Biochemist explaining longevity, biotech, CRISPR and more...!!
So, hello and welcome to The Sheekey Science Show! My name is Eleanor and I graduated in Biochemistry from the University of Cambridge (2019). I am now doing a PhD at the Cancer Research UK - Cambridge Institute. (p53 & senescence)
Science communication is a really important aspect to scientific research. So I made this science channel. The channel covers topics from aging & longevity, gut microbiome, neuroscience, CRISPR, Biotechnology companies and book reviews + more.
I post frequently and like to cover the latest science news. I hope you will enjoy learning something from any of my videos :)
Thank you! So, I wonder if hsCRP, easy to measure, correlates with IL-6 and IL-11. Seems like IL-11 is more evidence that chronic elevation of inflammation is pro-aging. And doing things that keeping inflammation low, except when needed, should be part of an antiaging strategy. Mean time I will be checking IL-6 and hsCRP.
Thanks Eleanor, that was very helpful. Until they can offer me a prescription Il-11 inhibiter I have been busy making a list of various foods and supplements that may act as suppressants. My list so far includes Omega 3s, Lutein, curcumin and of course exercise.
Fact Check: 94% of all scientific animal trials fail to translate into humans*. The claims made on this video regarding the animal testing's success meaning that the results are "potentially translatable for extending human healthspan and lifespan," are wrong. This fact, and the untrue claim that animal trials have substantial medical viability, are part of the reason that conditions like diabetes, cancer, and dementia remain uncured. Similar to taking a class in school, if you fail 94% of the papers you turn in, you should not graduate, nor should your methods be used in the real world. The case is the same here. Animal testing is a near-worthless metric, and the billions of dollars per year of wasted medical funding that goes towards it is a large and significant problem that has resulted in medical progress for major conditions being dramatically held back. To actually solve conditions like treating aging, direct-to-human trials are required for substantive results. *Source: Safer Medicines Trust
There must be much excitement in the mouse community! I think this looks promising for humans too. We are getting closer to anti-aging therapies. The part of the AI community that focuses on AlphaFold-3 and its astonishing abilities in unlocking the secrets of protein folding are predicting LEV (Longevity Escape Velocity) by 2030. That may be optimistic, but I think we are closing in the aging problem at an ever accelerating pace. It will truly shift the medical/healthcare paradigm.
why are biochemists so insanely quite about david sinclair? it really frustrates me how scientists fall into this mental trap of thinking the best thing to do is to never say anything, good or bad. the world needs scientists to just say what they think. silence does more harm than good.
Every mouse experiment extends lifespan by 25%. It’s the observation of the mice by scientists that cause the effect. Just hire a scientist to follow you around all your life and you will live 25% longer.
thanks for this useful summary. im so confused about david sinclaires big thing where he accelerated the apparent age of mice, is that real or what? a lot of mumbling about how it isnt real but i havent seen anyone debunk it. and its irritating because it would be a big deal if it were actually real.
apologies for the lower audio quality this time - was a combination of noisy circadas and my post-karaoke voice :D - also, i think ~1:20 i say antigen when i meant antibody!!!
So in short, Brad Stanfield is right, Resveratrol/Pterostilbene put artificial stress on the body in a way that mimics the stress of exercise. So if you’re somebody who already goes to the gym frequently, you should steer clear of these stressor supplements.
You came to Japan? 😮 Now I plan to make two RU-vid channels (one for academic-level Japanese learning). If you have any advice on topics to cover, please let me know. I’ve been doing a literature review on elastogenesis as a part of my hobbies. Arterial aging has captured my interest. However, I also think skin aging is an inevitable viewpoint. Some leading scientists boast about their young biological age, but their skin looks like that of uncles.
As much as I am just barely scraping the surface of Longevity, LEV and biological immortality - I've always cringed whenever I read studies utilizing lab mice. Sure they're mammals like us. But how can you take those results and say the same would happen or not happen in humans? We could be using a more identical DNA make-up such as Primates or even condemned humans - not to say it's not already in the works.
I hear Dr. Vittorio Sebastiano's company is working on a topical treatment for skin aging he's also on the board of some big cosmetic company so I'm not surprised
You are very appreciated. Sorry on the entitled attacking ungrateful egoist post. There's a special place in Hell for judgemental attackers, don't worry your awesomeness on it.
Boohoo, did not move to San Diego :( We have Scripps, Salk, UCSD, SDSU and other great stuff. To be honest, human skin on robots does creep me out. Things are likely to get perverse, abusive and inhumane. I am vastly more at ease with germ line genetic modification, artificial twinning, and cloning. The other areas that creep me out are: putting a lot of human genes into animals, especially the ones that express in the brain, making mini brains with human cells to experiment on, and taking human embryos beyond some point. I am against technologies for which the main app is allowing people an outlet to be more barbaric, grotesque, sadistic, power tripping and abusive clearly imagining they are doing these acts to other people, or run the risk of torture and murder of what might be human in some meaningful way, for science and profit. Less, so, but also concerning would be adding animal genes that change personality, and/or make people appear or behave like animals. I am less concerned about borrowing mitochondria, more efficient genes, better lung function and other purely objective improvements borrowed from animals. Adding horns, weird hairy skin, hooves, tales, funky ears...I have a problem with. Though, I admit to coming up short on a solid rational justification for my objection to that.
Hi Eleanor, another amazing video! Have you come across the story with the C15 fatty acids recently being discovered to be a necessary fat much like omega 3 and that its lack leads to fatty liver disease and cell death by compromised integrity of the cell membranes? What is up with this compound is the research legitimate? If so it could be important for longevity as well?
Sheekey, you probably remember seeing a few much more realistic-looking robotic faces in the news over the past couple of years, such as Amica (search on RU-vid if you don't remember). To me, this is getting pretty close to mimicking at least the look of human skin on an applied robotic body already, even without needing to use actual human skin. So I guess the question I would ask is what are the advantages and disadvantages of using human skin for such applications? Perhaps synthetic skin could go beyond human skin function in certain care-abouts and applications. Maybe if we want to touch a robot, we want it to look and feel as much like a human as possible, to be sure, but if we're just trying to get along with a robot friend, it may not be necessary. Of course, using new skin on ourselves is a completely different ballpark.
I personally believe skin will fix itself IF you maintain the hormonal levels as they are in youth. This would require fixing the core hormonal drop with aging in the pituitary gland and removing the inflammation that accumilated with age. So understsnding the decline in the pituitary gland is key and then removing the accumilation of damage so the hormones can do there job without cancer concerns any other solution is just a patch not a cure. 😊
good overview. small glitch: the hyflick limit is oudated... it was deteremined only in one or 2 cell types, in vitro. On the level of tissues it is much higher and different tissues have a very different limit. Skin cells replicate much more often
please go back to the old video format - more in-depth, less flashy... and covering NEW developments, not papers from 2016 (8 years ago). We're here primarily here for knowledge, and deciphering complex new papers; for entertainment, we have Netflix
"Cross-linking of proteins may also play a role in the hardening of collagen and cardiac enlargement, increasing the risk for cardiac arrest. Cross-linking is also associated with stiffening of blood vessel walls, delayed wound healing, reduced joint mobility, and changes in the lens of the eye. In addition to these potentially serious implications, many believe that cross-linking is responsible for age-related skin changes including wrinkles and reduced elasticity. It is believed that cross-linking within the body is enhanced when there is a high concentration of sugar in the bloodstream. Further bolstering this idea is the fact that diabetics often have two to three times more cross-linked proteins in their body in comparison to non-diabetics. If this theory is correct, then foods with a high glycemic index (those that release sugar into the body at a rapid pace) should be reduced as much as possible to retain one’s youthful appearance. By ditching the sugary sodas, simple carbohydrates, and processed foods, the onset of cross-linking molecules may be able to be slowed." Reducing glucose spikes will likely slow the aging process so a tablespoon of vinegar with a glass of water twenty to thirty minutes before a meal, and going for a walk after a meal will reduce these glucose spikes.
