Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

AutoModerator t1_j7bmzht wrote

Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our normal comment rules apply to all other comments.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

geockabez t1_j7bvwvy wrote

Yeah but what if I don't want to live a long life?

1

Shot-Donkey665 t1_j7ceh47 wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#1,730,638)

I do eat very well, in part because I have IBS , I also swim up to 5 days a week for an hour. I just had a cholesterol check and that's good. I also recently had a ECG, resting heart rate is between 61-64bpm which is good for someone in their 40s. Blood pressure is very good, too.

I went through commando training in my 20s but had a hiatus for about 10 years of little to no exercise due to wrecking my hips and back in the Corp. Hence, I swim and not run.

I'll just have to see how my body holds out. Knowing my mid 70s might be my lot is comforting to a degree.

6

GrowsOnGraves t1_j7ci2ac wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#1,729,618)

In my husband's family no man has made it to 60 (in at least 3 gens as far as I know) because of heart issues. My father in law was still body building at 55 and had a heart attack. 70 isn't so bad

39

scrapper t1_j7d7fzc wrote

Surely this gene slows aging effect rather than rewinding them?

96

Nyrin t1_j7dbuv8 wrote

Replying to scrapper (#1,731,765)

Sometimes. "Aging" is a remarkably complex set of processes and still in its very early stages of being properly understood. Some causes of aging, when treated and addressed, really do "reverse" apparent age — in reality, this is addressing flaws in replication process and moving that function back towards normal, but from the outside it does appear that the new tissue is functionally "younger" than the old.

One special case (telomerase deficiency) induced and exercised in mice: https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/aspects-aging-might-be-reversed

Everything in your body (almost) is continuously replacing itself at various speeds. If there's a problem that's causing replicated cells to behave as if they're more degraded ("older") than they otherwise would be, then treating that and having the next replacement round be more functional than its precessor is effectively "reducing age" as an apparent and functional measure.

If the source cells have accumulated replication errors or otherwise been intrinsically "damaged," however, you need much more intensive and hitherto "exotic" treatments to make all the trillions of pieces of "future human" to look and act younger than "current human," and "slowing aging" is a lot more readily attainable in those circumstances.

57

Robenever t1_j7e14k6 wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#1,731,560)

I’m 34. I lift. Have lifted since I joined the military. Stopped and started several times over for months to years. You just kinda do it, cause it’s what you’re use to. I Can definitely see myself lifting 20 years from now. I mean.. I’ve already done it for 17.

5

SerialStateLineXer t1_j7e4iax wrote

Replying to scrapper (#1,731,765)

> The Bristol team, led by Professor Paolo Madeddu, has found that a single administration of the mutant anti-aging gene halted the decay of heart function in middle-age mice. Even more remarkably, when given to elderly mice, whose hearts exhibit the same alterations observed in elderly patients, the gene rewound the heart’s biological clock age by the human equivalent of more than ten years.

That's where "rewind" comes from. It restored cardiac function in elderly mice when administered late in life.

18

jlynne58 t1_j7e5k9u wrote

Is it believable? Do you believe it? To me it feels like the latest, the greatest, the newest, and the soundbitiest nonsense du jour'.

2

Agitated_Narwhal_92 t1_j7e98mb wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#1,729,618)

My husband's side of the family has pretty bad cancer history. His grandfather died of Lung Cancer at 75, one uncle died of sudden stomach pain (after suffering most symptoms of stomach cancer ) and the other uncle died of liver cancer. Neither uncles made it to 60. Both had bad addictions towards alcohol and tobacco. Not sure if it's the gebes or their lifestyles. My husband doesn't regulate his eating habit, eats out at every chance, preffers sugar, refined flour etc over whole grains. We are both I our early 30s (I just turned 30 and he is 32) but I get sleepless nights thinking what if my husband gets it. I would need this gene for him!

4

Squirrel_Whisperer_ t1_j7exuen wrote

Replying to Shot-Donkey665 (#1,730,694)

Look into bpc157 and tb500. You inject both. They have been life savers. You can get a combo vials at some places. Both are amazing at healing muscoskeletal issues, healing organs, reducing inflammation all over the body, neuroprotective, etc.

1

Suldand1966159 t1_j7fblbx wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#1,732,616)

The latest science would disagree I think. It's more about epigenetic expression. Environment seems to play a greater part than genetics. Studies on twins have borne this out.

Sure, inheriting great genes is at definite advantage, but even those so called unlucky ones, can still manifest how the epigenome expresses their genes in such a way as to affect their lifespans substantially. Witness the studies done on identical twins with different lifestyles.

That's my overly worded way of kindly saying that you're not quite right.

1