Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Telomere lengthening in humans? GOOD, BAD or Indifferent.
GaleHawkins
Posts: 8,159 Member
in Debate Club
sciencealert.com/scientists-claim-they-ve-completed-the-first-successful-gene-therapy-against-human-ageing
Scientists claim they've completed the first successful gene therapy against human ageing.
Scientists claim they've completed the first successful gene therapy against human ageing.
0
Replies
-
I wouldn't do it if I was still of child-bearing age, but I am glad that there are people out there willing to develop (and try!) new therapies. I wonder how they can measure effectiveness.1
-
This article doesn't make total sense. First, it seems that the work hasn't been peer reviewed yet, so the jury isn't out yet on if the paper is legit. Second, they don't really explain telomeres accurately. Only a few kinds of cells in the body replicate, and those are the ones with telomeres. During the process of DNA replication, a tiny bit of the end of chromosomes has to be "sacrificed" in order to finish, so there are these non-coding bits at the end to make sure nothing important is lost. Basically, after X number of replications, there's nothing left to protect the end of the chromosome and that cell line dies because it can't replicate anymore. I could see potential in this for maybe skin cells, but I think the most important cells in our body are our brain cells, and those can't replicate. So even if this telomere research could somehow help maintain our bodies, our brains would still experience the normal degradation that comes with age (memory loss, damage from neurotoxins, damage from head injuries, damage from depression, etc). Basically, you are your brain and this research doesn't seem like it would impact the longevity of brain function. Just my opinion! I think if it's good work, it will certainly be medically important, just maybe not for aging.5
-
Who the heck has enough money in retirement to live passed 100?
Social security is just welfare.2 -
hmmmm, so we won't just put more people on the planet, we won't let them die either. This is going to end well5
-
GraceAnneU95 wrote: »This article doesn't make total sense. First, it seems that the work hasn't been peer reviewed yet, so the jury isn't out yet on if the paper is legit. Second, they don't really explain telomeres accurately. Only a few kinds of cells in the body replicate, and those are the ones with telomeres. During the process of DNA replication, a tiny bit of the end of chromosomes has to be "sacrificed" in order to finish, so there are these non-coding bits at the end to make sure nothing important is lost. Basically, after X number of replications, there's nothing left to protect the end of the chromosome and that cell line dies because it can't replicate anymore. I could see potential in this for maybe skin cells, but I think the most important cells in our body are our brain cells, and those can't replicate. So even if this telomere research could somehow help maintain our bodies, our brains would still experience the normal degradation that comes with age (memory loss, damage from neurotoxins, damage from head injuries, damage from depression, etc). Basically, you are your brain and this research doesn't seem like it would impact the longevity of brain function. Just my opinion! I think if it's good work, it will certainly be medically important, just maybe not for aging.
@GraceAnneU95 I can your point of view. This is a subject I have been studying for a few years so do my own article reviews on subject like this. This is a relative new field of study and the supplements on the market today thought to protect/lengthen the telomeres are on the expensive side. Brain cells we now understand can replicate. Nutritional ketosis is use to help protect our brains dementia, hearts and other organs from ROS, etc. Again I am sorry for the complexity of the subject but I agree it is deep and new science. As you see more articles from anti aging research I think you may become more interest in the subject to telomeres and protecting them. 40+ years ago I was not giving the subject any thought for sure like I am at 65.
1 -
Um, the article references another article that talks about NASA's research, so there's an issue with the link back in general.
From this vague article, she performed the research on herself. The only reason to do that is to avoid federal regulations on research, and is incredibly stupid.
Don't expect to see future research on this in humans for a while.
And peer review wouldn't touch this with a ten foot pole. There's a reason that good research isn't just someone randomly trying things on themselves.4 -
Um, the article references another article that talks about NASA's research, so there's an issue with the link back in general.
From this vague article, she performed the research on herself. The only reason to do that is to avoid federal regulations on research, and is incredibly stupid.
Don't expect to see future research on this in humans for a while.
And peer review wouldn't touch this with a ten foot pole. There's a reason that good research isn't just someone randomly trying things on themselves.
+1
The legitimate research on telomere preservation/lengthening is being done with the goal of extending the replication life of cell cultures. Now, THAT is exciting. Should bring down the cost of research in cell culture and will enable research where looking at effects after multiple replications is critical.1 -
GraceAnneU95 wrote: »This article doesn't make total sense. First, it seems that the work hasn't been peer reviewed yet, so the jury isn't out yet on if the paper is legit. Second, they don't really explain telomeres accurately. Only a few kinds of cells in the body replicate, and those are the ones with telomeres. During the process of DNA replication, a tiny bit of the end of chromosomes has to be "sacrificed" in order to finish, so there are these non-coding bits at the end to make sure nothing important is lost. Basically, after X number of replications, there's nothing left to protect the end of the chromosome and that cell line dies because it can't replicate anymore. I could see potential in this for maybe skin cells, but I think the most important cells in our body are our brain cells, and those can't replicate. So even if this telomere research could somehow help maintain our bodies, our brains would still experience the normal degradation that comes with age (memory loss, damage from neurotoxins, damage from head injuries, damage from depression, etc). Basically, you are your brain and this research doesn't seem like it would impact the longevity of brain function. Just my opinion! I think if it's good work, it will certainly be medically important, just maybe not for aging.
Wasn't there this saying that every 7~ years all your body's cells have been completely replaced by new ones? Are you telling me that's not true?0 -
https://ucsf.edu/news/2014/06/114956/longer-telomeres-linked-risk-brain-cancer
Cells that live the longest have down side implications in some cases. I have a 40 year old friend that was recently found to have stage 4 of this brain cancer.
We know next to nothing about how the body works it seems when it comes to longevity, cancer and most things it can seem.
https://google.com/search?q=telomeres&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS611US612&oq=telomeres&aqs=chrome..69i57&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#q=telomeres+cancer&start=100 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »https://ucsf.edu/news/2014/06/114956/longer-telomeres-linked-risk-brain-cancer
Cells that live the longest have down side implications in some cases. I have a 40 year old friend that was recently found to have stage 4 of this brain cancer.
We know next to nothing about how the body works it seems when it comes to longevity, cancer and most things it can seem.
https://google.com/search?q=telomeres&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS611US612&oq=telomeres&aqs=chrome..69i57&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#q=telomeres+cancer&start=10
I wouldn't say next to nothing.
And why are you posting google search results?1 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »https://ucsf.edu/news/2014/06/114956/longer-telomeres-linked-risk-brain-cancer
Cells that live the longest have down side implications in some cases. I have a 40 year old friend that was recently found to have stage 4 of this brain cancer.
We know next to nothing about how the body works it seems when it comes to longevity, cancer and most things it can seem.
https://google.com/search?q=telomeres&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS611US612&oq=telomeres&aqs=chrome..69i57&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#q=telomeres+cancer&start=10
Great for extending cell culture lines to keep research costs down which could be beneficial as this cost saving could be passed on to the patient from a pharmaceutical perspective.
When it comes to the aim to reduce the signs of ageing or to increase longevity I don't care for telomeres are the chormosal equivalent to a genetic damage reduction fail safe,why would we want to mess with that in the body? I would worry about the possibility of this increasing cancer risks which are there every time a cell divides the mechanism isn't perfect, dna transcription can make mistakes. Every mistake can have to potential to turn a normal cell into a cancer cell. I'll grow old gracefully and die when I'm supposed to instead of well in to the 100s, thanks!1 -
stevencloser wrote: »GraceAnneU95 wrote: »This article doesn't make total sense. First, it seems that the work hasn't been peer reviewed yet, so the jury isn't out yet on if the paper is legit. Second, they don't really explain telomeres accurately. Only a few kinds of cells in the body replicate, and those are the ones with telomeres. During the process of DNA replication, a tiny bit of the end of chromosomes has to be "sacrificed" in order to finish, so there are these non-coding bits at the end to make sure nothing important is lost. Basically, after X number of replications, there's nothing left to protect the end of the chromosome and that cell line dies because it can't replicate anymore. I could see potential in this for maybe skin cells, but I think the most important cells in our body are our brain cells, and those can't replicate. So even if this telomere research could somehow help maintain our bodies, our brains would still experience the normal degradation that comes with age (memory loss, damage from neurotoxins, damage from head injuries, damage from depression, etc). Basically, you are your brain and this research doesn't seem like it would impact the longevity of brain function. Just my opinion! I think if it's good work, it will certainly be medically important, just maybe not for aging.
Wasn't there this saying that every 7~ years all your body's cells have been completely replaced by new ones? Are you telling me that's not true?
My daughter says "telomeres are a thing and they run out" and with her MSc in Biology I'll take her word for it.2 -
It's slightly different to compare research done in the modern era with research done in the 1500-1600s. There is a reason for standardized, organized, controlled research.1 -
It's slightly different to compare research done in the modern era with research done in the 1500-1600s. There is a reason for standardized, organized, controlled research.
A Nobel prize was given for the self research that proved that stomach ulcers could be caused by H. pylori.
2 -
stevencloser wrote: »GraceAnneU95 wrote: »This article doesn't make total sense. First, it seems that the work hasn't been peer reviewed yet, so the jury isn't out yet on if the paper is legit. Second, they don't really explain telomeres accurately. Only a few kinds of cells in the body replicate, and those are the ones with telomeres. During the process of DNA replication, a tiny bit of the end of chromosomes has to be "sacrificed" in order to finish, so there are these non-coding bits at the end to make sure nothing important is lost. Basically, after X number of replications, there's nothing left to protect the end of the chromosome and that cell line dies because it can't replicate anymore. I could see potential in this for maybe skin cells, but I think the most important cells in our body are our brain cells, and those can't replicate. So even if this telomere research could somehow help maintain our bodies, our brains would still experience the normal degradation that comes with age (memory loss, damage from neurotoxins, damage from head injuries, damage from depression, etc). Basically, you are your brain and this research doesn't seem like it would impact the longevity of brain function. Just my opinion! I think if it's good work, it will certainly be medically important, just maybe not for aging.
Wasn't there this saying that every 7~ years all your body's cells have been completely replaced by new ones? Are you telling me that's not true?stevencloser wrote: »GraceAnneU95 wrote: »This article doesn't make total sense. First, it seems that the work hasn't been peer reviewed yet, so the jury isn't out yet on if the paper is legit. Second, they don't really explain telomeres accurately. Only a few kinds of cells in the body replicate, and those are the ones with telomeres. During the process of DNA replication, a tiny bit of the end of chromosomes has to be "sacrificed" in order to finish, so there are these non-coding bits at the end to make sure nothing important is lost. Basically, after X number of replications, there's nothing left to protect the end of the chromosome and that cell line dies because it can't replicate anymore. I could see potential in this for maybe skin cells, but I think the most important cells in our body are our brain cells, and those can't replicate. So even if this telomere research could somehow help maintain our bodies, our brains would still experience the normal degradation that comes with age (memory loss, damage from neurotoxins, damage from head injuries, damage from depression, etc). Basically, you are your brain and this research doesn't seem like it would impact the longevity of brain function. Just my opinion! I think if it's good work, it will certainly be medically important, just maybe not for aging.
Wasn't there this saying that every 7~ years all your body's cells have been completely replaced by new ones? Are you telling me that's not true?
My daughter says "telomeres are a thing and they run out" and with her MSc in Biology I'll take her word for it.
Telomeres are regions at the end of chromosomes that protect coding DNA. Chromosomes get shorter every time DNA replicates in preparation for cell division, because of lagging strand replication. If we had circular DNA, like bacteria, we wouldn't need them.
Telomerase is an enzyme that lengthens telomeres. It's used to develop immortal somatic cell cultures, and may be activated by exercise.2 -
lithezebra wrote: »
Telomerase is an enzyme that lengthens telomeres. It's used to develop immortal somatic cell cultures, and may be activated by exercise.
Interesting. Paper about the relationship between telomere length and exercise: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2581416/1 -
CorneliusPhoton wrote: »lithezebra wrote: »
Telomerase is an enzyme that lengthens telomeres. It's used to develop immortal somatic cell cultures, and may be activated by exercise.
Interesting. Paper about the relationship between telomere length and exercise: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2581416/
If I read the research correctly little or too much exercise both are not ideal for longer telomers?
Thanks for the link.0 -
Yes, that's what I got out of it. A similar relationship with immune function.1
-
CorneliusPhoton wrote: »lithezebra wrote: »
Telomerase is an enzyme that lengthens telomeres. It's used to develop immortal somatic cell cultures, and may be activated by exercise.
Interesting. Paper about the relationship between telomere length and exercise: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2581416/
Wait, they did a base 10 transformation of the data because there wasn't a normal distribution but decided to write up the non-transformed data because it more closely represents biologically relevant data?
It sounds like they were massaging the data. And not well. I can't see that they controlled for other differences that would affect telomere length.1 -
The original story is more a commercial announcement than a scientifically peer-reviewed journal publication.
That said, it is being noted with interest in the investment community. If not as an equity opportunity, then as a line-item expenditure. If one had a few extra bucks and enjoyed even a small part of one's life, it makes perfectly good sense to take the treatment in the same hopes of long life and good health as we who are slogging through this journey together.0 -
lithezebra wrote: »
It's slightly different to compare research done in the modern era with research done in the 1500-1600s. There is a reason for standardized, organized, controlled research.
A Nobel prize was given for the self research that proved that stomach ulcers could be caused by H. pylori.
Barry Marshall and Robin Warren have conducted a lot of research on H pylori including multiple double-blind treatment/eradication studies. I really doubt that in the modern era of science that a nobel prize would be granted for single study of one researcher performing a study on themselves with no further research to support their claim.4 -
If this relationship is supported by more research it could support why weight loss involving high CO instead of low CI leads to net weight gains long term.
One can control CI for life but at some point CO is going to decrease. This may be why lower CI is proven to be life extending. Calories In management may trump Calories Out management for health and weight management.
Yesterday I saw a guy about 90 on his riding lawn mower. He as been moving all of his life selling gas and oil changes, etc. While there is a genetic factor in that family he has moved all of his life but nothing extreme.0 -
CorneliusPhoton wrote: »lithezebra wrote: »
Telomerase is an enzyme that lengthens telomeres. It's used to develop immortal somatic cell cultures, and may be activated by exercise.
Interesting. Paper about the relationship between telomere length and exercise: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2581416/
Wait, they did a base 10 transformation of the data because there wasn't a normal distribution but decided to write up the non-transformed data because it more closely represents biologically relevant data?
It sounds like they were massaging the data. And not well. I can't see that they controlled for other differences that would affect telomere length.
@auddii what is the area of your PhD studies?0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »CorneliusPhoton wrote: »lithezebra wrote: »
Telomerase is an enzyme that lengthens telomeres. It's used to develop immortal somatic cell cultures, and may be activated by exercise.
Interesting. Paper about the relationship between telomere length and exercise: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2581416/
Wait, they did a base 10 transformation of the data because there wasn't a normal distribution but decided to write up the non-transformed data because it more closely represents biologically relevant data?
It sounds like they were massaging the data. And not well. I can't see that they controlled for other differences that would affect telomere length.
@auddii what is the area of your PhD studies?
Human and Molecular Genetics.7 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »CorneliusPhoton wrote: »lithezebra wrote: »
Telomerase is an enzyme that lengthens telomeres. It's used to develop immortal somatic cell cultures, and may be activated by exercise.
Interesting. Paper about the relationship between telomere length and exercise: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2581416/
Wait, they did a base 10 transformation of the data because there wasn't a normal distribution but decided to write up the non-transformed data because it more closely represents biologically relevant data?
It sounds like they were massaging the data. And not well. I can't see that they controlled for other differences that would affect telomere length.
@auddii what is the area of your PhD studies?
Human and Molecular Genetics.
@auddii please stop poking your nose where it doesnt belong. Grown ups are talking...
3 -
lithezebra wrote: »
It's slightly different to compare research done in the modern era with research done in the 1500-1600s. There is a reason for standardized, organized, controlled research.
A Nobel prize was given for the self research that proved that stomach ulcers could be caused by H. pylori.
Barry Marshall and Robin Warren have conducted a lot of research on H pylori including multiple double-blind treatment/eradication studies. I really doubt that in the modern era of science that a nobel prize would be granted for single study of one researcher performing a study on themselves with no further research to support their claim.
No, but that was the seminal study. n=1 but with a (self) control.
I'm all about standardised, organised, controlled research and while there is value in some experiments on the self (optical theory owes a great bit to Newton poking blades into his eye....) the research in the OP is nothing short of a stunt and not research, IMHO.
1 -
EvgeniZyntx wrote: »lithezebra wrote: »
It's slightly different to compare research done in the modern era with research done in the 1500-1600s. There is a reason for standardized, organized, controlled research.
A Nobel prize was given for the self research that proved that stomach ulcers could be caused by H. pylori.
Barry Marshall and Robin Warren have conducted a lot of research on H pylori including multiple double-blind treatment/eradication studies. I really doubt that in the modern era of science that a nobel prize would be granted for single study of one researcher performing a study on themselves with no further research to support their claim.
No, but that was the seminal study. n=1 but with a (self) control.
I'm all about standardised, organised, controlled research and while there is value in some experiments on the self (optical theory owes a great bit to Newton poking blades into his eye....) the research in the OP is nothing short of a stunt and not research, IMHO.
Definitely agree.0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »CorneliusPhoton wrote: »lithezebra wrote: »
Telomerase is an enzyme that lengthens telomeres. It's used to develop immortal somatic cell cultures, and may be activated by exercise.
Interesting. Paper about the relationship between telomere length and exercise: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2581416/
Wait, they did a base 10 transformation of the data because there wasn't a normal distribution but decided to write up the non-transformed data because it more closely represents biologically relevant data?
It sounds like they were massaging the data. And not well. I can't see that they controlled for other differences that would affect telomere length.
@auddii what is the area of your PhD studies?
Human and Molecular Genetics.
WOW! that has to be an exciting field. As you know in a relative new field like working with telomeres there are so many unknowns today that all of the research will needed to be repeated as we learn more on the subject in general.
Pattern recognition is what I count on in all areas of life including medical research. You and I know peer reviews may be helpful in some established fields but often can cause more harm than good in areas like the studying of telomeres because of the biases/ignorance of those doing the reviewing.
What I find of interest personally and as one with an earned OD degree is how much is in our control over our gene expressions just by what we eat and think. Epigenetics are so interesting.
Are you working in the field of research today?
1 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »CorneliusPhoton wrote: »lithezebra wrote: »
Telomerase is an enzyme that lengthens telomeres. It's used to develop immortal somatic cell cultures, and may be activated by exercise.
Interesting. Paper about the relationship between telomere length and exercise: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2581416/
Wait, they did a base 10 transformation of the data because there wasn't a normal distribution but decided to write up the non-transformed data because it more closely represents biologically relevant data?
It sounds like they were massaging the data. And not well. I can't see that they controlled for other differences that would affect telomere length.
@auddii what is the area of your PhD studies?
Human and Molecular Genetics.
WOW! that has to be an exciting field. As you know in a relative new field like working with telomeres there are so many unknowns today that all of the research will needed to be repeated as we learn more on the subject in general.
Pattern recognition is what I count on in all areas of life including medical research. You and I know peer reviews may be helpful in some established fields but often can cause more harm than good in areas like the studying of telomeres because of the biases/ignorance of those doing the reviewing.
What I find of interest personally and as one with an earned OD degree is how much is in our control over our gene expressions just by what we eat and think. Epigenetics are so interesting.
Are you working in the field of research today?
You're an optometrist?
I don't do my own research; I wasn't a fan of working at the bench and grant writing. I work in the regulation of research and get to read most of the research going on at our institution. I enjoy it much better; I get to read a very broad range of research which I find much more interesting.1
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions