Buckyballs, extending MY life? It's freaking strange no matter how you cut it.

[Kai]

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.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

That is weird....

[Kai]

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.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

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?

[Triple Zero]

I didn't quite get whether they let the control group fast or not?

Cause if not, why??

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

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

[Kai]

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

4 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.

[Bruno]

Fullerenes seem like something that would be extravagantly expensive. Maybe that would explain the small sample size.

[Kai]

Fullerenes seem like something that would be extravagantly expensive. Maybe that would explain the small sample size.

1 g is 45 USD. 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).

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

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

4 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.

[Kai]

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

4 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.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

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

4 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.

[Bruno]

Fullerenes seem like something that would be extravagantly expensive. Maybe that would explain the small sample size.

1 g is 45 USD. 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.

[Cardinal Pizza Deliverance.]

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.

[Bruno]

"You'd think it'd be something you have to freebase." -Phillip J Fry