Dear Steve, Eduouard, Johnny et.al.
Shouldn’t a key ground rule of submission of an article, idea or suggestion to the GRG list be to include who owns the IP (patents) on a given compound offered for further testing?
Little point testing a compound owned by Novartis. They would cream us & GRG would go home penniless. In fact, how much money is in the GRG treasury Johnny, to do any research at all?
It would be worthwhile also for the GRG to state its Mission (& not only to say “find healthspan solutions”), indicate exactly HOW we would do it and, most important, how the research would be funded.
GRG needs a Business-Research Strategic Plan. We have terrific people & skills power but, need a realistic plan for capitalizing on those valuable assets.
We MUST be realistic.
On Feb 9, 2015, at 4:59 PM, steve hill wrote:
At the risk of sounding critical would it not be better to investigate C60 in a suitably controlled experiment?
Few reasons for this:
1: Noravtis is already investigating Everolimus so why duplicate the same work? Plus big Pharma has considerable money to throw at their research whilst we have less and should focus it.
2: C60 is as you have stated lacking in data so therefore would benefit from basic research to ascertain if its value. A previous experiment with rats led to controversial results in life extension so perhaps more investigation is required?
3: To ascertain if C60 has any effect on boosting the Human immune system would it not be better to measure T cells and or WBC as an indication of it improving the immune system? The suggestion of tracking doctors visits that has been proposed just seems too vague and not controlled enough as a scientific study, far too many variables. The people will all have differing diets, calorie intakes, lifestyles etc… how does one account for so many variables and hope to obtain meaningful data?
I feel that more basic research is needed here before progressing to Human trials, and those human trials need to be very tightly controlled to yield consistent and reliable data. To do otherwise is to risk results that mean very little like the uncontrolled experiments people are doing at home on Longecity.
That’s my 2 cents anyway without wishing to seem overly critical.
From: Mallory E. McLaren To: Edouard Debonneuil ; Gerontology Research Group Sent: Sunday, 8 February 2015, 21:59Subject: Re: [GRG] Do you want to take part in a life extension clinical trial? //was: Placebo-controlled, health-primary-endpoint, everolimus crowd testing
How do I sign up?
Mallory McLaren, J.D.http://ift.tt/1jxi5B4
On Sun, Feb 8, 2015 at 12:38 PM, Edouard Debonneuil wrote:
Everolimus extends lifespan similarly to rapamycin. On Stephen Spindler’s video from EHA2012 (http://ift.tt/1Ixi39E t=10:53) you can see the life extension in mice (crossed strains). Rapamycin is probably more robust than everolimus in mice but in humans we don’t know what would be a low dose. In humans, Novartis has developped a series of clinical trials with small doses of everolimus (called “RAD001”) where it shows positive effects (http://ift.tt/1Ixi3pS)
C60 is promising but there is not much data to back it. I am in very good contacts with Fathi Moussa in France, the head of the lab who obtained the 90% life extension, and he is someone I tend to trust, but it was only found once in rats with N=6. I am also in very good contacts with Iryna Pishel’s lab in Ukraine, where they are trying to reproduce the results with more animals but in mice (all is doing well for now), and the results are expected for the beginning of 2016. SURPRISINGLY, DESPITE NUMEROUS HUMANS TRYING C60, I AM NOT AWARE OF ANYONE TRYING TO REPRODUCE THE C60 LIFE EXTENSION IN RATS. Frankly, I don’t understand why that is not happening. I am aware of smaller studies like one Where are the life extensionist researchers (?). And among those who report effects at LongeCity it is not done in a scientific, precise, coordinated way so it is difficult to say anything.
So for now C60 is promising but has weak evidence. Everolimus is c o n s i d e r a b l y more robust for human effects.
De : Walter Derzko Ã€ : ‘Edouard Debonneuil’ Cc : Walter EnvoyÃ© le : Dimanche 8 fÃ©vrier 2015 18h26Objet : RE: [GRG] Placebo-controlled, heath-primary-endpoint, everolimus crowd testing
You mention: — why everolimus: because it is an mTOR inhibitor like rapamycin and because mTOR inhibition is the most robust life extension technique so far (eg in mice it extends life even when started late in life) and because such low-risk-but-effective doses have been already established in healthy persons in various research studies (http://www.ncbi.nlm….ed/?term=rad001).
By what percent does everolimus extend life in mice or rats?
Is it better then Carbon 60 Hydrated Fullerenes, the worldâ€™s highest universal antioxidant which have extended the lifespan in rats by over 90%? From ~25 months (control) to ~ 53 months (C60 +olive oil) (see attached )
The best “cure for old age”, such as resveratrol or rapamicin, extended animal lives by only 20-25%.
Adding Fullerene C60 to animal food allowed a group of scientists led by Professor Fathi Moussa, from the University of Paris-Sud XI to nearly double the life expectancy of rats – by 90% in 2010. No currently known substance provides such a record of “longevity.” (see attached)
Biomaterials. 2012 Jun;33(19):4936-46. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2012.03.036. Epub 2012 Apr 10.
The prolongation of the lifespan of rats by repeated oral administration of fullerene.
From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of Edouard DebonneuilSent: February 7, 2015 8:11 PMTo: Gerontology Research GroupSubject: [GRG] Placebo-controlled, heath-primary-endpoint, everolimus crowtesting
Dear GRG members,
It seems to me time has come to pool the life extension communities around the world to do an everolimus versus placebo testing on health in healthy persons, especially healthy elderlies.
Reactions to be expected but it seems to me it is the right time to do that. Given the scientific level here, I thought GRG would be a great place to shape the project. FAQ below.
— why everolimus: because it is an mTOR inhibitor like rapamycin and because mTOR inhibition is the most robust life extension technique so far (eg in mice it extends life even when started late in life) and because such low-risk-but-effective doses have been already established in healthy persons in various research studies (http://www.ncbi.nlm….ed/?term=rad001). The most well known is likely the recent 6-week use as a premedication to increase the response to the flu vaccine in elderlies (http://www.ncbi.nlm….pubmed/25540326)
— is it allowed? It would be best to do it in a legal way. Since there has been discussions on the matter over the years without answer, I suggest to start and to be receptive to propositions to make it well recognized along the way.
— how long would it last? what should we measure? We should typically report health (whenever we go to the doctor and report some health issue, have a sore throat, some flu, take some medicine…), during say one year before and then during the treatment. We should also indicate if we smoke/specific things that may make us healthy or not. The outcome would be a scoring system of health (eg counting 1 whenever we go to the doctor, take some medicine, etc.). Ideally we should report during say 5 years (epidemiologic studies of low-dose aspirin report positive results over 5 years)
— would the data be public? Yes but people will be defined by a nickname that they don’t use elsewhere so that their self-reporting is less biased by some potential avoidance to indicate bad health.
— who would pay? the people who take the placebo-or-drug.
— who would make the placebo-or-drug and send it? Logistics to be organized here.
FAQ (more general)
— For those who know me: what about mouse healthspan and lifespan tests?: I am not at all abandonning. In the contrary this human trial should provide light that human life extension solutions are happening now and that we should speed up the pipeline: speed up the check in mice of life extension properties that are believed from the litterature, and set controlled human trials.
— I think that what you propose is absolutely nonsense: no worry, indicate why precisely and we’ll see if some tradeoff makes more sense.