Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

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: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 02 2016, @03:42PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 02 2016, @03:42PM (#383165)

    So replacing the population of civ A with civ B who never discovered the wheel, means civ A will collapse.

    Not necessarily. Neandertals are thought to have picked up techniques like jewelry and makeup from their interactions with homo sapiens, and would likely have never come up with them on their own. During the replacement process, unless you wait until civ A has already completely collapsed before civ B moves in (which then isn't a replacement via immigration, its a new civilization settling on old ruins), you have a period where its both civ A + B, and during this time civ B picks up many of civ A's techniques, allowing civ A to continue on if in diminished form. It is in fact this exact process which has made America great and caused it to thrive, adding and integrating many other cultures rather than stagnating as a single homogenous group. The trick is that you have to start integrating civ B while civ A is not already in massive decline, otherwise civ B can "destroy" civ A by replacing them rather than integrating.

  • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 02 2016, @09:14PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 02 2016, @09:14PM (#383343)

    The trick is that you have to start integrating civ B while civ A is not already in massive decline, otherwise civ B can "destroy" civ A by replacing them rather than integrating.

    that sounds familiar...

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 03 2016, @01:33AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 03 2016, @01:33AM (#383448)

    Well these savages have picked up explosive, beheading and AK-47 techniques.