Hypothesis: The biological effect of C60 in MCT oil is enhanced by exposure to red light.
Background: C60 epoxides are oxides of C60 where C60 has reacted with one or more oxygen atoms. C60 has an energy gap to photo-chemical transformations of around 1.8 eV. This is quite low, thus it is easily oxidized in solution by visible light, even red light. For example, red light of 650 nm present in sunlight and predominately emitted by red LED flashlights has a photon energy of around 1.9 eV and can thus promote the oxidation of C60. This wavelength is highly penetrating. It penetrates the thinnest part of my hand, for example, and can thus promote C60 oxidation in vivo and vitro—even in the dark amber bottles in which C60EVOO is sold. The amber bottles are intended to protect against photo-chemical effects of shorter wavelength light, but with C60’s low energy gap, I expect they don’t prevent the photo-formation of epoxides from the longer wavelengths of red light.
The incoming photon (1.8 eV) excites an electron in the C60 to the first excited state, followed by internal conversion and inter-system crossing to form a triplet excited state; in the presence of oxygen, triplet energy transfer occurs and produces singlet oxygen; the simultaneous presence of triplet excited state C60 and singlet oxygen then produces fullerene oxide . . . Four light sources were evaluated, specifically: a 633 nm, 4 mW, HeNe laser, a 100 W, Mercury UV-A (365 nm) lamp, a high intensity white light, and ambient laboratory light (detailed in Section S3). The most effective light source was found to be the red laser source, with the highest irradiance, and was thus employed for most experiments reported in this study.
http://www.sciencedi...021979715000326
Kmoody et al found C60 epoxides in most of the commercial product being sold, but it is not clear if the C60 epoxide itself is responsible for the cancer found in their trial with mice (using one oil from SES). When C60 is oxidized, reactive oxygen species are set loose which can then react with the unsaturated fatty acids of olive oil, creating chemical changes that could be the source of the observed cancer. It’s also possible SES was using some brute force method to dissolve it, like ultrasonic energy, which produces microscopic areas of extreme temperature, and/or their oil sample used by Kmoody was years old. According to their website, they seemed to believe it is good for 3 years, which is highly unlikely.
Kmoody: We ran into an issue in that as soon as we sourced C60oo rather than making it in house, we found most vendors sell oxidized C60oo which, in my hands, doubled the cancer rate in our mice. We are working to develop a C60 product produced under FDA compliant GMP standards. For translation, an issue with C60oo is that olive oil is not chemically defined and varies from batch to batch -- an undesirable quality for a drug vehicle. We are currently screening half a dozen or so different vehicles to assess PK/PD to see if any of them are able to get into the body like C60oo. Those studies are done, we are just compiling the data. After that, we will be doing pilot toxicity and efficacy studies with winning candidates using several different animal studies.
http://www.longecity...ndpost&p=777147
But is the oxidation of C60 directly causing this problem? Because C60 epoxides themselves have been found to be better antioxidants than pristine C60 in vitro—
The introduction of pin-up oxygen [epoxide] on C60, such as in the oxidized fullerenes C60O and C60On, induced noticeable increase in the antioxidant activity as compared to pristine C60. The water-soluble inclusion complexes of fullerenes C60O and C60On reacted with linoleic acid peroxyl radical 1.7 and 2.4 times faster, respectively.
http://www.ncbi.nlm....les/PMC3244865/
An Experiment with red light: I’ve used MCT oil as a C60 vehicle for months now, and along with additional hydroxytyrosol it gives me results equal to or better than the best extra virgin olive oil. Also, MCT oil is saturated and thus relatively non-reactive compared to the unsaturated fatty acids in olive oil. Using the MCT mix in this post, I exposed 30 ml in a clear glass beaker placed atop a red LED flashlight (Maxxima Mf-37r Ultra Bright 6 Red Led), with the whole thing wrapped in aluminum foil to prevent light loss and maximize intensity.
Total exposure of the C60 MCT oil was 15 minutes.
Dose of the irradiated oil was one teaspoon, once a day.
This produced a quite noticeable increase in both aerobic and anaerobic capacity over the unirradiated oil, and did this consistently over a period of days. On occasion it also produced a feeling of excess energy within an hour of taking it, so I did wind sprints to burn it off.
Final words: While there is a question about the safety of C60 epoxides, they are better antioxidants than unreacted C60 in vitro, and in my own case, better in vivo for exercise enhancement. The likelihood that some epoxides are always present is high. Solid C60 is known to react with O2 in the dark—
Even sublimed C60 is irreversibly modified after contact with oxygen or air under any condition.
http://www-old.mpi-h...pdf/1703_94.pdf
—and C60 is known to react with O2 in solution if light and oxygen are present, thus epoxides will likely form unless the vendor and user are very careful, thus creating ROS that can attack the unsaturated fatty acids of olive oil. Also, using C60 in conjunction with LLLT might be a bad idea. Some here have notice negative reactions--see this post. Such effects might be mitigated or eliminated by taking mitochondrial antioxidants such as glutathione, hydroxytyrosol, PQQ, and vitamin C.
