Posted by Jack
This article sounds almost too good to be true, but assure you it is true. This could greatly improve the quality of life for people over 60.
A new study shows that removing “zombie” cells — also known as senescent (aging or deteriorating) cells — from the body has the potential to slow down or even reverse some major diseases associated with aging.
Scientists have long known that an accumulation of senescent cells is linked to conditions such as arthritis, Parkinson’s disease, and Alzheimer’s disease.
Despite the potential shown in this recent research, Dr. James Kirkland, a professor of physiology and medicine at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota and senior study author, emphasized that the process isn’t a magic bullet.
“It’s a very preliminary study and we should plan other trials,” Dr. Kirkland told Healthline. “The biggest risk factor for most people is still their chronological age.”
Think of “zombie” cells as little vacuum cleaners that no longer work efficiently. But because they still work a bit, they’re not cleared out by the body.
At the same time, they’re too damaged to carry out their normal functions or repair tissue. So they clog up the works, leading to a gradual deterioration of the body.
In previous studies done with animals, removing these cells reversed the aging process and extended life span.
The most recent study showed improvements in humans for the first time. The three-week trial with 14 volunteers — all elderly and with pulmonary fibrosis — was intended to investigate the safety of a new drug.
The fact that the test subjects were able to walk more quickly, get up from a chair more easily, and scored better in ability tests was an unintended benefit.
Specifically, the results showed that after the trial, participants could walk an extra 25 yards during a 6-minute jaunt, and get up from their chairs 2 seconds more quickly.
They also scored an extra point on functionality tests, moving from an average of 10 points to 11 points.
“This is a glimmer that the drug might actually work. The results were impressive. All 14 people got better in their functional ability,” Kirkland told The Telegraph in England.
The new treatment, named DQ, uses a drug called dasatnib, which is already licensed for killing cancer cells in people with leukemia, and the drug quercetin, a common plant pigment found in red wine, onions, green tea, apples, berries, Ginkgo biloba, and St John’s wort.
The drug combination began clearing out the “zombie” cells within 30 minutes, and within 24 hours, all senescent cells were gone, the researchers reported.
“This article sounds almost too good to be true…”
Then it is. I wouldn’t hold my breath if I were you. Nearly everything you read in the MSM is a lie or a distortion. All these miracle cures or even “treatments” like this don’t make it out of clinical trials or if they do their effectiveness turns out to be nothing like what the MSM said. I have read countless MSM articles about cures or potential cures or treatments almost as good as cures and it was all BS. Can you name one disease cured in the last 50 years?
And could you imagine what would happen if life spans were extended? Do you think our rulers want that when their socialist insecurity and ponzi pension schemes are underfunded by trillions?
Neg, I think what we have here is a quality of life thing, not so much a life extension. If that’s the case Medicare would be a winner with much less medical payout. By all accounts this looks like the real deal. It has the potential to reduce a lot of age related diseases that are crippling and killing us right now.
I think there’s a higher likelihood of being turned into Soylent Green than this panning out.
And if this ever pans out it will probably be long after we are all dead.
Weird dig. Jack’s source wasn’t the “mainstream media,” it was an open access science journal.
Even when I defend Jack, you have a problem with me.
Doesn’t that indicate the problem lies within yourself?
Bias and hatred have made you illiterate, Pie. There was nothing “backhanded” about my defense of Jack. Negative Ned’s critique of Jack was nonsensical, and I was merely pointing that out. I note that you have no response to Ned, who actually did criticize Jack, because you hate me so much that you hallucinated a critique of Jack on my part.