17 ms·
Sodium rutin extends lifespan and health span in mice by 10%
- cupcake-unicorn 5y agoThis says one of the highest natural sources is from olives. Association with Mediterranean diet maybe? Anyway this is linked to quercetin and other citrus bioflavonoids supplements. Pretty sure selegiline still knocks this out of the park though.
- nsajko 5y agoTangential: I think it should be "we investigate" instead of "we investigating" in the first paragraph of the abstract? How can such an awful mistaken use of grammar pass peer-review and other processes that precede publishing? Or am I the one who is mistaken? EDIT: this is an "early view" of the paper, before it gets published. No idea about the implications of that.
- bluenose69 5y agoYou are not mistaken. I stopped reading at that point. Edit: the status is listed as "Online ahead of print", so perhaps the error will get corrected prior to publication.
- rapsacnz 5y agoGive them a break - English is probably not their first language.
- hungryforcodes 5y agoYou won't survive 5 seconds in the new Asia dominated 21st century. /s
- schappim 5y agoTheir English is better than my non-existant Chinese. The Affiliations where: 1. The Brain Science Center, Beijing Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, Beijing, China. 2. Beijing Institute for Brain Disorders, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China. 3. Center on Translational Neuroscience, College of Life & Environmental Science, Minzu University of China, Beijing, China. 4. Department of Biomedical Informatics, Center for Noncoding RNA Medicine, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Peking University, Beijing, China. 5. School of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China. Should we take this with a grain of sodium chloride instead?
- nsajko 5y agoSure, but the publisher is Wiley (from USA), and the journal is the British Journal of Pharmacology. Seems like these entities should provide someone to proofread the paper before it gets publicized in any way?
- nextos 5y agoIn my experience, even prestigious journals such as Nature Communications or Genome Biology are not willing to spend resources on professional editing. Most of the effort is passed onto reviewers. Only Nature, Science, Cell and a few high-end sister journals really put an effort proofreading, editing and adapting figures to the general look and feel of the journal.
- steve_adams_86 5y agoThe people behind this seem to be working in Beijing, so there's a possibility English isn't the first language they're using. I don't want to make assumptions, just give the benefit of the doubt. This is science, not literature - there could still be value here. Or not. I just wouldn't discount it for a typo.
- gnabgib 5y agoUnrelated cross post (can't comment on the story I only just read).. where is this magical food forest? Sounds delightful
- akhilpotla 5y agoClassic nerds, can't differentiate between substance and minutia.
- antioxidant 5y agoRutin is basically an antioxidant that contains quercetin. Yet another antioxidant which “prolongs” lifespan by a negligible percentage compared to other antioxidants and mice on a keto diet which avoid the oxidative stress from carbs in the first place. It seems we always hit a limit to lifespan studies. Unless we are able to modify the organs themselves, including the insulin response and mTOR, no single substance will ever prolong lifespan in a significant way.
- The_rationalist 5y agoYou clearly didn't follow geroprotectors advances. Classical antioxidants are weak that's for sure. Mitochondrial targeted antioxidants are one millionth time more potent (this is NOT an exageration), as such they can double lifespan and eliminate entire classes of diseases such as Alzeihmer and Parkinson. Only a small minority of people are erudite in geroprotectors today and as such only this small minority will be part of the first generation to have significantly better ageing.
- airesearcher 5y agoSuch as what substances? And are they available in supplements?
- The_rationalist 5y agoThere are many but the most studied one is skq1. It is marketed as eye drops for slowing age related eye diseases such as macular degeneration. It is also marketed as cosmetics to be applied on the skin as an anti wrinkle agent. Of course those uses are not enough geroprotective. The oral pill is in the work and will very probably be the breakthrough of the century though, it will take ~a decade before being FDA approved. However indeed the currently marketed cosmetics are the same active substance and can be off-label ingested orally (or sublingually). Anybody doing that should read the pubmed papers about Skq1 in order to make an informed decision. The other contender is Fullerene C60 which is bioavailable when diluted in oil (e.g olive oil) however it doesn't cross the blood brain barrier and hence won't stop your current neurodegeneration.
- bwb 5y agoOnly 8% of experiments on mice work on humans… friendly reminder.
- schappim 5y agoDo you have a reference on this? It'd be quite interesting to read further on why studies using mice are often poor predictors of human reactions to exposure.
- bwb 5y agoI read it years ago in a medical journal talking about the insanity of websites that post cutting edge research when it is only the early result. Sorry not sure where it is located, but you could Google it. You have locations like this: https://theconversation.com/of-mice-and-men-why-animal-trial-results-dont-always-translate-to-humans-73354 https://theconversation.com/of-mice-and-men-why-animal-trial... It showed that of the most-cited animal studies in prestigious scientific journals, such as Nature and Cell, only 37% were replicated in subsequent human randomised trials and 18% were contradicted in human trials. It is safe to assume that less-cited animal studies in lesser journals would have an even lower strike rate. Not sure why that is higher, but it is phrased weird.
- The_rationalist 5y agoSource? It would be nice to scope such vague statements. Some kind of pharmaceutical mechanism of action ~totally transpose to the human while some other do not at all, it's heavily topic dependent. For example mitochondrial targeted antioxidant are specy agnostic.
- bwb 5y agoGoogle, not sure how that is vague :), it is a specific number I read in a medical journal years ago.
- amelius 5y agoThat's actually quite a lot.
- The_rationalist 5y agoBoth Fullerene C60 and SkQ1 can double lifespan in mice. Everybody should take (at his own risk) SkQ1, it's gonna create a new generation of temporally old but physically young people. SKQ1 being considered non toxic and properly eliminated by the body and given it's large (>150 studies) body of evidence showing revolutionar anti ageing (totally prevent Alzeihmer, Parkinson), to me the risk/benefit cost is a no brainer. In addition to it, mexidol can be a nice augmentation. Of course it's only a part of the complete anti ageing solution, see also: https://www.lifespan.io/road-maps/the-rejuvenation-roadmap/ https://www.lifespan.io/road-maps/the-rejuvenation-roadmap/ http://geroprotectors.org http://geroprotectors.org
- akhilpotla 5y agoWe should investigate the benefits of sodium as well. Sodium is vitally important for many bodily function and is a very misunderstood nutrient. Historically people consumed much more salt, and don't give me the "people used to die when they were 35" nonsense. There is a big difference between being kicked by a horse vs dying of a stroke.
- typon 5y agoWasn't most meat also salted in the past?
- nsajko 5y agoDepends on the past.
- firecall 5y agoThe past is a long time!
- justinator 5y agoAnd incidentally, seems to always be getting longer
- londons_explore 5y agoA lot of meat is salted today... Ham... Bacon....
- marcyb5st 5y agoI think there is a substantial difference as back then the meat was literally "submerged" in salt to preserve it. Nowadays I believe it's simply lightly coated in salt to only maximize flavor since we have fridges.
- 5y ago
- martini333 5y agoHeadline is wrong. Only lifespan did extend by 10%. Not both.
- jeroenhd 5y agoGreat news for aging rodents all around the world! Too bad most experiments that work on mice have no or negative effects on humans, so we probably won't be able to benefit from this.
- The_rationalist 5y agoGeroprotectors often transpose well into other species. E.g mexidol has a partially related mechanism of action and show health benefits in humans. The idea that geroprotectors in mice do not transpose in human needs to be substantiated with rationale/evidence and scoped to specific classes of geroprotectors.
- ravenstine 5y ago> Too bad most experiments that work on mice have no or negative effects on humans Really? I'm curious where you heard that. (purely curious, not saying you're wrong)
- treeman79 5y agoSarcasm...
- jeroenhd 5y agoAs other HN commenters point out, most research in this area doesn't translate to humans[0]. It might be nice if we suddenly found a miracle chemical that can add ten years to our lifespan (though we'd all be working ten years longer, not living it up in retirement), but like with every article around this subject, we'll just have to wait the coming five to six years to see if we can benefit from this ourselves. Might be a good addition to food for pet mice though, so at least there's that. [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27351316 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27351316
- silvergr 5y agoWould also like some source/info on this, seems suspicious, like something that anti-cruelty organizations came up with and people are mindlessly believing and repeating...
- amelius 5y agoPerhaps it's part of their natural diet, and not part of the typical "lab diet".
- Gatsky 5y agoInteresting result but needs confirmation in other studies, particularly as the rutin formulation seems to be homegrown by the research team. Incidentally, I recently learned about the Interventions Testing Program [1,2]. This is an ongoing very well conducted study investigating different drugs and supplements for longevity extension in mice. Aside from being highly rigorous, reproducible and free of conflicts, the results of this are fascinating. Particularly striking is the benefit of drugs which reduce peak glycemia after meals (acarbose and canagliflozin) in male mice. [1] https://www.nia.nih.gov/research/dab/interventions-testing-program-itp https://www.nia.nih.gov/research/dab/interventions-testing-p... [2] https://peterattiamd.com/richardmiller/ https://peterattiamd.com/richardmiller/
- williesleg 5y agoSo does Hydroxychloroquine and UV rays
- londons_explore 5y agoI believe there are a whole slew of diet modifications that are believed to increase lifespan in humans >10%. Doesn't make people eat that diet...
- chris1993 5y agoMostly this seems to revolve around 'eat less', which is a challenge for many people.
- alecco 5y ago1. The abstract is not great. 2. This is a study from China, including "School of Traditional Chinese Medicine"
- dundarious 5y agoDiet/longevity studies in mice aren't good sources of information for the general population. They are (at best) pilots/guides for further (more expensive) human testing. Unless it's a treatment for an acute condition that you suffer from, and there's some logical basis for trusting the effect will equally apply to humans, there's no point in basing personal dietary behavior in any way off of such studies. And a lesser point is that there is likely enough agreed upon research in this area that you are not adhering to already! (Myself included, though I do try) Of course, the people who might work on such trials might frequent HN, and research is just intrinsically interesting, so I'm not saying "this is a bad post".
- the__alchemist 5y agoMice, by virtue of being vertebrates, and more specifically mammals, share much biology with us - from biochemistry, to cellular functions, to macro structures. There's a reasonable chance things that affect their bodies will affect ours as well.
- dundarious 5y agoThat is a justification for doing such studies, but it says nothing about whether they provide good enough evidence for dietary/behavioral changes in the general population. Why base our daily behavior on such thin evidence? Human trials should be the minimum requirement in the vast majority of cases.
- knuthsat 5y agoReasonable as in highly unlikely. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4594046/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4594046/ More than 95% of successful animal studies fail to progress further from human trials. There's obviously a great need for doing these tests in a different fashion.
- ProjectArcturis 5y agoI will offer anyone 100-1 odds that sodium rutin will not be approved by the FDA for human anti-aging purposes in the next 20 years.
- nradov 5y agoSure because the FDA doesn't recognize aging as a specific medical condition. It's too vague of a term. However it's somewhat possible that the FDA will approve sodium rutin as a treatment for some condition that tends to become more common with age.
- ProjectArcturis 5y ago"Somewhat possible", in the sense of "extremely unlikely" is correct. This is a pretty small effect size in mice. If it's even real in mice, it's very likely due to specific factors related to mice that live in a small box all their lives and eat the exact same cheap dry food every day.
- rkagerer 5y agoHow do you measure "health" in percent? I don't think the article quantified that.
- qwerty456127 5y agoWhat is sodium rutin? I know about rutin but never heard about sodium rutin.