4 ms·
> In many of these experiments, older mice that received younger blood saw either slight or no significant improvements compared to old mice with old blood. You
by darawk 10y ago
> In many of these experiments, older mice that received younger blood saw either slight or no significant improvements compared to old mice with old blood. Young mice that received older blood, however, saw large declines in most of these tissues or organs.
> The researchers think that many benefits seen in old mice after receiving young blood might be due to the young blood diluting the concentration of inhibitors in the old blood.
How can these things be compatible? If it were diluting the inhibitors, that should have shown up as an improvement in the old mice, no?
- tominous 10y agoMy guess is that the effect of the inhibitors is not linear with concentration. Imagine that the effective (deleterious) dose of these inhibitors is, say, 10% of the amount found in old mice. So an equal exchange between two mice is enough to provide an effective dose to the young mouse, but not enough to eliminate an effective dose to the old mouse.
- ttflee 10y agoIf this inhibitor hypothesis were true, an experiment could be set up to determine which component/combination of components in the old-blood actually plays the inhibitor role, with injection of separated part by component of old-blood into the young mice, more or less like a binary search. After knowing the exact combination, it would be much easier to target the inhibitor itself.
- beachstartup 10y ago> older mice that received younger blood saw either slight keyword is 'slight' improvements. it's a poorly written sentence.