Guardian: Can we reverse the ageing process by putting young blood into older people?

A series of experiments has produced incredible results by giving young blood to old mice. Now the findings are being tested on humans. Ian Sample meets the scientists whose research could transform our lives

On an August morning in 2008, Tony Wyss-Coray sat in a conference room at the Veterans Affairs hospital in Palo Alto, California, waiting for his lab’s weekly meeting to begin. Wyss-Coray, a professor of neurology at Stanford University, was leading a young group of researchers who studied ageing and neurodegeneration. As a rule, the gatherings were forgettable affairs – the incremental nature of scientific progress does not lend itself to big surprises. But a lab member scheduled to speak that day had taken on a radical project, and he had new results to share.

Saul Villeda, an ebullient PhD student with slick black hair and a goatee, had spent the past year engrossed in research that called to mind the speculative medical science of the middle ages. He was investigating whether the old and frail could be rejuvenated by infusions of blood from the young. The hypothesis was not as absurd as it might sound.

Villeda had conducted pilot studies with pairs of surgically conjoined mice that shared a blood supply for several weeks. Young mice received blood from older mice, and old mice received blood from younger ones. Villeda wanted to see the effect on their brains. Neurons in ageing brains lose their connections and start to die off; ultimately, the brain shrinks and becomes less effective. A region called the hippocampus, crucial for memory and learning, is one of the first to deteriorate with age, causing people’s memories and thought processes to falter.

...

Villeda got three hours’ sleep that night. The next morning, he stood up at the lab meeting and revealed to his colleagues what young blood did to the ageing brain. “There was a palpable electricity in the room,” Wyss-Coray recalled. “I remember seeing the images for the first time and saying, ‘Wow.’” Old mice that received young blood experienced a burst of brain cell growth in the hippocampus. They had three to four times as many newborn neurons as their counterparts. But that was not all: old blood had the opposite effect on the brains of young mice, stalling the birth of new neurons and leaving them looking old before their time.

The other scientists in the room were stunned. Some were sceptical. Could it be real? “This could be big,” said Wyss-Coray. “If an old mouse starts to make more neurons when you give it young blood? That is amazing.”

Since that meeting seven years ago, research on this topic has moved on dramatically. It has led some to speculate that in young blood might lie an antidote to the ravages of old age. But the apparent rejuvenating properties of young blood must be treated with healthy scepticism. The hopes they raise rest solely on mouse studies. No beneficial effects have ever been proven in humans. Then again, no one has ever looked.

That is about to change. In October 2014, Wyss-Coray launched the first human trial of young blood. At Stanford School of Medicine, infusions of blood plasma from young people are being given to older people with Alzheimer’s disease. The results are expected at the end of the year. It is the greatest test yet for the medical potential of young blood.

...

Scientists may never halt the process entirely: ageing is an opaque and complex mingle of molecular pathways. But they might learn how to stop changes that underpin the worst chronic diseases. They want to extend healthspan, not lifespan.

...

The study was published in Nature Medicine in 2014. Immediately, emails flooded in to Wyss-Coray’s inbox. Alzheimer’s patients wanted infusions of young blood. So did numerous aged billionaires. One, who flies around in a jet with his name emblazoned on the side, invited Wyss-Coray to an Oscars after-party this year. (He didn’t go.) Another correspondent wrote with a more disturbing offer: he said he could provide blood from children of whatever age the scientists required. Wyss-Coray was appalled. “That was creepy,” he said.

...

As a business proposition, the transfusion of young blood raises all kinds of fears. It raises the spectre of a macabre black market, where teenagers bleed for the highest bidder, and young children go missing from the streets. Then there is the danger of unscrupulous dealers selling fake plasma, or plasma unsafe for human infusion. The fears are not unfounded: health has become one of the most lucrative sectors for criminals and con artists.

Havocscope, an online database, tracks the latest prices of all manner of black market goods and services. For $600 you can buy an AK-47 in Europe. A rhino-horn dagger will cost you $14,000. The services of a group of former military snipers? That will be $800,000. The list includes human organs too, mostly lungs, kidneys and livers. Today, a healthy seller can expect about $5,000 for their kidney. The organ broker who handles the deal can make a hefty profit, selling it on for $150,000 to a wealthy patient who needs a transplant.

In some countries, there is already a legal market for blood plasma. In the wake of the BSE crisis of the 1990s, plasma donations are not used in the UK. But in the US, donors can make $200 a month (plus loyalty points) from plasma donations. The fresh plasma is separated from the blood, and the red blood cells returned to the bloodstream, in a sitting that lasts 90 minutes. The plasma is used in medical procedures, to treat coagulation disorders and immune deficiencies. The business is completely legitimate, but if young plasma is proved to have anti-ageing effects, the risk of backstreet operators setting up will soar. When I asked Wyss-Coray if the prospect worried him, he looked serious. “Absolutely,” he said. “There are always going to be nutcases.”

Now, if only, for the sake of the ageing billionaires of the world, we had a large and ever-growing population of poor people desperate to make money any way they could.  Including younger generations growing up knowing that they will never achieve the same level of (relative) prosperity as their parents.  Oh, right.

Fun fun times ahead.

Canada Ending Tax on Tampons ?

Federal 'tampon tax' to be removed July 1  

The federal government plans to remove the tax on tampons and other feminine hygiene products, effective July 1.

A notice of a motion to amend the Excise Tax Act says the move will apply to sanitary napkins, tampons, menstrual cups and other similar products.

The NDP and others have been calling on the government to get rid of the so-called “tampon tax,” saying it unfairly targeted women.

Under the Excise Tax Act, the GST is typically applied to “luxury” items not considered essential to daily life. But in trying to get the tax eliminated, NDP MPs argued that tampons and pads are essential for most women of reproductive age.

Since January, more than 74,000 people have signed an online petition calling for an end to the levy on menstrual products.

Earlier this month, the NDP introduced a motion in the House calling on the government to exempt the products from the GST – a motion that the Conservative government said it would support.

Good.  Australia next ?  For some reason, fundamental human bodily functions always seem to get short shrift when it comes to talking about human rights, especially when it's to do with women's bodies.  Politicians never tire of talking about ways to make rich white men even richer, but addressing the messy details of actual human bodies ?  Ew !  Don't want to even think about it.  Make it go away...

Just How Do You Spin This ?

Ugh.

Amongst the Many Benefits of Brain-Washing...

'Fer the kids...

American Exceptionalism...

...in accidentally harming children by giving them the wrong doses of medicine apparently...

Children’s liquid medicines should only be measured in metric units to avoid overdoses common with teaspoons and tablespoons, U.S. pediatricians say.

Tens of thousands of kids wind up in emergency rooms after unintentional medicine overdoses each year, and the cause is often badly labeled containers or unclear directions, said Dr. Ian Paul, a pediatrician at Penn State Milton S. Hershey Children's Hospital and lead author of new metric dosing guidelines from the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP).

"Even though we know metric units are safer and more accurate, too many healthcare providers are still writing that prescription using spoon-based dosing," said Paul. "Some parents use household spoons to administer it, which can lead to dangerous mistakes.”

For example, he said, accidentally using a tablespoon instead of a teaspoon would triple the dose.

To avoid errors associated with common kitchen spoons, the guidelines urge that liquid medicines being taken by mouth should be dosed using milliliters (abbreviated as "mL").

Also, prescriptions should include so-called leading zeros, such as 0.5 for a half mL dose, and exclude so-called trailing zeroes, such as 0.50, to reduce the potential for parents to misunderstand the dosing.

While the AAP has been pushing for more accurate dosing of children's medicines since the 1970s, the new guidelines are the most extensive call for metric dosing to date and are intended to reach drug manufacturers, retailers, pharmacists, prescribers and caregivers.

"For this to be effective, we need not just the parents and families to make the switch to metric, we need providers and pharmacists too," said Paul.

The image above is of course a map of countries that have still not adopted the metric system*.  Those other two countries in red are Liberia (yes, that Liberia) and Myanmar/Burma (yes, that one too).  And the latter announced in 2013 its own planned conversion to metric, which will leave just the US of A and Liberia in this particular little club.

And this of a country that adopted decimal currency in 1792.  To much of the rest of the world, the idea of using an Imperial-based system of measurement is as strange as still using the likes of guineas, florins, crowns, and groats.

A smidgen of history on the US' flirtation with metric:

In 1821, after studying the various units of measurement used by the 22 states, Secretary of State John Quincy Adams determined that the U.S. Customary System was sufficiently uniform and required no changes. Most people thought actually that the metric won’t survive Napoleon’s rule. They were wrong however and by the time the American Civil War ended, most of Europe had turned metric, besides the proud British of course.

In 1866, an act of Congress, signed into law by President Andrew Johnson, made it “lawful throughout the United States of America to employ the weights and measures of the metric system in all contracts, dealings or court proceedings.” The act however was merely an act of recognition, which didn’t necessarily translate into practical use.

Following the second WWII, the world officially entered a stage still in expansion: globalization. As America was importing and exporting millions of goods, it found itself in a predicament when trading with other countries, most of whom used metric. American companies had to make twin labels, train workers and students with both systems and re-purpose thousands of machines across various industries. The costs were and still are enormous. With this in mind, some Congressmen proposed the US finally switched to metric. In 1971, the U.S. National Bureau of Standards issued a report titled “A Metric America” recommending that the U.S. transition to the metric system over the course of 10 years. In response, Congress enacted the Metric Conversion Act in 1975 to commence the conversion process. However, these good intentions were extremely poorly applied because someone had the bright idea to strip out the 10-year deadline and make the conversion voluntary. Of course no one wanted to willingly change to metric.

Could it be that due to the size of its economy, the US has made a calculation that it would be more expensive for it to convert than not, unlike the conclusion the rest of the planet has come to ?  Perhaps.  More likely, it's just plain...cussedness.  Or, as it's more commonly explained:

Freedom!

* And yes, of course there are variations & exceptions in the degree of adoption, such as items sold in 'Liters' in the US, and the continuing use of MPH in the UK.

You might very well think that; I couldn't possibly comment

TheBlaze, huh.  Anyways, no of course, the US Government would never speculate on the health of a foreign leader.  That would be inappropriate and disrespectful and...oh, wait...