Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 10 submissions in the queue.
posted by cmn32480 on Tuesday August 02 2016, @11:23AM   Printer-friendly
from the it-works-for-vampires dept.

Apparently, Peter Thiel Is Very, Very Interested in Young People's Blood

According to the article, ...

More than anything, Peter Thiel, the billionaire technology investor and Donald Trump supporter, wants to find a way to escape death. ... if there's one thing that really excites Thiel, it's the prospect of having younger people's blood transfused into his own veins. ... according to Thiel, it's a potential biological Fountain of Youth - the closest thing science has discovered to an anti-ageing panacea.

[...] After decades languishing on the fringes, it's recently started getting attention from mainstream researchers, with multiple clinical trials underway in humans in the U.S. and even more advanced studies in China and Korea.

[...] In Monterey, California, about 120 miles from San Francisco, a company called Ambrosia recently commenced one of the trials. Titled "Young Donor Plasma Transfusion and Age-Related Biomarkers," it has a simple protocol: Healthy participants aged 35 and older get a transfusion of blood plasma from donors under 25, and researchers monitor their blood over the next two years for molecular indicators of health and ageing. The study is patient-funded; participants, who range in age from late 30s through 80s, must pay $8,000 to take part, and live in or travel to Monterey for treatments and follow-up assessments.

I thought I would bring this development to the attention of the Soylent News community. I also have a question. The article claims that the practice is known as parabiosis. But Wikipedia says "parabiosis is a class of techniques in which two living organisms are joined together surgically and develop single, shared physiological systems, such as a shared circulatory system." This definition seems to include the relevant 1950s rat experiments. But I believe it does not cover the Monterey experiment, nor the kinds of human treatment that Thiel and others are seeking. Am I right about this? And if so, is there better word to use?

Also, feel free to comment any fictional examples you know of. Did Montgomery Burns ever partake, for example?


[Continues...]

Want to stay/get younger? Inject plasma from a younger person...

Now a startup has launched a "clinical trial" to test the antiaging benefits of such treatment...but it's pay-per-view. Writing in Science today, Jocelyn Kaiser reports on the ethical, and other, aspects of this project. From her article, "Young blood antiaging trial raises questions":

[...] The company, Ambrosia in Monterey, California, plans to charge participants $8000 for lab tests and a one-time treatment with young plasma. The volunteers don't have to be sick or even particularly aged--the trial is open to anyone 35 and older. Karmazin notes that the study passed ethical review and argues that it's not that unusual to charge people to participate in clinical trials.

To some ethicists and researchers, however, the trial raises red flags, both for its cost to participants and for a design that they say is unlikely to deliver much science. "There's just no clinical evidence [that the treatment will be beneficial], and you're basically abusing people's trust and the public excitement around this," says neuroscientist Tony Wyss-Coray of Stanford University in Palo Alto, California, who led the 2014 young plasma study in mice. [In which injecting old mice with the plasma portion of blood from young mice seemed to improve the elderly rodents' memory and ability to learn.]

[...]

To bioethicist Leigh Turner at the University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, the study brings to mind a growing number of scientifically dubious trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov by private, for-profit stem cell clinics. The presence of such trials in the database confers "undeserved legitimacy," he says.

The scientific design of the trial is drawing concerns as well. "I don't see how it will be in any way informative or convincing," says aging biologist Matt Kaeberlein of the University of Washington, Seattle. The participants won't necessarily be elderly, making it hard to see any effects, and there are no well-accepted biomarkers of aging in blood, he says. "If you're interested in science," Wyss-Coray adds, why doesn't such a large trial include a placebo arm? Karmazin says he can't expect people to pay knowing they may get a placebo. With physiological measurements taken before and after treatment, each person will serve as their own control, he explains.


[Ed Note: The second sub was added about 15 minutes after the first story went live on the main page.]

Original Submission

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by takyon on Tuesday August 02 2016, @08:33PM

    by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Tuesday August 02 2016, @08:33PM (#383317) Journal

    Great, so you don't think that global population will plateau (without life extension, it may even peak and decline), and you think that life extension is unsustainable (people will still die of non-aging causes, and others will refuse life extension or kill themselves).

    What are you going to do if these therapies pan out and enable indefinite, youthful, healthy lives at a low cost? Are you going to ban them? Good luck with that. You want to start a war or two and trim the population a bit? Better not involve the nuclear powers.

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Tuesday August 02 2016, @08:44PM

    by Joe Desertrat (2454) on Tuesday August 02 2016, @08:44PM (#383324)

    Great, so you don't think that global population will plateau

    It may or may not. I'm saying we are already past the point where continued growth of the human population makes this a better planet to live on. It may be my age, but I do not see us gaining as much as we are losing, even with all the toys technology brings us.

    • (Score: 2, Disagree) by takyon on Tuesday August 02 2016, @08:56PM

      by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Tuesday August 02 2016, @08:56PM (#383332) Journal

      I actually do think that a few more billion people could improve things. It means more cultural output and greater potential audiences for creative work. It means a larger pool of scientists and engineers that are doing research, some of which might help the growth to be sustainable (agriculture, solar/fusion, etc.)

      It means more global economic output and a larger number of billionaires, some of whom will fund science and other big projects that might not be attempted otherwise.

      In general, it means a greater number of ideas being thought up and shared (and the proportion of Internet users is rising).

      Having a population at 12 billion rather than 3 billion, along with some of the other changes we've seen, could be what is needed to save the planet. If that isn't the case, then we will see a "correction".

      --
      [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 03 2016, @12:42AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 03 2016, @12:42AM (#383426)

        Population rates are already locked in. World population is going to plateau at 11 billion so you will get your few extra billion ... Almost all In Africa.
        Amazing Hans Rosling video will make it all clear but skip to minute 20 if in a hurry
        https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FACK2knC08E [youtube.com]

      • (Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Thursday August 04 2016, @08:43PM

        by Joe Desertrat (2454) on Thursday August 04 2016, @08:43PM (#384232)

        There's a world beyond the internet, and much of it is being trampled and destroyed by the mania for growth.