HomeОбразованиеRelated VideosMore From: ONEEZE

New Mitochondrial Free Radical Theory of Aging

24 ratings | 4238 views
Html code for embedding videos on your blog
Text Comments (19)
Samuel Mullins (4 years ago)
I quit after this because expected web links from an acquaintance did not show up here, for me to study how every body cell is ordinarily replaced every 7 yrs. And Aro can describe the Caribian housing construction for comparable best. So this is my final offer for combining added value for his theory. The reproduction ovaries with DNA etc which are replaced during last 7 yrs of feasible conception age, withstand all health challenges better during elder years because of production during parents older reproductive years. And increases overall when following generations repeats the process. This is because the very best of sperm and ovaries win the competition during the older parent's conception. The ovaries with DNA etc produced by younger parents have more equal opportunity for weaker materials when overall conditions are favored by parents' youth. Their reproductive cells are also produced faster with shorter cell life cycles. So they better withstand younger health challenges not requiring a senior's age. I also have other disabilities hindering my describing things understandable. I did my best to help Aro's best. That's it, I'm done here.
Samuel Mullins (4 years ago)
Please tolerate my totally uncolleged observations. Some seem genetically enhanced in various ways by natural selection when a mother's pregnancy occurs in latter years betwixt mid 30s and early 40s, especially when she combines clean living practices. Which also usually involves good conscience and spiritual morale. Such traits also seems to favor births of earlier motherhood approximate age 30 regardless of conceptions during illnesses requiring serious physician's care. I have especially noticed that such children whom luckily avoid associating in sinful conspiracies thereby good opposite pursuits, retain better than average youthful appearance in spite of genetic dispositions to illnesses. So question is does good conscience and moral based morale teamwork brain body defenses better? Would I be wrong to conclude such acceptances for self would even serve catalyst combining ton with genetic therapy? As you say nature's defensive gloves even thereby therapeutically need assisting grip - tight assistance from somewheres, or did I misunderstand you?
Samuel Mullins (3 years ago)
Were sisters related to aunts' maternal or father's side of family? My mother also had children in twenties & later teens got breast cancer at 93, but after certain age no other diagnosis other than old-age reasons cause of death-certificate. My oldest sibling a sister having first & only child by choice at 14 needed breast cyst tumors removed before her 20s but I think domestic violence bruising caused that. She is a self-reliantly active single-occupant for decades age 80s now. My new testament bible says the diety does not religiously discriminate against people lead by righteous desires including Atheists; but it is noted environmental impacts including unhealthy habits adversely affect women pertaining to reproduction equipment, and females more than males. Righteousness prioritizing self would be my point on this. I think genetics like anything else in creation becomes subject to people's non-mystical ordinary abilities to influence, comparable if not equal to futuristic/modern technology at least somewhat. I appreciate your non-religious/non-occultish/non-fanaticism as I likewise am not anti-pharmaceutical-corp. I think minimizing my participation to siring no pregnancies/children affords my clean conscience extra time as less worn & torn being much smaller vulnerability target, also considering them utmost wearing hold cares you can never delegate more distantly. Maybe all rhe observations I not list about happenstance routine can teamwork nothing beneath the geneticists' absolute of it's all in your genetic genome jeans? Undoubtedly I prefer avoiding nonprofessional-malpractice legal suits and expert doctors to advise all women to not plan pregnancy after age 26 and/or beyond. I do think it relevant how thorough their study & extent their patient's case history bases this advice? Please do you remember any clues at all other than dating it 5 years back for my finding that publication? This is a sincere and unsarcastic amateurish comment.
Samuel Mullins (3 years ago)
+John Galt Could it be test subjects had parents conceiving them at younger age than that? What resulted from pregnant mothers when having mothers older by 30yrs, 35yrs, & closer to 40 years older? I was not articulate when trying to say I thought it was generation/evolutionary progressive. It seems you are saying these mothers studied had parents 30 to 40 years of age but inherited regressive conception ability; and regardless of optimal health practices omitting substance abuse habits of tobacco, alcoholic beverages, and omitting drugs known for health-compromising side-effects? Could questionnaire writers or record examiners been anyways biased needing artificial good-times to celebrate authentic happinesses? I would be interested to see how thorough the information of such competent scientists whom debunked it? Can you provide a webpage link please? Besides I did not think I was arguing for easiest conception age, but slower overall sperm & ovaries favoring the healthier reproducers into stronger immunity + more asymptomatic by LDL cholesterol but mostly slower receptors increasing anti-body chances to retaliate in greater number; but most importantly slower tissue reproduction because of genetically slower/longer cellular life-cycles especially blood. My longevity conception theory is based upon the overall slightly weakened conception chances BECAUSE of slightly older age, when decreasing cell reproduction would natural-selection disfavor weaker and prefer strongest building materials. I think by my amateurish observations this progresses over following generations. I do not know environmental circumstance about your sisters. But hypothesize they had conception chance at age 26 producing a daughter which unstagnates her reproductive equipment maybe to increase your sisters' unassisted chances again at age 29. If not I would still think their daughter's conception chance for second pregnancies would increase upto age 29 and beyond by a few years, and so forth improve by generations. Rethinking if such were parlayed into optimal first conceptions enduring even later, it is probably best not to "delay motherhood" for first child past age 33 during 3 to 4 more generations because of stagnating. If progressing first conception chances to age 33-35, more than likely average puberty age also reverts back to age 15 years old or so. Even if invitro-fertilization performance enhancers were used conceiving your nieces, their first natural conception chances are probably prolonged to age 26 if not 27 & second conception odds at 29 years old better than your sisters. Only one of my acquaintances, my mother deceased at 93, was an only child of her mother deceased at 103, a second child conceived by her mother near 30 recuperating from flu or pneumonia. Other acquaintances were birthed by older parents some later 30s, early 40s & older. I listened to their stories asking questions wondering how they lasted so long & well and not all by clean living. As one although heavily abusing non-filter cigarettes and alcoholic beverages up into his 90s, many times mentioned his "sainted Mother, may God rest her soul" he says. Can I please have a webpage address or dated publication reporting that study? Maybe they don't know the right answers because they haven't learned the right questions? The clues didn't add up for me until I wondered why they didn't wear out sooner!
Samuel Mullins (4 years ago)
+KnightmareOX I only use such words stumbling for best glossary use. Being of inadequate education, I was helpless from phd question viewpoint, "Why don't we live longer?" I could only entertain the question interest, "Why do some of my acquaintance live as long as they do?" But at best my contribution could only be complimentary to the really great work making us want to study basics, just so we can understand it better.
Samuel Mullins (4 years ago)
Usually after middle age, digestive tract's efficiency using amino acids decrease, requiring (topical) skin solutions. Much like the tounge absorbing preference for coloidial-silver (mineral supplement popular for various symptoms if not cures). But that was only comparison for different environment (conception age) of body machinery adapting both construction (reproduction) material, for longer and better defended repair cycles (cell regeneration) for elderly age, because of parents conceiving later. Not because of avoiding conception when younger. Yet delaying sleepless nights among other factors advantage preparations for nurturing from seasoned parents not so used up.
KnightmareOX (4 years ago)
Check this out, first of all you're throwin too many big words at me. And because I don't understand em, I'm gonna take em as disrespect. Watch ya mouth and ask your question.
Manvendra Singh (4 years ago)
Okay so i'm not a biology student but tend to study a lot of biology and body systems as a hobby. I want to ask you 2 questions. 1) Is that why we should eat more antioxidants because a lot AEA would be produced and excess electrons at reductive hotspots would be picked up more by AECs and less by O2, which in turn would decrease the probability of formation of LDLs? Please point out if i said anything wrong. 2) There are some people or companies i would say that claim that they have supplements which will increase the quantity of NADH in body. They say that it should be taken about half an hour before eating and our foods should contain a lot of antioxidants. This will increase the performance of the body like athleticity, concentration, focus and memory. Is it true that if we supplement NADH in our body, it will catalyze the formation of ATP in our body more and improve bodily performance?
ONEEZE (3 years ago)
With preventing this type of damage it wouldn't help. The damage occurs to the mitochondrial DNA, which is in the mitochondria. Increasing antioxidants outside wouldn't help.  The antioxidant approach has been a dead end for a long time, the only reason it is still popular because it helps to sell supplements, but you don't have to prove anything with those unlike a prescription medication through the FDA. You can just say whatever you want.  For a serious solution the DNA will need to be replaced. Either by putting in a whole new copy in the mitochondria or by finding hydrophilic versions of the proteins that have not yet moved into the nucleus and put a back up copy in the nucleus. Here is an explanation of that. Its a bit long, but thorough. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBQFsaHRcWk
Jeff Little (3 years ago)
+ONEEZE So given the difficulty of finding antioxidants that actually help inside the mitochondria, is it worth looking at ergothioneine, which allegedly acts as an antioxidant and for which mitochondrial transport proteins have supposedly been found?
ONEEZE (4 years ago)
1) It has been shown many times that antioxidants have no effect on lifespan, but this type of damage is only one of many facets of a complex problem. I made a playlist which I have yet to finish that contains other types of damage that come from different sources. These reactions occur so quickly that it is like trying to catch bullets with bullet proof gloves. They only instance where real slowing with that strategy has occurred is when very strong anti oxidants have been genetically engineered to be produced inside the mitochondira. Having them produced in the cell body had no effect. Some in fact like Vitamin E help facilitate in the export of radical damage throughout the body through LDL. http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ja00067a019 2) I would say that stuff is nonsense. If it could be proven  they would be making a lot money. It is just deceptive advertising. The only way that could work would be to inject it directly into the cells. Eating precursors does not make the body produce more of it. Does eating more food cause a baby to be born more quickly? Things happen in the body at a set rate and speed. Put a lot of extra precursor in and the body will use what it needs and dump the rest. Extra NAD+ would not help in the case anyways, because the electron transport chain and OXPHOS mechanism are broken.  Its difficulty to explain to someone who is not a biologist how delicately balanced everything in the body is. Small changes can be fatal. As the result the body is designed to respond vigorously to anything that attempts of move it out of its normal equilibrium. Think of balancing on a beam. Losing even a little balance often causes one to do a big correction which causes them to fall over. Difficult to say the effect of those things. If it where me I would only put in exactly what is required. No more no less. Hope this helps.
Sujay Shad (4 years ago)
Very lucid interplay of NAD and electron transport as it affects ageing. Highly Recommended.
ONEEZE (4 years ago)
Here is the long version, if you are interested. http://pliki.supernova.com.pl/CELLFOOD/BADANIA/THE_MITOCHONDRIAL_FREE_RADICAL_THEORY_OF_AGING.pdf

Would you like to comment?

Join YouTube for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.