unusual lifespans well before the paper was published. I guess the problem was that they were toxicologists and nanotech guys, and were not at all connected to the biogerontology world. It might even be the case that they didn't understand what an extraordinary result they had. We might have been well on our way to seeing a replication (or refutation) by now, instead of just getting started on an experiment. Oh well. Science marches on...

I very much hope that there are labs all over the world that are also looking at C60-oo, and we'll soon start seeing a resveratrol-like flood of papers. (there are now over 5000 hits on "resveratrol" in pubmed) Something tells me this isn't happening, though.

[taho]

Baati's rats had an extremely square mortality curve- They all lived for a very long time, then they all died in rapid succession. One explanation of this could be that some other non-redox failure mode that accrues at a slow constant rate finally caught up with them, though I don't have an obvious candidate for that. (amyloidosis?)

how about mTOR?

Aging can be viewed as a quasi-programmed phenomenon driven by the overactivation of the nutrient-sensing mTOR gerogene. mTOR-driven aging can be triggered or accelerated by a decline or loss of responsiveness to activation of the energy-sensing protein AMPK, a critical gerosuppressor of mTOR. The occurrence of age-related diseases, therefore, reflects the synergistic interaction between our evolutionary path to sedentarism, which chronically increases a number of mTOR activating gero-promoters (e.g., food, growth factors, cytokines and insulin) and the "defective design" of central metabolic integrators such as mTOR and AMPK. Our laboratories at the Bioactive Food Component Platform in Spain have initiated a systematic approach to molecularly elucidate and clinically explore whether the "xenohormesis hypothesis," which states that stress-induced synthesis of plant polyphenols and many other phytochemicals provides an environmental chemical signature that upregulates stress-resistance pathways in plant consumers, can be explained in terms of the reactivity of the AMPK/mTOR-axis to so-called xenohormetins. Here, we explore the AMPK/mTOR-xenohormetic nature of complex polyphenols naturally present in extra virgin olive oil (EVOO), a pivotal component of the Mediterranean style diet that has been repeatedly associated with a reduction in age-related morbid conditions and longer life expectancy. Using crude EVOO phenolic extracts highly enriched in the secoiridoids oleuropein aglycon and decarboxymethyl oleuropein aglycon, we show for the first time that (1) the anticancer activity of EVOO secoiridoids is related to the activation of anti-aging/cellular stress-like gene signatures, including endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress and the unfolded protein response, spermidine and polyamine metabolism, sirtuin-1 (SIRT1) and NRF2 signaling; (2) EVOO secoiridoids activate AMPK and suppress crucial genes involved in the Warburg effect and the self-renewal capacity of "immortal" cancer stem cells; (3) EVOO secoiridoids prevent age-related changes in the cell size, morphological heterogeneity, arrayed cell arrangement and senescence-associated β-galactosidase staining of normal diploid human fibroblasts at the end of their proliferative lifespans. EVOO secoiridoids, which provide an effective defense against plant attack by herbivores and pathogens, are bona fide xenohormetins that are able to activate the gerosuppressor AMPK and trigger numerous resveratrol-like anti-aging transcriptomic signatures. As such, EVOO secoiridoids constitute a new family of plant-produced gerosuppressant agents that molecularly "repair" the aimless (and harmful) AMPK/mTOR-driven quasi-program that leads to aging and aging-related diseases, including cancer.

http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/23370395

This article discusses that the traditional analogy of an aging organism with a rusting (albeit self-repairing) car is misleading. The true analogy is a speeding car that enters a low-speed zone and damages itself because it does not and cannot slow down. For such a car without brakes (and actually without a driver), aging from rusting never occurs. Using simple analogies (although turning gerontology upside down), this article discusses the origin of aging, how overactivation of the mTOR (Target of Rapamycin) pathway causes aging, why aging causes damage (organ damage) not damage causes aging, the link between aging and age-related diseases, slow aging versus aging tolerance and suppression of aging with rapamycin.

http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/19923900

In mammals, TOR (mTOR, mammalian TOR) is activated by nutrients (glucose, amino acids), insulin, cytokines, free radicals and growth factors

http://www.landesbio...lonnyCC8-24.pdf


So.. what if ROS reduction didn't prolong life by itself, but acted on TOR via reduced free radicals?

Olive oil also acts on TOR, thus slows down "the speeding car" (aging).

That would explain why the control with only olive oil did live longer (small decrease in TOR activation).
The group with c60-oo lived that much longer because maybe they had low TOR because of low ROS production.

Since they were basically clones, given the same amount of olive oil + c60, eaten the same food, had the same environment they had the same "cruise control". Since c60-oo protected them from ROS damage (cancer), they all died at the same time when they "ran out of gass" (they had identical TOR activation). If this hypotesis is correct, that would mean, that in three groups of mice (control, c60-oo, c60-oo + mTOR inhibitor) the last group would live significantly longer (depending on how much we would inhibit mTOR).

ROS reductions: C60-oo, NAC, Vit C, E, all the rest of antioxidants..
mTOR inhibiotors: rapamycin (the best), CR, Vit D3, resveratrol, cucurium, olive oil, green tea,...

Maybe we should have even the forth group of mice, give our poor mice all of that plus anything else that could help.. It would be very unscientific, but it would help to find any other hidden causes of aging..

[hav]

Profile of Early Occurring Spontaneous Tumors in Han Wistar Rats

... The paper you linked was a carcinogenicity study, so those animals were getting dosed with carcinogens. In both rats and humans, you see an age-dependent increase in cancer.

Just reread it and noticed this:

Information from carcinogenicity studies was gathered from control groups (a total of 2,119 male and 2,119 female rats).

Been thinking some more about it and it made me wonder if there was an unusual lack of tumor free rats in the Baati control group. But if 76% is the observed incidence of tumors causing death in male Wistars, that would have only indicated a likelihood of one of the Baati control rats living a tumor free life. Probably n=6 is just too small a group for that measurement. With an n=24 they might get better metrics with as many as 5 or 6 tumor free controls.

Another thing that jumps out at me is that in the carcinogenic studies they catalog Wistar rats living as long as 52 weeks. I don't recall if the individual data points were recited in Baati but I do recall that the C60-treated rats lived an average of 42 weeks. [ Only because it made me wonder at the time if c60 might be the answer to life, the universe, and everything. (that's for Maxwatt ]

Howard

Edited by hav, 20 March 2013 - 04:41 PM.

[Turnbuckle]

Another thing that jumps out at me is that in the carcinogenic studies they catalog Wistar rats living as long as 52 weeks. I don't recall if the individual data points were recited in Baati but I do recall that the C60-treated rats lived an average of 42 weeks. [ Only because it made me wonder at the time if c60 might be the answer to life, the universe, and everything. (that's for Maxwatt ]

Howard

I think you're confusing a 52 week study in one case with a 42 month longevity in the other.

[hav]

Another thing that jumps out at me is that in the carcinogenic studies they catalog Wistar rats living as long as 52 weeks. I don't recall if the individual data points were recited in Baati but I do recall that the C60-treated rats lived an average of 42 weeks. [ Only because it made me wonder at the time if c60 might be the answer to life, the universe, and everything. (that's for Maxwatt ]

Howard

I think you're confusing a 52 week study in one case with a 42 month longevity in the other.

.... never mind.

[pleb]

there are a lot of studies that indicate whilst 75 % of rats die from cancer the others dont live a normal life they all die from other diseases at a similar age,
there are a few studies giving the average lifespan for wistar rats in the thread on Deprenyl,

and with regards the lack of pub med papers i cant see that there would be many,
this is an industrial mineral not a drug,

apart from the odd blurb by big pharma talking about using it as a carrier for other drugs,which have been reported now and again there are no reasons, for it to be on any kind of drug trail,
at least not until us silly devils on here get noticed and achieve some sort of notoriety,one way or another :>)

[Adamzski]

Eben Byers style notoriety! actually I'm going to order some more, I will take it once per week using a bottle of the VA C60 in a month. Would people say that is the best dose? I did use it daily for one month previously and I do think I got some effects but all subjective. There is not much I can go on in the way of measuring effects, I am untrained at the moment so if I start training then I will of course go up in the weights fast, I have no way of gauging the effects unless it makes me manic or has amazing effects or both.

Wouldnt the bodybuilding guys be all over this by now if it did increase strength? these guys will take anything and are really in tune with what has an effect. a search for "bodybuilding.com c60" brings up almost nothing. The hairloss guys as well, they really clutch at straws nothing.. Only here where I would say that there are higher amount of people with mania or mental somethings (haha I'm one!) than most forums.

[markymark]

@Adamski,
Yes, I also thought that the bodybuilding folks would jump on it first. But by searching the respective key words, nothing showed up
mm

[Hebbeh]

The bodybuilding crowd doesn't know about C60 yet and there has been no demonstration of increased strength or size...only possible injuries from exercise. I would expect more of a possible benefit in endurance sports such as cycling.

[mikeinnaples]

The bodybuilding crowd doesn't know about C60 yet and there has been no demonstration of increased strength or size...only possible injuries from exercise. I would expect more of a possible benefit in endurance sports such as cycling.

Agreed, C60 is really outside of what they would be interested in.

I did try lifting heavy recently and did not notice any unexpected or unusual strength gains. Given this anecdote as well as my actual hard data on lifting at lower weight, I firmly believe increasing endurance is far more likely than increasing strength.

[Shaved APE]

Has anybody else experienced dizziness / nausea after taking C60?

I've got a 50ml bottle (C60 in evoo), and have thus far taken around half; I started back in January, and took it daily for around 1 week (until I started getting dizzy spells), and then repeated the experiment twice at several week intervals.

On each occasion I experienced dizziness after several days use (whereupon I stopped), and the last time I used it (about a week ago) I felt dizzy & nauseous as soon as I swallowed!

These effects seem to have worn off, which suggests it is being eliminated from my system.

Feel somewhat nervous of trying this again.

[Adamzski]

Has anybody else experienced dizziness / nausea after taking C60?

I've got a 50ml bottle (C60 in evoo), and have thus far taken around half; I started back in January, and took it daily for around 1 week (until I started getting dizzy spells), and then repeated the experiment twice at several week intervals.

On each occasion I experienced dizziness after several days use (whereupon I stopped), and the last time I used it (about a week ago) I felt dizzy & nauseous as soon as I swallowed!

These effects seem to have worn off, which suggests it is being eliminated from my system.

Feel somewhat nervous of trying this again.

I did once have a "spell" felt dizzy, could not breath properly and considered going to the hospital for the first time in my life. I was thinking it was too much nicotine/caffeine with the c60 increasing the effects of these.

The bodybuilding guys do know about this, if it did have instant strength and endurance gains like several people say here then really there would be 100's of them right now on it and reporting results. Pro cyclists, their forums would be all over it.

[pleb]

Eben Byers style notoriety! actually I'm going to order some more, I will take it once per week using a bottle of the VA C60 in a month. Would people say that is the best dose? I did use it daily for one month previously and I do think I got some effects but all subjective. There is not much I can go on in the way of measuring effects, I am untrained at the moment so if I start training then I will of course go up in the weights fast, I have no way of gauging the effects unless it makes me manic or has amazing effects or both.

Wouldnt the bodybuilding guys be all over this by now if it did increase strength? these guys will take anything and are really in tune with what has an effect. a search for "bodybuilding.com c60" brings up almost nothing. The hairloss guys as well, they really clutch at straws nothing.. Only here where I would say that there are higher amount of people with mania or mental somethings (haha I'm one!) than most forums.

if it is an Eban Byers scenario, i'll come back and haunt Baati, :>)

after reading a few BB forums a few months ago looking for information on HGH and other peptides, i joined a one BB forum looking for a reliable supplier, and there has been no mention of C60 on any of them,
i havnt noticed any effect on hair growth apart from having to shave more often there seems to be more body to it and i do have a few grey hairs but after 6 months there still seems to be the same number

[Adamzski]

if it is an Eban Byers scenario, i'll come back and haunt Baati, :>)

after reading a few BB forums a few months ago looking for information on HGH and other peptides, i joined a one BB forum looking for a reliable supplier, and there has been no mention of C60 on any of them,
i havnt noticed any effect on hair growth apart from having to shave more often there seems to be more body to it and i do have a few grey hairs but after 6 months there still seems to be the same number

Will you take HGH? from what I have seen you need to take enough of it to make a difference and a small amount will not help, it may also stop you naturally producing it.

I have always had trouble shaving, seem to have a 9 o'clock shaddow right after shaving and this may be worse for me now as I have been motivated enough to LOL join a shaving forum... and tweak my shaving regime...

I know that BB people do look on noot/science forums Im sure some have tried C60 and not noticed anything dramatic. Things like the pre workout supplement "craze" and a while ago Creatine really took hold fast. Creatine has a proven 5-15% explosive boost. Many state athletic teams are trying to always get their hands on the next legal or illegal thing that can boost athletes performance also. So im sure it has been evaluated.

[pleb]

Yes i'm already on it, just a couple of weeks now, but not for BBing just to take my HGH levels back to what they were when i was in my late teens after reading the results from the 1990 New England school of Medicine trails,1iu a day, also results indicate that once you stop injecting HGH the pituitary gland restarts again after two to three weeks, but at my age my gland is probably only producing 10 percent of what it did when i was 19 or 20,

most BB'rs take anywhere between 4 and 10 iu a day, but in the last couple of years IGF-1 became available and many now take IGF-1-long-3 which is a modified version that lasts a lot longer in the body because of the change in amino acids, one changed and two additions over the normal IGF-1,that the liver produces,
also if your interested look up Myostatin blockers, especially ACE-031 and Follistatin,

[Adamzski]

can you notice anything straight away? what kind of money does it cost per month? I'm turning 36 this year, I guess now could be the time to try it. I gotta get to the gym and strengthen up my tendons for a hit of ACE-031 in the future!

[pleb]

Sorry for all this off topic stuff,

with HGH its a slower process, most of the peptides and hormones other than HGH are pretty new and protocols are a bit rule of thumb,
I'm a very young 68, lol i do have these to try out purely as an experiment to see if they work,
so i can only say what i have read on the forums, Follistatin and ACE were developed to try to increase muscle for people, mostly kids with muscular Dystrophy,
when you exercise your muscles produce Myostatin that stops the muscle from building, its a survival mechanism from when we were in caves and skinny guys eat less than guys with muscle so the species had a better chance of survival,
so when you exercise to build muscle or take IGF-! its like having your foot on the accelerator, but as you exercise your muscles produce Myostatin for the reasons mentioned, so that's like having the other foot on the brake,

using a Myostatin blocker is like taking your foot off the brake,allowing the muscle to build much quicker,and without exercise,

in trails with mice they gained 60 % extra muscle in 2 weeks, if you can take in enough protein there have been figures of 1 lb of muscle a day mentioned, that's skeletal muscle so organs are not effected, , and it is new muscle and stays, increasing over and above your genetic muscle, most people who are not overweight have about 20% of their weight as muscle, so 1lb is a lot if it works you could double or triple your muscles in 2 to 3 months,,
but its so new most protocols and amounts to take are guess work,
ACE doesn't give the tendon problem that Follistatin does as it works on slightly different pathways,

[Andey]

Sorry for all this off topic stuff,

using a Myostatin blocker is like taking your foot off the brake,allowing the muscle to build much quicker,and without exercise,

Dont sorry, thanks for heads up.

[Adamzski]

I should hurry up and get rich, I wanna get on everything:)

C60 is quite cheap, lucky there for something that shows a lot of promise.

[mikeinnaples]

The bodybuilding guys do know about this, if it did have instant strength and endurance gains like several people say here then really there would be 100's of them right now on it and reporting results. Pro cyclists, their forums would be all over it.

It depends. A bodybuilder does not care about doing more reps at a lower weight as it doesn't translate into strength or size gains. However, if they were suddenly able to life 2olbs overnight, it would be a different situation.

Pro cyclists I can't speak of, but I am not so sure this is helping me run faster 'longer'. My specific testing using a treadmill did show a minor drop with heart rate at maximum test load though (note: not my maximum load). My weight lifting tests did show rep gain well outside of anything that could be considered 'normal' gain, but does that translate at all to a cyclist in an endurance race? Take a look at my log and see for yourself what my findings were. I have been an athlete and around gyms for long enough and consistently enough that I would put my knowledge, experience, and self awareness on par with almost anyone you would find in these other forums.

The real question is not that I had results, but 'why'. Could it be the statin use during a period of my life? The years I spent as an on/off smoker unable to completely kick the habit? Nerve damage from my spinal injury? I mention those because maybe C60 is doing something related to the various ways I damaged myself over the years? Who knows.

[stephen_b]

Pro cyclists I can't speak of, but I am not so sure this is helping me run faster 'longer'.

I've seen some success running slower. I usually run 3 days easy, one hard, and one long or hard. Yesterday I did a leisurely 8 mile run at a 10:13 pace, but the interesting thing is that I did it at an average heart rate of 138 bpm (my max is 196), just under 70% of my heart rate reserve (zone 1). Typically I'd be 8 bpm higher than that. At that heart rate, I'm almost entirely fat burning. I'll have a chance to test out the faster longer aspect when I try running a marathon at an 8 min/mi pace in early May.

[mikeinnaples]

Yeah my results was a 6-8bpm difference under the exact same load before/after. I was on incline at 8:00 pace during my treadmill test (for the sake of consistency).