http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2012-04/can-eating-buckyball-infused-olive-oil-prolong-your-lifespan (http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2012-04/can-eating-buckyball-infused-olive-oil-prolong-your-lifespan)
My first thought was WTF. My second thought was, this has got to be confounding variables.
That is weird....
Quote from: Nephew Twiddleton on April 20, 2012, 01:51:38 AM
That is weird....
Seems that the fasting aspect may be confounding. Low calorie diets alone extend the lifespan of mice. Still, fullerine has weird properties.
Quote from: ZL 'Kai' Burington, M.S. on April 20, 2012, 01:52:56 AM
Quote from: Nephew Twiddleton on April 20, 2012, 01:51:38 AM
That is weird....
Seems that the fasting aspect may be confounding. Low calorie diets alone extend the lifespan of mice. Still, fullerine has weird properties.
Yeah, but a 90% increase in lifespan? What's the usual increase for fasting rodents?
I didn't quite get whether they let the control group fast or not?
Cause if not, why??
Quote from: Triple Zero on April 20, 2012, 03:35:08 PM
I didn't quite get whether they let the control group fast or not?
Cause if not, why??
Yeah, that article just didn't bother with a lot of very relevant details. A link to the full text is here: http://extremelongevity.net/wp-content/uploads/C60-Fullerene.pdf
Quote from: Nigel on April 20, 2012, 03:46:27 PM
Quote from: Triple Zero on April 20, 2012, 03:35:08 PM
I didn't quite get whether they let the control group fast or not?
Cause if not, why??
Yeah, that article just didn't bother with a lot of very relevant details. A link to the full text is here: http://extremelongevity.net/wp-content/uploads/C60-Fullerene.pdf
Quote4 groups of 3 rats
They think 12 is an adequate sample size?
ETA: Wait, wrong section....wait...they think 18 is an adequate sample size? If half of those are controls, there were only 9 actually tested for survival. Not saying their conclusions are wrong, just that at lower sample sizes outliers tend to be magnified.
On the other hand....100% of fullerine tested rats alive after 38 months, while all the water control rats were dead from aging.
ETA2: No, not 9 control. 6 control, six olive oil treatment, and six fullerine treated rats.
Fullerenes seem like something that would be extravagantly expensive. Maybe that would explain the small sample size.
Quote from: Emo Howard on April 21, 2012, 02:48:44 AM
Fullerenes seem like something that would be extravagantly expensive. Maybe that would explain the small sample size.
1 g is 45 USD. (https://sesres.com/Fullerene.asp) They used 50 mg in the entire study.
A more likely reason why they don't have a high sample size is ethical concerns. Or, maybe not, since they "sacrificed" 60 rats for another part of the experiment.
Maybe it was more an issue of keeping an experiment going for several years (38 - 55 months).
Quote from: ZL 'Kai' Burington, M.S. on April 21, 2012, 01:02:10 AM
Quote from: Nigel on April 20, 2012, 03:46:27 PM
Quote from: Triple Zero on April 20, 2012, 03:35:08 PM
I didn't quite get whether they let the control group fast or not?
Cause if not, why??
Yeah, that article just didn't bother with a lot of very relevant details. A link to the full text is here: http://extremelongevity.net/wp-content/uploads/C60-Fullerene.pdf
Quote4 groups of 3 rats
They think 12 is an adequate sample size?
ETA: Wait, wrong section....wait...they think 18 is an adequate sample size? If half of those are controls, there were only 9 actually tested for survival. Not saying their conclusions are wrong, just that at lower sample sizes outliers tend to be magnified.
On the other hand....100% of fullerine tested rats alive after 38 months, while all the water control rats were dead from aging.
ETA2: No, not 9 control. 6 control, six olive oil treatment, and six fullerine treated rats.
It's adequate information to get funding for additional study.
Quote from: Nigel on April 21, 2012, 03:09:58 AM
Quote from: ZL 'Kai' Burington, M.S. on April 21, 2012, 01:02:10 AM
Quote from: Nigel on April 20, 2012, 03:46:27 PM
Quote from: Triple Zero on April 20, 2012, 03:35:08 PM
I didn't quite get whether they let the control group fast or not?
Cause if not, why??
Yeah, that article just didn't bother with a lot of very relevant details. A link to the full text is here: http://extremelongevity.net/wp-content/uploads/C60-Fullerene.pdf
Quote4 groups of 3 rats
They think 12 is an adequate sample size?
ETA: Wait, wrong section....wait...they think 18 is an adequate sample size? If half of those are controls, there were only 9 actually tested for survival. Not saying their conclusions are wrong, just that at lower sample sizes outliers tend to be magnified.
On the other hand....100% of fullerine tested rats alive after 38 months, while all the water control rats were dead from aging.
ETA2: No, not 9 control. 6 control, six olive oil treatment, and six fullerine treated rats.
It's adequate information to get funding for additional study.
That's it right there.
Also, another thing. From the numbers, it looks like the main objective was testing toxicity, and they decided to see if there were any long term effects as well. They were likely surprised to find the rats lived so long, and decided to make that a focal point of the paper and press release. It was a happy accidental discovery. Those are the best.
Quote from: ZL 'Kai' Burington, M.S. on April 21, 2012, 03:43:12 AM
Quote from: Nigel on April 21, 2012, 03:09:58 AM
Quote from: ZL 'Kai' Burington, M.S. on April 21, 2012, 01:02:10 AM
Quote from: Nigel on April 20, 2012, 03:46:27 PM
Quote from: Triple Zero on April 20, 2012, 03:35:08 PM
I didn't quite get whether they let the control group fast or not?
Cause if not, why??
Yeah, that article just didn't bother with a lot of very relevant details. A link to the full text is here: http://extremelongevity.net/wp-content/uploads/C60-Fullerene.pdf
Quote4 groups of 3 rats
They think 12 is an adequate sample size?
ETA: Wait, wrong section....wait...they think 18 is an adequate sample size? If half of those are controls, there were only 9 actually tested for survival. Not saying their conclusions are wrong, just that at lower sample sizes outliers tend to be magnified.
On the other hand....100% of fullerine tested rats alive after 38 months, while all the water control rats were dead from aging.
ETA2: No, not 9 control. 6 control, six olive oil treatment, and six fullerine treated rats.
It's adequate information to get funding for additional study.
That's it right there.
Also, another thing. From the numbers, it looks like the main objective was testing toxicity, and they decided to see if there were any long term effects as well. They were likely surprised to find the rats lived so long, and decided to make that a focal point of the paper and press release. It was a happy accidental discovery. Those are the best.
Totally! I am fascinated to see what research develops from this.
Quote from: ZL 'Kai' Burington, M.S. on April 21, 2012, 02:58:39 AM
Quote from: Emo Howard on April 21, 2012, 02:48:44 AM
Fullerenes seem like something that would be extravagantly expensive. Maybe that would explain the small sample size.
1 g is 45 USD. (https://sesres.com/Fullerene.asp) They used 50 mg in the entire study.
A more likely reason why they don't have a high sample size is ethical concerns. Or, maybe not, since they "sacrificed" 60 rats for another part of the experiment.
Maybe it was more an issue of keeping an experiment going for several years (38 - 55 months).
Oh, wow. I had no idea.
I find it entertaining that something called 'buckyballs' has serious scientific applications. I am also interested in seeing where the research goes with this stuff.
"You'd think it'd be something you have to freebase." -Phillip J Fry
http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2012/04/20/buckyball_longevity_theres_a_problem.php
Quote from: Template on April 23, 2012, 06:29:37 AM
http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2012/04/20/buckyball_longevity_theres_a_problem.php
Also, read the comments.
I guess my question is, did the rats really live five years? If that is true, then it bears investigating. Pet rats can live up to 5 years, but it's quite rare.
To comment, please Login. NAVY No thanks
what was the Annal production of B.ball in France that year anyway?
No those are not: (4Me} they look like Vitamine E capsuls \ Hi Bread Rat
No! hair Frizzies for 4.56 Hrs Min
Quote from: ZL 'Kai' Burington, M.S. on April 23, 2012, 02:53:38 PM
Also, read the comments.
Quote from: Cardinal Pizza Deliverance. on April 21, 2012, 05:48:05 AM
I find it entertaining that something called 'buckyballs' has serious scientific applications. I am also interested in seeing where the research goes with this stuff.
Well.. buckyballs is better name then Buckminsterfullerene or C60 fullerene. :) Research so far went into more industrial area and this stuff has tone of applications (to name some (http://mstnano.com/products/fullerenes/)). Many people actually tried to digest C60 on regular bases because its not that hard to obtain and many of them claimed a significant improvement in their overall health. On the other hand its too soon to know exactly what is going on in the body. Most probably buckyballs serves as an anti-oxidant. Fun fact: buckyballs can occur in nature after lightning strikes and meteor impacts. One of the meteors in Russia created soil very rich for this kind of material. They called the soil shungite and as far as you can date, people keep saying that water from the area have some magical and healing properties. :D
Quote from: hrubes on December 08, 2017, 07:39:40 AM
Many people actually tried to digest C60 on regular bases because its not that hard to obtain and many of them claimed a significant improvement in their overall health. On the other hand its too soon to know exactly what is going on in the body. Most probably buckyballs serves as an anti-oxidant.
:lulz: