Oisin Biotechnology is a leader in removing senescent cells for antiaging. They have shown p16 positive senescent cells can be killed on demand in both in vitro and in vivo environments. Now they have started on experiments that will show improvements in both healthspan and lifespan in model organisms from mice to primates. And then, everything changes.
The Oisin Biotechnologies staff are currently more than six months into a long-term mouse lifespan study, using cohorts in which the gene therapy is deployed against either p16, p53, or both p16 and p53, plus a control group injected with phosphate buffered saline (PBS). The study commenced more than six months ago with mice that were at the time two years (104 weeks) old.
So far half of the control group mice are dead but only 10% of the mice with both p16 and p53 gene therapy treatment are dead.
There is a 28 page presentation of the Oisin Biotechnologies work.
The Methuselah Foundation is trying to make 90 the new 50 by 2030.
Brian Wang is a Futurist Thought Leader and a popular Science blogger with 1 million readers per month. His blog Nextbigfuture.com is ranked #1 Science News Blog. It covers many disruptive technology and trends including Space, Robotics, Artificial Intelligence, Medicine, Anti-aging Biotechnology, and Nanotechnology.
Known for identifying cutting edge technologies, he is currently a Co-Founder of a startup and fundraiser for high potential early-stage companies. He is the Head of Research for Allocations for deep technology investments and an Angel Investor at Space Angels.
A frequent speaker at corporations, he has been a TEDx speaker, a Singularity University speaker and guest at numerous interviews for radio and podcasts. He is open to public speaking and advising engagements.
Even if this does not work exactly as planned in humans, it still could be a great way to fight cancer, not that I don’t think it could work in aging.
Yes it is exciting. Just let’s not forget that mice are not people and what works for them might not work for us. After all, some regular human foods are outright poison for many animals.
Well, you don’t have to treat ageing. You could target senescent -cell related chronic inflammatory syndrome or some other fancy name. It is not limited only to old people. You can get some form from radiation, chemical poisoning and such.
It seems OISIN has solved the immune response problem. The plasmids are encased in peptides which don’t usually trigger immune response. The plasmids don’t get inserted in the DNA they rather stay in the cells for short time and if there is an active pathway they can amplify or inhibit it. That’s how they tarkdeg p16+p53. The nuclear DNA should be intact.
Yes it is intended for the people already alive. IMHO, If it works, there will be a long way until it reaches FDA approval and mass market, however. So in 5 to 10 years we have good chances to have it for the general population. In a couple of years it could be available to humans on limited experimental basis.
Are they going to open a lab in Mexico (or somewhere else the FDA doesn’t have jurisdiction) so people can get the treatments this decade?
To speed things along, surely there are some aging penitentiary lifers willing to give this a go for a fair trade.
For those of us already past the half century mark; I think we’ll be lucky if any of these make a difference in how long we live. For our children and grandchildren – they will see the results – assuming there are any. As Homer 502a said a bit more elliptically, yes it is for the living, they are testing with middle aged mice
Plus the FDA doesn’t even consider ageing to be a disease or ailment of any kind, so getting any legitimate anti- ageing treatment approved and to market is a regulatory nightmare.
From what little I have heard, it may not be very long, relatively speaking, before it is available. It is tended to be for both future AND current generations. It still has some flaws to be ironed out though. They inject into the body modified plasmids (yes the thing from the Bioshock video games actually exists) that contain p16 and p53, and the plasmids then insert them into the DNA of existing cells. The problem that I am aware of is that while many of the plasmids do function successfully, many (most?) are intercepted by the immune system as foreign bodies. The modified cells of the body aren’t treated any differently though. Oisin apparently considers this immune thing problematic, though I am not sure why, other than for efficiency concerns. Perhaps they are concerned it may cause temporary swelling or other uncomfortable immune responses in humans, at least until the plasmids either succeed in their function or are removed by the immune system. Maybe there are other issues, I don’t know, but it seems like a very minor thing for such a remarkably effective treatment.
That’s the part that’s really exciting — a segment of the study involved mice that were already middle aged (2 years old). Six months later, half of the control group but only 10% of the treated group had died.
If it works out that’s nice for future generations, but this isn’t a treatment for people who are already alive, is it?
Even if this does not work exactly as planned in humans it still could be a great way to fight cancer not that I don’t think it could work in aging.
Yes it is exciting. Just let’s not forget that mice are not people and what works for them might not work for us. After all some regular human foods are outright poison for many animals.
Well you don’t have to treat ageing. You could target senescent -cell related chronic inflammatory syndrome or some other fancy name. It is not limited only to old people. You can get some form from radiation chemical poisoning and such.
It seems OISIN has solved the immune response problem. The plasmids are encased in peptides which don’t usually trigger immune response. The plasmids don’t get inserted in the DNA they rather stay in the cells for short time and if there is an active pathway they can amplify or inhibit it. That’s how they tarkdeg p16+p53. The nuclear DNA should be intact.
Yes it is intended for the people already alive. IMHO If it works there will be a long way until it reaches FDA approval and mass market however. So in 5 to 10 years we have good chances to have it for the general population. In a couple of years it could be available to humans on limited experimental basis.
Are they going to open a lab in Mexico (or somewhere else the FDA doesn’t have jurisdiction) so people can get the treatments this decade?
To speed things along surely there are some aging penitentiary lifers willing to give this a go for a fair trade.
For those of us already past the half century mark; I think we’ll be lucky if any of these make a difference in how long we live. For our children and grandchildren – they will see the results – assuming there are any. As Homer 502a said a bit more elliptically yes it is for the living they are testing with middle aged mice
Plus the FDA doesn’t even consider ageing to be a disease or ailment of any kind so getting any legitimate anti- ageing treatment approved and to market is a regulatory nightmare.
From what little I have heard it may not be very long relatively speaking before it is available. It is tended to be for both future AND current generations. It still has some flaws to be ironed out though. They inject into the body modified plasmids (yes the thing from the Bioshock video games actually exists) that contain p16 and p53 and the plasmids then insert them into the DNA of existing cells. The problem that I am aware of is that while many of the plasmids do function successfully many (most?) are intercepted by the immune system as foreign bodies. The modified cells of the body aren’t treated any differently though. Oisin apparently considers this immune thing problematic though I am not sure why other than for efficiency concerns. Perhaps they are concerned it may cause temporary swelling or other uncomfortable immune responses in humans at least until the plasmids either succeed in their function or are removed by the immune system. Maybe there are other issues I don’t know but it seems like a very minor thing for such a remarkably effective treatment.
That’s the part that’s really exciting — a segment of the study involved mice that were already middle aged (2 years old). Six months later half of the control group but only 10{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} of the treated group had died.
If it works out that’s nice for future generations but this isn’t a treatment for people who are already alive is it?
Don’t know how to edit. I misspelled: Resveratrol.
There are things which help remove senescent cells available now: Tocotrienols and Quercetin. I am sure they don’t do anything as dramatic, but they should help.
Even if this will not be available for a while, there are still approaches that might work to some degree. You can try to prevent cells from becoming senescent cells in the first place with: antioxidants, extending telomeres, fighting diseases, getting optimal nutrition (unfortunately we don’t know what that is, but we certainly know some things that are poor food choices), getting enough and regular sleep, controlling blood sugar, fasting/HIIT exercises to recycle mitochondria, avoiding toxins: lead (kills over 412,000 Americans every year via high blood pressure and possibly other ways), tobacco (kills 480,000 Americans every year from carcinogens, respiratory damage, and free radicals mostly damaging the cardiovascular system), asbestos, radon gas, some artificial flavors, colors, preservatives, automobile exhaust especially diesel exhaust, coal power plant exhaust (less of a concern in first world countries, but still has effects), household cleaners like ammonia, rat feces vapors (believe it or not they can cause lung cancer), some plastics exposure might be bad (though, evidence is far from conclusive), some herbicides, fungicides, insecticides, fire retardants, paint/epoxy vapors, lacquer vapors, some mold/mildew emanations, gasoline vapors, lighter fluid, and other chemicals, some medications/illicit drugs. For antioxidants, I think you have to go with mega doses of some to get maximum benefit. There are many different environments within the body, so a number of different antioxidants are needed: the usual vitamins plus, Alpha Lipoic acid, NAC, lycopene, lutein, Zeaxanthin, Astaxanthin, the carotenes (from foods like brightly colored vegetables and fruits), and grape seed extract and/or Reversatrol. You also want to boost some of the natural antioxidant production within your body like SOD. There are few options when it comes to telomere extension. Cycloastragenol works, but does not effect all tissues equally. Still, it appears to help the telomers
See Gary Hudson’s (CEO of Oisin) reply to comments over at the Fightaging.org article, Oisin will be moving their p53 treatment into clinical trials for cancer in 2019. The fusogenic lipposome delivery vehicle is already being used in a phase 1 cancer trial (siRNA) at MD Anderson: https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/treatment/clinical-trials/intervention/epha2-targeting-dopc-encapsulated-sirna
Don’t know how to edit. I misspelled: Resveratrol.
There are things which help remove senescent cells available now: Tocotrienols and Quercetin. I am sure they don’t do anything as dramatic but they should help.
Even if this will not be available for a while there are still approaches that might work to some degree. You can try to prevent cells from becoming senescent cells in the first place with: antioxidants extending telomeres fighting diseases getting optimal nutrition (unfortunately we don’t know what that is but we certainly know some things that are poor food choices) getting enough and regular sleep controlling blood sugar fasting/HIIT exercises to recycle mitochondria avoiding toxins: lead (kills over 412000 Americans every year via high blood pressure and possibly other ways) tobacco (kills 480000 Americans every year from carcinogens respiratory damage and free radicals mostly damaging the cardiovascular system) asbestos radon gas some artificial flavors colors preservatives automobile exhaust especially diesel exhaust coal power plant exhaust (less of a concern in first world countries but still has effects) household cleaners like ammonia rat feces vapors (believe it or not they can cause lung cancer) some plastics exposure might be bad (though evidence is far from conclusive) some herbicides fungicides insecticides fire retardants paint/epoxy vapors lacquer vapors some mold/mildew emanations gasoline vapors lighter fluid and other chemicals some medications/illicit drugs.For antioxidants I think you have to go with mega doses of some to get maximum benefit. There are many different environments within the body so a number of different antioxidants are needed: the usual vitamins plus Alpha Lipoic acid NAC lycopene lutein Zeaxanthin Astaxanthin the carotenes (from foods like brightly colored vegetables and fruits) and grape seed extract and/or Reversatrol. You also want to boost some of the natural antioxidant production within your body like SOD. There are few options when it comes to telomere extension. Cycloastragenol works but does not effect all tissues equally. Still it appears to help the telomers in the immune system and likely the cardio
See Gary Hudson’s (CEO of Oisin) reply to comments over at the Fightaging.org article Oisin will be moving their p53 treatment into clinical trials for cancer in 2019.The fusogenic lipposome delivery vehicle is already being used in a phase 1 cancer trial (siRNA) at MD Anderson:https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/treatment/clinical-trials/intervention/epha2-targeting-dopc-encapsulated-sirna
Fasting (Water only.) seems to have as good a success in this area as any proven drug therapy. Problem is it’s free…Pharma hates that. Don’t eat for three days and send me $100.
Don’t forget the the “Right to Try” Act has been approved. Very hopeful once the regs are worked out.
Fasting (Water only.) seems to have as good a success in this area as any proven drug therapy. Problem is it’s free…Pharma hates that. Don’t eat for three days and send me $100.
Don’t forget the the Right to Try”” Act has been approved. Very hopeful once the regs are worked out.”””
All of the mice treated (as well as the controls) started treatment at >105 weeks of age.
The treatment DOES NOT integrate into the genome of targeted cells. The p16 and p53 targets are not the gene itself, but the promoter for those genes. The plasmids are contained in lipid nanoparticles, which protect them from immune surveillance. The referenced PDF explains the treatment in detail.
No, the treatment is given to non-genetically-engineered mice.
That’s not correct; this is a treatment administered to wild-type mice, unlike the transgene approach that was used by the Mayo Clinic researcher and presented in their Feb 2016 Nature paper.
Speaking from experience, the 5 to 10 year estimate is more like 15 to 20 years. My wife is likely to die of Huntington’s Disease because a gene silencing therapy that was effective in animal models over 10 years ago has only just passed safety trials (with flying colors and signs of effectiveness in humans) — hence qualifies for “Right to Try”. However, the tort risk is _still_ too high for deep pockets pharmaceutical companies to permit access outside their limited clinical trials. By the time* efficacy trials are through, placing the company under the protection judicial precedent, she’ll likely be so far gone that it may be cruel to extend her life even with substantial reversal of symptoms. The judiciary, by, in effect, nullifying law, have likely killed my wife by figuring out ways around contracts by which patients like her would protect pharmaceutical companies and prescribing physicians from being sued. Her situation isn’t too far removed from the senesce faced by all but the youngest cohort of Boomers. It may sound like satire to say it, but for most Boomers, they may stand a better chance of long healthy life if Washington DC is nuked.
Speaking from experience with “Right to Try”: Speaking from experience, the 5 to 10 year estimate is more like 15 to 20 years. My wife is likely to die of Huntington’s Disease because a gene silencing therapy that was effective in animal models over 10 years ago has only just passed safety trials (with flying colors and signs of effectiveness in humans) — hence qualifies for “Right to Try”. However, the tort risk is _still_ too high for deep pockets pharmaceutical companies to permit access outside their limited clinical trials. The judiciary, by, in effect, nullifying law, have likely killed my wife by figuring out ways around contracts that would protect pharmaceutical companies and prescribing physicians from being sued. By the time* efficacy trials are through, placing the company under the protection judicial precedent, she’ll likely be so far gone that it may be cruel to extend her life even with substantial reversal of symptoms. Her situation isn’t too far removed from the senesce faced by all but the youngest cohort of Boomers. It may sound like satire to say it, but for most Boomers, they may stand a better chance of long healthy life if Washington DC is nuked.
The article says that the mice were genetically engineered to drive an inducible suicide gene using the p16 promoter. Implying that it would not work for people already alive unless they have that particular suicide gene.
The mice had to be genetically engineered for the drugs to work in the first place. You can’t just use this treatment on a wild type mouse, or human. Of course, that doesn’t stop the basic approach being developed so it DOES work on wild mice (or humans), just that would be another whole research project on top of this one.
All of the mice treated (as well as the controls) started treatment at >105 weeks of age.
The treatment DOES NOT integrate into the genome of targeted cells. The p16 and p53 targets are not the gene itself but the promoter for those genes. The plasmids are contained in lipid nanoparticles which protect them from immune surveillance. The referenced PDF explains the treatment in detail.
No the treatment is given to non-genetically-engineered mice.
That’s not correct; this is a treatment administered to wild-type mice unlike the transgene approach that was used by the Mayo Clinic researcher and presented in their Feb 2016 Nature paper.
Speaking from experience the 5 to 10 year estimate is more like 15 to 20 years. My wife is likely to die of Huntington’s Disease because a gene silencing therapy that was effective in animal models over 10 years ago has only just passed safety trials (with flying colors and signs of effectiveness in humans) — hence qualifies for Right to Try””. However”” the tort risk is _still_ too high for deep pockets pharmaceutical companies to permit access outside their limited clinical trials. By the time* efficacy trials are through placing the company under the protection judicial precedent she’ll likely be so far gone that it may be cruel to extend her life even with substantial reversal of symptoms. The judiciary by in effect nullifying law have likely killed my wife by figuring out ways around contracts by which patients like her would protect pharmaceutical companies and prescribing physicians from being sued. Her situation isn’t too far removed from the senesce faced by all but the youngest cohort of Boomers. It may sound like satire to say it but for most Boomers”” they may stand a better chance of long healthy life if Washington DC is nuked.”””
Speaking from experience with Right to Try””: Speaking from experience”””” the 5 to 10 year estimate is more like 15 to 20 years. My wife is likely to die of Huntington’s Disease because a gene silencing therapy that was effective in animal models over 10 years ago has only just passed safety trials (with flying colors and signs of effectiveness in humans) — hence qualifies for “”””Right to Try””””. However”” the tort risk is _still_ too high for deep pockets pharmaceutical companies to permit access outside their limited clinical trials. The judiciary by in effect nullifying law have likely killed my wife by figuring out ways around contracts that would protect pharmaceutical companies and prescribing physicians from being sued. By the time* efficacy trials are through placing the company under the protection judicial precedent she’ll likely be so far gone that it may be cruel to extend her life even with substantial reversal of symptoms.Her situation isn’t too far removed from the senesce faced by all but the youngest cohort of Boomers. It may sound like satire to say it but for most Boomers”” they may stand a better chance of long healthy life if Washington DC is nuked.”””
The article says that the mice were genetically engineered to drive an inducible suicide gene using the p16 promoter.Implying that it would not work for people already alive unless they have that particular suicide gene.
The mice had to be genetically engineered for the drugs to work in the first place.You can’t just use this treatment on a wild type mouse or human.Of course that doesn’t stop the basic approach being developed so it DOES work on wild mice (or humans) just that would be another whole research project on top of this one.
Thanks for the clarification Gary, that was just from my (not super accurate) memory. Also I can’t seem to view PDFs on this ancient phone. Perhaps I should not open my mouth in such situations hahaha.
Thanks for the clarification Gary that was just from my (not super accurate) memory. Also I can’t seem to view PDFs on this ancient phone. Perhaps I should not open my mouth in such situations hahaha.
Catbert?? Are you using ADAM as a nome de guerre?? And for your edification. http://dilbert.com/strip/2006-04-15
Never mind post Nuclear war cockroaches. The human world is about to taken over by immortal mice. Be warned and get a cat.
Catbert?? Are you using ADAM as a nome de guerre?? And for your edification. http://dilbert.com/strip/2006-04-15
Never mind post Nuclear war cockroaches. The human world is about to taken over by immortal mice. Be warned and get a cat.
And in that case then I want to say this is excellent news. Thanks for the update Gary. Now how to change my vote on this article from “Happy” to “Excited”?
I was quoting from the final slide image in the article. But if you are saying that NBF has once again mixed up two different articles into one then I wouldn’t be too surprised.
And in that case then I want to say this is excellent news. Thanks for the update Gary.Now how to change my vote on this article from Happy”” to “”””Excited””””?”””
I was quoting from the final slide image in the article. But if you are saying that NBF has once again mixed up two different articles into one then I wouldn’t be too surprised.
You need to read the entire PDF. The slide above is taken from the presentation’s introductory slides, showing the PREVIOUS work reported by Mayo in 2016 in Nature. This was a TRANSGENIC mouse model which was a proof of concept that killing senescent cells has health and lifespan benefits. Oisin employs THERAPEUTIC lipid nanoparticle that is administered (in the case of the mice) as a tail vein injection. Our mice are normal wild-type BL/6 that have not been genetically modified. The PDF is very clear on this point.
Gary, from this very web page it says: “The mice were genetically engineered to drive an inducible suicide gene using the p16 promoters.” I would like what you say (“the treatment is given to non-genetically-engineered mice”) to be true, but can you address the above point?
You need to read the entire PDF. The slide above is taken from the presentation’s introductory slides showing the PREVIOUS work reported by Mayo in 2016 in Nature. This was a TRANSGENIC mouse model which was a proof of concept that killing senescent cells has health and lifespan benefits. Oisin employs THERAPEUTIC lipid nanoparticle that is administered (in the case of the mice) as a tail vein injection. Our mice are normal wild-type BL/6 that have not been genetically modified. The PDF is very clear on this point.
Gary from this very web page it says: The mice were genetically engineered to drive an inducible suicide gene using the p16 promoters.”” I would like what you say (“”””the treatment is given to non-genetically-engineered mice””””) to be true”””” but can you address the above point?”””
I’m not sure it directly applies. This is removing senescent (dying) cells. Cancer is the opposite – cells that stay young and divide too much. But if you can select one, maybe you can change it to select the other.
Reversatrol seems like a Freudian slip :-)I’m surprised you didn’t mention calorie restriction and exercise. How about a daily aspirin to reduce inflammation?
I’m not sure it directly applies. This is removing senescent (dying) cells. Cancer is the opposite – cells that stay young and divide too much. But if you can select one maybe you can change it to select the other.
Sorry to hear about your wife. I agree 5-10 years is optimistic. Gary has said on the fightaging website (linked to above) that they have to wait for all the mice to die before they can finalize the report, then submit it to a peer-reviewed journal. Then we’d probably want to test it on a larger mammal closer to human physiology, that could easily take another 10 years, then go thru the regulatory process of human testing, then roll-out to general human populations. Even then it would probably be first for people with specific ailments before it would be given as a general treatment for healthy (but aging) people. Would insurance pay for something that everybody takes for the rest of their life? That would be a fixed cost across their entire customer base, we would end up paying for it one way or another, so then the question is, how expensive is this treatment?
Reversatrol seems like a Freudian slip 🙂 I’m surprised you didn’t mention calorie restriction and exercise. How about a daily aspirin to reduce inflammation?
Sorry to hear about your wife.I agree 5-10 years is optimistic. Gary has said on the fightaging website (linked to above) that they have to wait for all the mice to die before they can finalize the report then submit it to a peer-reviewed journal.Then we’d probably want to test it on a larger mammal closer to human physiology that could easily take another 10 years then go thru the regulatory process of human testing then roll-out to general human populations. Even then it would probably be first for people with specific ailments before it would be given as a general treatment for healthy (but aging) people. Would insurance pay for something that everybody takes for the rest of their life? That would be a fixed cost across their entire customer base we would end up paying for it one way or another so then the question is how expensive is this treatment?
Fasting is a form of calorie restriction without it being constant hunger for the rest of your miserable life. I would not wish calorie restriction on anyone. Also, if you are 90 lb, and get a serious illness your body has no fat to fall back on, if your digestion is compromised. And this makes a difference. Older people with a few extra pounds live longer than the skinny older people. Maybe that is due to reduced likelihood of injury during falls instead, or it might just be that extra storage to get them through an illness. Probably both. But you can’t have calorie restriction and a few extra pounds…that is mutually exclusive. I mentioned HIIT exercises. That is “high intensity interval training” which has been shown to do a much better job of recycling mitochondria than the usual aerobic exercise. Strength exercises are good too especially core stuff. That reduces falls and lifting injuries. Some people don’t react well to aspirin. Fortunately, it does not bother me, and I do take it once in the morning and once at night. There is also a risk of bleeding problems if you get cut or something. But if you do the rest…I suspect inflammation will be greatly reduced. That is sorta the point. Most of the inflammation is caused by these senescent cells. If we do a ton of stuff to reduce their accumulation, we should also be reducing inflammation as well.
In the article there is a link: “There is a 28 page presentation of the Oisin Biotechnologies work.” Go to page 16 and beyond. That explains their anticancer approach.
Fasting is a form of calorie restriction without it being constant hunger for the rest of your miserable life. I would not wish calorie restriction on anyone. Also if you are 90 lb and get a serious illness your body has no fat to fall back on if your digestion is compromised. And this makes a difference. Older people with a few extra pounds live longer than the skinny older people. Maybe that is due to reduced likelihood of injury during falls instead or it might just be that extra storage to get them through an illness. Probably both. But you can’t have calorie restriction and a few extra pounds…that is mutually exclusive. I mentioned HIIT exercises. That is high intensity interval training”” which has been shown to do a much better job of recycling mitochondria than the usual aerobic exercise. Strength exercises are good too especially core stuff. That reduces falls and lifting injuries.Some people don’t react well to aspirin. Fortunately”” it does not bother me and I do take it once in the morning and once at night. There is also a risk of bleeding problems if you get cut or something. But if you do the rest…I suspect inflammation will be greatly reduced. That is sorta the point. Most of the inflammation is caused by these senescent cells. If we do a ton of stuff to reduce their accumulation”” we should also be reducing inflammation as well.”””
In the article there is a link: There is a 28 page presentation of the Oisin Biotechnologies work.”” Go to page 16 and beyond. That explains their anticancer approach.”””
Fasting is a form of calorie restriction without it being constant hunger for the rest of your miserable life. I would not wish calorie restriction on anyone. Also, if you are 90 lb, and get a serious illness your body has no fat to fall back on, if your digestion is compromised. And this makes a difference. Older people with a few extra pounds live longer than the skinny older people. Maybe that is due to reduced likelihood of injury during falls instead, or it might just be that extra storage to get them through an illness. Probably both. But you can’t have calorie restriction and a few extra pounds…that is mutually exclusive.
I mentioned HIIT exercises. That is “high intensity interval training” which has been shown to do a much better job of recycling mitochondria than the usual aerobic exercise. Strength exercises are good too especially core stuff. That reduces falls and lifting injuries.
Some people don’t react well to aspirin. Fortunately, it does not bother me, and I do take it once in the morning and once at night. There is also a risk of bleeding problems if you get cut or something. But if you do the rest…I suspect inflammation will be greatly reduced. That is sorta the point. Most of the inflammation is caused by these senescent cells. If we do a ton of stuff to reduce their accumulation, we should also be reducing inflammation as well.
In the article there is a link: “There is a 28 page presentation of the Oisin Biotechnologies work.” Go to page 16 and beyond. That explains their anticancer approach.
Sorry to hear about your wife.
I agree 5-10 years is optimistic.
Gary has said on the fightaging website (linked to above) that they have to wait for all the mice to die before they can finalize the report, then submit it to a peer-reviewed journal.
Then we’d probably want to test it on a larger mammal closer to human physiology, that could easily take another 10 years, then go thru the regulatory process of human testing, then roll-out to general human populations. Even then it would probably be first for people with specific ailments before it would be given as a general treatment for healthy (but aging) people. Would insurance pay for something that everybody takes for the rest of their life? That would be a fixed cost across their entire customer base, we would end up paying for it one way or another, so then the question is, how expensive is this treatment?
Reversatrol seems like a Freudian slip 🙂
I’m surprised you didn’t mention calorie restriction and exercise. How about a daily aspirin to reduce inflammation?
I’m not sure it directly applies. This is removing senescent (dying) cells. Cancer is the opposite – cells that stay young and divide too much. But if you can select one, maybe you can change it to select the other.
You need to read the entire PDF. The slide above is taken from the presentation’s introductory slides, showing the PREVIOUS work reported by Mayo in 2016 in Nature. This was a TRANSGENIC mouse model which was a proof of concept that killing senescent cells has health and lifespan benefits. Oisin employs THERAPEUTIC lipid nanoparticle that is administered (in the case of the mice) as a tail vein injection. Our mice are normal wild-type BL/6 that have not been genetically modified. The PDF is very clear on this point.
Gary, from this very web page it says: “The mice were genetically engineered to drive an inducible suicide gene using the p16 promoters.”
I would like what you say (“the treatment is given to non-genetically-engineered mice”) to be true, but can you address the above point?
And in that case then I want to say this is excellent news. Thanks for the update Gary.
Now how to change my vote on this article from “Happy” to “Excited”?
I was quoting from the final slide image in the article. But if you are saying that NBF has once again mixed up two different articles into one then I wouldn’t be too surprised.
Catbert?? Are you using ADAM as a nome de guerre?? And for your edification. http://dilbert.com/strip/2006-04-15
Never mind post Nuclear war cockroaches. The human world is about to taken over by immortal mice. Be warned and get a cat.
Thanks for the clarification Gary, that was just from my (not super accurate) memory. Also I can’t seem to view PDFs on this ancient phone. Perhaps I should not open my mouth in such situations hahaha.
All of the mice treated (as well as the controls) started treatment at >105 weeks of age.
The treatment DOES NOT integrate into the genome of targeted cells. The p16 and p53 targets are not the gene itself, but the promoter for those genes. The plasmids are contained in lipid nanoparticles, which protect them from immune surveillance. The referenced PDF explains the treatment in detail.
No, the treatment is given to non-genetically-engineered mice.
That’s not correct; this is a treatment administered to wild-type mice, unlike the transgene approach that was used by the Mayo Clinic researcher and presented in their Feb 2016 Nature paper.
Speaking from experience, the 5 to 10 year estimate is more like 15 to 20 years. My wife is likely to die of Huntington’s Disease because a gene silencing therapy that was effective in animal models over 10 years ago has only just passed safety trials (with flying colors and signs of effectiveness in humans) — hence qualifies for “Right to Try”. However, the tort risk is _still_ too high for deep pockets pharmaceutical companies to permit access outside their limited clinical trials.
By the time* efficacy trials are through, placing the company under the protection judicial precedent, she’ll likely be so far gone that it may be cruel to extend her life even with substantial reversal of symptoms. The judiciary, by, in effect, nullifying law, have likely killed my wife by figuring out ways around contracts by which patients like her would protect pharmaceutical companies and prescribing physicians from being sued.
Her situation isn’t too far removed from the senesce faced by all but the youngest cohort of Boomers. It may sound like satire to say it, but for most Boomers, they may stand a better chance of long healthy life if Washington DC is nuked.
Speaking from experience with “Right to Try”:
Speaking from experience, the 5 to 10 year estimate is more like 15 to 20 years. My wife is likely to die of Huntington’s Disease because a gene silencing therapy that was effective in animal models over 10 years ago has only just passed safety trials (with flying colors and signs of effectiveness in humans) — hence qualifies for “Right to Try”. However, the tort risk is _still_ too high for deep pockets pharmaceutical companies to permit access outside their limited clinical trials. The judiciary, by, in effect, nullifying law, have likely killed my wife by figuring out ways around contracts that would protect pharmaceutical companies and prescribing physicians from being sued.
By the time* efficacy trials are through, placing the company under the protection judicial precedent, she’ll likely be so far gone that it may be cruel to extend her life even with substantial reversal of symptoms.
Her situation isn’t too far removed from the senesce faced by all but the youngest cohort of Boomers. It may sound like satire to say it, but for most Boomers, they may stand a better chance of long healthy life if Washington DC is nuked.
The article says that the mice were genetically engineered to drive an inducible suicide gene using the p16 promoter.
Implying that it would not work for people already alive unless they have that particular suicide gene.
The mice had to be genetically engineered for the drugs to work in the first place.
You can’t just use this treatment on a wild type mouse, or human.
Of course, that doesn’t stop the basic approach being developed so it DOES work on wild mice (or humans), just that would be another whole research project on top of this one.
Fasting (Water only.) seems to have as good a success in this area as any proven drug therapy. Problem is it’s free…Pharma hates that. Don’t eat for three days and send me $100.
Don’t forget the the “Right to Try” Act has been approved. Very hopeful once the regs are worked out.
Don’t know how to edit. I misspelled: Resveratrol.
There are things which help remove senescent cells available now: Tocotrienols and Quercetin. I am sure they don’t do anything as dramatic, but they should help.
Even if this will not be available for a while, there are still approaches that might work to some degree. You can try to prevent cells from becoming senescent cells in the first place with: antioxidants, extending telomeres, fighting diseases, getting optimal nutrition (unfortunately we don’t know what that is, but we certainly know some things that are poor food choices), getting enough and regular sleep, controlling blood sugar, fasting/HIIT exercises to recycle mitochondria, avoiding toxins: lead (kills over 412,000 Americans every year via high blood pressure and possibly other ways), tobacco (kills 480,000 Americans every year from carcinogens, respiratory damage, and free radicals mostly damaging the cardiovascular system), asbestos, radon gas, some artificial flavors, colors, preservatives, automobile exhaust especially diesel exhaust, coal power plant exhaust (less of a concern in first world countries, but still has effects), household cleaners like ammonia, rat feces vapors (believe it or not they can cause lung cancer), some plastics exposure might be bad (though, evidence is far from conclusive), some herbicides, fungicides, insecticides, fire retardants, paint/epoxy vapors, lacquer vapors, some mold/mildew emanations, gasoline vapors, lighter fluid, and other chemicals, some medications/illicit drugs.
For antioxidants, I think you have to go with mega doses of some to get maximum benefit. There are many different environments within the body, so a number of different antioxidants are needed: the usual vitamins plus, Alpha Lipoic acid, NAC, lycopene, lutein, Zeaxanthin, Astaxanthin, the carotenes (from foods like brightly colored vegetables and fruits), and grape seed extract and/or Reversatrol. You also want to boost some of the natural antioxidant production within your body like SOD.
There are few options when it comes to telomere extension. Cycloastragenol works, but does not effect all tissues equally. Still, it appears to help the telomers in the immune system, and likely the cardiovascular system. It is expensive, but probably nothing compared to the cost of interventions down the road.
Fighting disease is an under appreciated avenue to life extension. We accumulate a number of viruses that continue to stay in our system and continually test our immune system wearing it down. There are actually interventions for some of these, but they are rarely prescribed unless someone is pregnant and has an active infection, or the immune system is already compromised such as with HIV. An exception is the chicken pox virus which also causes shingles: Varicella zoster. There are now two vaccines against Varicella zoster. Shingrix is the new better vaccine, but you have to be 50 years old to take it in the US. As we age the likelihood that we will catch some of these gets very high…virtually 100%. There are also parasites like Toxoplasma gondii which infects the brain and more than half the population is likely infected.
See Gary Hudson’s (CEO of Oisin) reply to comments over at the Fightaging.org article, Oisin will be moving their p53 treatment into clinical trials for cancer in 2019.
The fusogenic lipposome delivery vehicle is already being used in a phase 1 cancer trial (siRNA) at MD Anderson:
https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/treatment/clinical-trials/intervention/epha2-targeting-dopc-encapsulated-sirna
Even if this does not work exactly as planned in humans, it still could be a great way to fight cancer, not that I don’t think it could work in aging.
Yes it is exciting. Just let’s not forget that mice are not people and what works for them might not work for us. After all, some regular human foods are outright poison for many animals.
Well, you don’t have to treat ageing. You could target senescent -cell related chronic inflammatory syndrome or some other fancy name. It is not limited only to old people. You can get some form from radiation, chemical poisoning and such.
It seems OISIN has solved the immune response problem. The plasmids are encased in peptides which don’t usually trigger immune response. The plasmids don’t get inserted in the DNA they rather stay in the cells for short time and if there is an active pathway they can amplify or inhibit it. That’s how they tarkdeg p16+p53. The nuclear DNA should be intact.
Yes it is intended for the people already alive. IMHO, If it works, there will be a long way until it reaches FDA approval and mass market, however. So in 5 to 10 years we have good chances to have it for the general population. In a couple of years it could be available to humans on limited experimental basis.
Are they going to open a lab in Mexico (or somewhere else the FDA doesn’t have jurisdiction) so people can get the treatments this decade?
To speed things along, surely there are some aging penitentiary lifers willing to give this a go for a fair trade.
For those of us already past the half century mark; I think we’ll be lucky if any of these make a difference in how long we live. For our children and grandchildren – they will see the results – assuming there are any. As Homer 502a said a bit more elliptically, yes it is for the living, they are testing with middle aged mice
Plus the FDA doesn’t even consider ageing to be a disease or ailment of any kind, so getting any legitimate anti- ageing treatment approved and to market is a regulatory nightmare.
From what little I have heard, it may not be very long, relatively speaking, before it is available. It is tended to be for both future AND current generations. It still has some flaws to be ironed out though. They inject into the body modified plasmids (yes the thing from the Bioshock video games actually exists) that contain p16 and p53, and the plasmids then insert them into the DNA of existing cells. The problem that I am aware of is that while many of the plasmids do function successfully, many (most?) are intercepted by the immune system as foreign bodies. The modified cells of the body aren’t treated any differently though. Oisin apparently considers this immune thing problematic, though I am not sure why, other than for efficiency concerns. Perhaps they are concerned it may cause temporary swelling or other uncomfortable immune responses in humans, at least until the plasmids either succeed in their function or are removed by the immune system. Maybe there are other issues, I don’t know, but it seems like a very minor thing for such a remarkably effective treatment.
That’s the part that’s really exciting — a segment of the study involved mice that were already middle aged (2 years old). Six months later, half of the control group but only 10% of the treated group had died.
If it works out that’s nice for future generations, but this isn’t a treatment for people who are already alive, is it?