Current Research into Telomeres

ufotruth at ufotruth at
Mon Aug 31 20:43:25 EST 1998

On 31 Aug 1998 23:24:09 GMT, excelife at (Excelife) wrote:

>There's a twofold answer to this question.  First we are, unfortunately, a 
>long way from being able to effectively immortalize even one cellular system 
>let alone every cell.  It's the old saying "you have to crawl before you can 

Thanks for the information. It seems like a properly engineered virus
or some other kind of agent could eventually be developed to
immortalize every single cell in the human body.

>walk". Any interim advances we can take to help mitigate the damage caused by 
>the genetic products of senescent cells will be a step in the right 

So basically these interim advances would not rid us of senecent cells
but could possibly make the senecent cells less damaging? Now, if this
can be achieved it would be great. But I think it would be really cool
if we could immortalize all human cells, so none of them would be
senecent, so that we would not even have to worry about making
senecent cells less damaging because there would be none, or at least
none from telomere shortening.

>direction.  Intervention in age related diseases like heart disease and 
>immunological failures can help many of us survive to the point that "aging" 
>itself is the primary cause of death.

Perhaps when they learn to turn off or on certain genes in senecent
cells they will also learn how to turn the telomerase gene in human
cells on or off or insert a new one.

>Secondly, it is not at all clear that just maintaining telomeric length will 
>have the desired effect on age related genetic expression. Many other 

You are very correct. It might not. But from what I read from GERON
they stated that the cells they immortalized both continued to divide
and stayed "youthful" including its age related genetic expression.

>processes are likely involved in determining which genes will be expressed at 
>any given time. The technologies developed by Geron will help us address some 
>of these issues.

Yep. Lets hope that GERON and other companies start doing a lot more

>The most recent research indicates that memories are stored as synaptic 
>connections between neurons.  If the cells maintaining these connections are 
>lost so are the memories associated with them.  But the brain is a robust 
>organ and contains numerous back up systems and most of your important 
>memories are stored in numerous locations.

Hmm... Interesting. Thanks for the information.

I would just hate to go in for a neural stem cell insertion and start
randomly fogetting things. 

Perhaps, eventually, scientists will figure out a way to rejuvinate
the neurons OR to have the new neurons that divide replace the old
ones without hurting the synaptic connections...

>Gradual replacement of cells would have no more impact on your memory than 
>aging itself does, ie; you tend to forget memories from long ago while your 
>most recent experiences are crystal clear.  I don't have the time nor the 
>expertise to go into state dependent learning and the effects of memory 
>stimulation and rote memorization but I don't believe neuron replacement 
>therapies will cause any great problems.

That is good to hear.

But before I ever have it done I will want to make sure that it won't
cause me any major memory problems. And hopefully none at all.
>A medline search will show you that much foundational research into this area 
>is already completed.  I would expect to be seeing results similar to those 
>you describe in the very near future.

I have been doing several medline searches lately about telomerase,
anti-oxidants, telomeres, etc. You may be correct that much of the
foundational research is already completed. But as far as I know, and
I might be wrong, so far no company or organization has actually tried
to REJUVINATE an organism, an organ of an organism, or a tissue of an
organism with any kind of telomerase therapy.

It would be very nice to just see if it would work.

>The research into growth factors may give us our first inkling of what to 
>expect.  Growth factors can initiate cellular reproduction on a large scale 
>and can produce skin cells and new veins.  However, this rapid prolification 
>of cells has the unintended drawback of shortening the telomeres.  It is 
>likely that the cells produced utilizing growth factors will enter senescence 
>much sooner than the other cells in the body and therapies based on this 
>technology, absent telomeric lengthening, may prove to be only a short term 

I wonder if younger cells produce more growth factor than older ones.
If so then perhaps immortalized and "younger" cells would produce more
growth factor...

Just recently, while at work, I burnt myself with a glue gun. It burnt
a small hole in my flesh. I have been watching it heal very carefully
and it seems to be healing very well. What is interesting to me is
that the small hole (don't worry, the burn is not that serious at all
and I have been medicating it) is filling in with new flesh. I was
thinking the other day about whether an average 70 year old person
would heal as quickly or if their wound would not totally fill in
because they did not have as much growth factor.

It would be interesting, in my opinion, to culture a group of normal
human cells, that have replicated lets say 50 times and then culture
another group of immortalized human cells, that have replicated lets
say 50 times, and see which group of cells have more growth factor...

Ooopps.. I am rambling again. Sorry.

>Similarly, the lengthening of the telomeres, while increasing the cellular 
>reproductive capacity, may not produce the cellular prolification required to 
>restore the functioning, of some of the systems, desired.

You are right. It may not. But we can always be hopeful that it will. 

>I hope not!

I don't know if I hope so or not. If they are going to release some
amazing and startling information soon I hope that there has been
secret research going on. But if they plan to keep the information
secret and suppressed then I hope it has not.....

>Our Gov't. is not "evil" but they are bureaucratic and subject to political 
>pressure from constituents and lobbyists.  Even with fast tract approval at 
>the FDA, any procedures developed will have to undergo years of testing 
>before they will be made available to the general public.

Well, in my opinion many of the actions of our government violate the
rights of its citizens. You are correct. Our government is not "evil"
but the ACTIONS of certain GROUPS and ORGANIZATIONS inside of it are
in my opinion. 

Because of these groups, individuals, and organizations I fear that a
cure for the aging process might, possibly, be at least slightly
"suppressed" for a while before it is released.

I really hope that it is not though.

>If the procedures developed are limited by supply or the availability of 
>medical technology then they may get involved in the distribution.  Probably 
>in the same way they regulate organ transplants.  The laws and the 
>administrators will have our best interest in mind but just as in the 
>transplant system, some people will die while waiting their turn!

It would be really sad if people were dying waiting to get
rejuvinated. Lets just hope that a therapy to reverse the aging
process does not become too expensive or time consuming that it is not
practicle at all.

I hope that one day someone will be able to just get a few injections
every day for a couple of weeks and be rejuvinated, permanently, to a
youthful state.

>Thomas Mahoney, Pres.
>Lifeline Laboratories, Inc.

Thanks so much for responding to my comments and questions! I
appreciate you information, answers, and responses very much. Keep up
the great research.

Best Regards,

More information about the Cellbiol mailing list