
Anti-ageing compound set for human trials after turning clock back for mice - Mizza
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/dec/20/anti-ageing-human-trials?CMP=EMCNEWEML6619I2
======
KVFinn
From Aubrey De Grey:

Short answer is it’s not all that big a deal in biomedical terms. It’s a great
discovery in terms of understanding mitochondria, and it provides a new way to
rejuvenate mito function, but it doesn’t tell us that rejuvenating mito
function in isolation in an otherwise still-old animal is a good idea -- and
there have for many years been other ways to rejuvenate mito function which
have not led to longer lifespan in rodents, notably acetyl-L-carnitine
combined with alpha-lipoic acid (which has been marketed as Juvenon).

~~~
tokenadult
Aubrey De Grey is younger than I am, but he looks old and haggard, much older
than I look (and much older than my younger sister who is almost exactly his
age looks). I don't know why people take anti-aging advice from Aubrey De
Grey. His advice has meager uptake or support in reliable sources on human
medicine.

AFTER EDIT: I see the first reaction to this comment was a silent downvote,
which evokes my desire to learn. Now that we've established that you disagree
with me, would it be all right for me to ask what facts I should consider to
change my opinion that Aubrey De Grey's anti-aging advice is not correct? What
positive rationale can you provide for taking his writings on his favorite
topic seriously? What evidence can you provide that he is on to something that
the National Institute of Aging[1] isn't researching adequately already
without him?

[1] [http://www.nia.nih.gov/](http://www.nia.nih.gov/)

ONE MORE EDIT: Thanks for the replies. I think the most helpful to me was

 _As far as I know, Aubrey has not claimed to have invented any working anti-
aging treatments so far_

because I've been curious for a long time why Aubrey De Grey receives so much
mention here on Hacker News whenever research on aging comes up, but so little
mention in any of the extensive medical literature I read. So he is one guy
with some interesting ideas (interesting to people here, at least) but perhaps
just one guy among thousands working on anti-aging ideas. I wish anyone well
who is devoting time and attention to reducing the harm of aging processes in
human beings, but I try to cast my net searching for information more in the
waters of medical reports than among people with a famous online presence as
such. Thanks for the follow-up, and for letting me know what you really think
about the unedited version of my comment, which still appears at the top here.

~~~
blazespin
Feedback? Sure. You're doing the "appeal to surface appearance" argument. Not
sure, but I don't recall that argument from Critical Thinking 101.

~~~
tokenadult
I will acknowledge that the article about him on Wikipedia has a talk page

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Aubrey_de_Grey](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Aubrey_de_Grey)

like few other biography of living person (BLP) articles I have seen in years
of editing Wikipedia. Wow.

~~~
DennisP
First time I've seen Jimmy Wales jump into a discussion. In Aubrey's defense,
in this case:

"I am entirely unconvinced by the quite frankly bizarre claim that the
credentialed experts on the board of Mr. De Gray's foundation don't 'count'
towards respectability since they are 'conflicted'. Conflicted in that they
endorse his work? It makes no sense. Also, be very careful that you are not
edging into uncivil personal attack by hinting darkly about his bona fides as
a scientist - he has a Phd from Cambridge University based on 'The
Mitochondrial Free Radical Theory of Aging'!"

------
pvnick

      Researchers injected a chemical called nicotinamide adenine
      dinucleotide, or NAD, which reduces in the body as we age.
      The addition of this compound led to the radical reversal
      in the ageing of the mice.
    

While this is pretty cool, it seems that the most immediate effect would be a
higher availability of adenosine triphosphate (ATP), meaning more energy
"currency" for the body's machinery to work with [1] [2] (someone please
comment if my understanding is incomplete). Used as a general lifestyle drug
†, grandma isn't suddenly going to look like a sorority girl, but she may feel
like one - a scary thought indeed!

Anti-aging technologies are going to introduce many philosophical questions;
although, that doesn't quite seem to be the case in this specific instance
since this compound will probably just improve the quality of the last couple
decades of a person's life rather than drastically extend it. What's the
difference between curing disease/prolonging natural life vs unnatural "anti-
aging" technologies? At what point do we start grappling with the issues of
immortality? Personally, I believe that the mentally-deteriorating effects of
everyday life, including what one may call "sin," will be too much for the
modern human to retain his/her sanity after a certain point. I for one would
rather face death.

[1] [http://www.genome.jp/dbget-
bin/www_bget?C00003](http://www.genome.jp/dbget-bin/www_bget?C00003)

[2] [http://www.genome.jp/kegg-
bin/show_pathway?map00190+C00003](http://www.genome.jp/kegg-
bin/show_pathway?map00190+C00003)

† I say "lifestyle drug" here to denote elective treatment, although the
effects of natural aging and death dying probably do not fit in the technical
definition, which is to treat "non-life threatening and non-painful conditions
such as baldness, impotence, wrinkles, erectile dysfunction, or acne"

~~~
rictic
This post fills me with questions. Foremost: What makes anti-aging technology
unnatural compared to other medical treatments? To take one example, the
smallpox vaccine was initially considered unnatural, and an affront to God[1].

[1]
[http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/whitem10.html](http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/whitem10.html)

~~~
wpietri
I think it's fair to call most medical treatments unnatural. That doesn't make
them bad, but it should make us thoughtful and careful. Natural systems are
often, thanks to evolution and adaptation, complicated and delicately
balanced.

I think reflexive appeals to tradition and novelty are both kind of dumb. But
if people are going to err, I'd rather they erred on the side of tradition: at
least that shit has been demonstrated to work in one fashion or another. I
always try to keep in mind examples like Eben Byers [1], the THERAC 25 [2],
and rabbits in Australia [3]. All sorts of stupid ideas look appealing at
first.

[1]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eben_Byers](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eben_Byers)

[2]
[http://courses.cs.vt.edu/cs3604/lib/Therac_25/Therac_1.html](http://courses.cs.vt.edu/cs3604/lib/Therac_25/Therac_1.html)

[3]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbits_in_Australia#Effects_on...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbits_in_Australia#Effects_on_Australia.27s_ecology)

~~~
Udo
Sorry, I fat-fingered on the downvote button with my iDevice, I meant to vote
you up (because of the first paragraph specifically, not so much the rest).

Could someone counteract me, please?

~~~
pfortuny
Done.... Just you make a little sport in my stead and get a thinner thumb will
you?

Just kidding.

~~~
Udo
Thanks!

Maybe I'll consider thumb-thinning surgery instead ;)

~~~
crgt
Sounds unnatural.

------
derekja
[http://www.sendspace.com/file/o6n3ad](http://www.sendspace.com/file/o6n3ad)

~~~
mmastrac
Not sure why you are being downvoted -- this is actually the paper in
question, minus paywall. Thanks for the link.

------
fragsworth
> _" with scientists set to look at how the theory of age reversal can be used
> to treat diseases such as cancer, dementia and diabetes."_

Alzheimer's medications can generally improve cognition. Age-reversal
medications might work even better if used at an early age.

I always see articles, media, and papers focusing on how something new can be
used to treat some existing disease. But what I'm always thinking is "can I
use this if I don't have a disease?"

It's a strange disconnect. I know everyone is thinking what I'm thinking, but
you _never_ see this in the articles. Is it some kind of taboo?

~~~
maratd
> It's a strange disconnect. I know everyone is thinking what I'm thinking,
> but you never see this in the articles. Is it some kind of taboo?

Sure. It's ridiculously selfish.

As you age, you realize your success in all things eventually boils down to
experience and ability to execute. Ability to execute wanes with age, as
experience is accumulated, so it balances out. Now imagine a spry 20 year old
with 60 years of experience? Not exactly fair to those actually 20 years old.

EDIT: To the old farts responding below me, regardless of how well you take
care of yourself, you wither with age. By removing that, you are messing with
the balance that has existed for millions of years. It has nothing to do with
fair competition, it has everything to do with using technology to get ahead
of the competition, in the same way that some athletes use performance
enhancing drugs, and we as a society frown on that too.

~~~
gjm11
This is a good opportunity to apply the "reversal test": you say the status
quo is better than an envisaged alternative, so let's see how it looks if that
alternative is the status quo and someone proposes to switch to what we have
now.

So: Imagine a world in which people (let's say) stay at 25-year-old health
until the age of about 90, and then die quickly. And suppose, in this world,
that someone comes along and says: "Hey, I've had this great idea. You know
how sometimes it can be difficult for young people to be successful because
older people are more effective? Well, I know what we can do about it. I've
got this stuff we can put in the water, and what it'll do is make everyone
degenerate with age, so that they lose energy and brain function and strength
and so on. Most people will have stopped paid work entirely by the time
they're 70. A lot of people will find themselves practically unemployable
before they're even 60. What's not to like?"

I can't imagine that the response would be very positive.

~~~
maratd
This is silly. You have absolutely no clue what a future with a "25-year-old
health until the age of about 90" would look like. Not even close. There are
literally millions of things, from the economy to social structure, that would
be impacted. It's not possible to even remotely predict.

~~~
johndevor
Neither do you! So stop trying to predict that it's necessarily a bad or
"selfish" thing.

~~~
intenex
Boom. This was a great rebuttal, I just needed to say that.

------
exratione
There has been a fair amount of research into the effects of manipulating
hypoxia-inducible factor 1 (HIF-1) in lower animals, mostly nematode worms I
believe. Interestingly this is one of the few manipulations in which either
reducing or increasing levels of the protein in question can increase
longevity. This is a sign that there is probably significant complexity
involved in this outcome, such as in relationships with other mechanisms or
that the effects of changes are tied to specific tissues in the body or
locations within cells.

So this is, I think, an overhyping of otherwise interesting new research into
a way to manipulate HIF-1 via NAD levels that is apparently an offshoot of
past and ongoing research into sirtuins and aging. When considering the source
of the wor - the Sinclair lab - the overhyping is perhaps less of a surprise
than it might otherwise be: this is a group with a very large sunk cost behind
them and little to show for it. Deep pockets nonetheless still back continued
efforts, and they have a lot of experience with the press. This is a formula
that leads to breathless press materials touting rejuvenation. The people who
are really, actually working on rejuvenation are more restrained these days.

So I disagree with the tone of the publicity for this work; it's a great
example of the mindless attention machine being manipulating into seizing on
something that has little relevance compared to other far more deserving work.

I think that (a) these researchers have found an interesting set of
interactions to help explain why manipulation of HIF-1 can affect longevity,
and (b) the changing levels of that and various related proteins with
advancing age are responses to accumulated cellular damage. Perhaps the most
relevant damage is mitochondrial, given that cycling of NAD is involved in the
chain of unpleasant results that unfold when mitochondrial DNA becomes
damaged, or perhaps it is something else.

So to my eyes what they focus on isn't a cause, it's a consequence. The
fastest way to see what causes what at this point is to work on repairing the
known forms of damage rather than tracing back all of the myriad complexity of
relationships and feedback loops in the cell - a task that would take
substantially longer than just building means of biological repair for our
cells and other small-scale structures.

------
espadagroup
You can get NADH (which is interchangeable with NAD) pills pretty easily on
amazon for like $30. My question is what is the difference between those pills
and the $50K substance/solution they came up with?

------
malandrew
How is nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NAD) synthesized, such that their
estimates for cost are "about $50,000 a day for a human."?

I would expect that any such estimates on cost would be based on the predicted
cost at scale and not the cost to produce it one off for lab experiments. Is
this a PR ploy to start staking a high price, so that people view it as a
bargain when it is released at some absurd price like $1000/day.

~~~
obiefernandez
They must have some special version of it. NAD can be gotten online for
considerably less [http://www.herbspro.com/co-e1-nadh-
tab-76057.html](http://www.herbspro.com/co-e1-nadh-tab-76057.html)

------
fragsworth
Anyone care to explain why this is too good to be true? Because it's always
too good to be true.

~~~
seanica
It sounds like an expensive drug habit to have. To start with, imagine the
withdrawal symptoms.

~~~
ric2z
death

------
tokenadult
The article reports, "Turner said a 'magic pill' that reverses ageing is
several years away, partially due to the cost of the compound, which would be
about $50,000 a day for a human."

That suggests several things. The clinical trials will be small in the
beginning, and thus the small-n studies will not have much statistical power.
There will be some kind of patent scramble related to any patentable
technology that can reduce the cost of producing the chemical in a dosage form
appropriate for human medicine. And (if and only if this preliminary finding
in mice translates into a safe and effective human medicine) there will be
immense political pressure for a public subsidy to make treatment like this
available to more patients.

The HN participant who kindly submitted this interesting story found a news
source with a nuanced headline, "Anti-ageing compound set for human trials
after turning clock back for mice." That doesn't overpromise, and tells what
stage the research is in. The news report mentions that the researchers have a
peer-reviewed journal publication in Cell

[http://www.cell.com/retrieve/pii/S0092867413015213?cc=y](http://www.cell.com/retrieve/pii/S0092867413015213?cc=y)

on their findings, and I suppose many scientists will be looking at that
publication and thinking about their study findings. That too is better than
the usual submission to HN. Many, many submissions to HN are based at bottom
on press releases, and press releases are well known for spinning preliminary
research findings beyond all recognition. This has been commented on in the
PhD comic "The Science News Cycle,"[1] which only exaggerates the process a
very little. More serious commentary in the edited group blog post "Related by
coincidence only? University and medical journal press releases versus journal
articles"[2] points to the same danger of taking press releases (and news
aggregator website articles based solely on press releases) too seriously.
Press releases are usually misleading.

The most sure and certain finding of any preliminary study will be that more
research is needed. All too often, preliminary findings don't lead to further
useful discoveries in science, because the preliminary findings are flawed.
The obligatory link for any discussion of a report on a research result like
the one kindly submitted here is the article "Warning Signs in Experimental
Design and Interpretation"[3] by Peter Norvig, director of research at Google,
on how to interpret scientific research. Check each news story you read for
how many of the important issues in interpreting research are NOT discussed in
the story.

[1]
[http://www.phdcomics.com/comics.php?f=1174](http://www.phdcomics.com/comics.php?f=1174)

[2] [http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/related-by-
coi...](http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/related-by-coincidence-
only-journal-press-releases-versus-journal-articles/)

[3] [http://norvig.com/experiment-design.html](http://norvig.com/experiment-
design.html)

~~~
rms
If nothing else, I think this is emblematic of where we are in both the news
cycle and the scientific cycle with regards to anti-aging research. After
decades of small progress in anti-aging research, we're at this neat
convergence of increasing public interest in anti-aging research combined with
promising early results and vastly increased funding in the area.

------
Mizza
The actual paper is here, free abstract but the full PDF is paywalled:
[http://www.cell.com/retrieve/pii/S0092867413015213?cc=y](http://www.cell.com/retrieve/pii/S0092867413015213?cc=y)

------
darsham
This seems to be a pretty big deal, but the article gives off the impression
that mithocondrial aging is the only reason that we age. In fact there are
many other aging factors that have not been linked to mithocondrial aging (and
have, agruably, no relationship).

Some other factors I recall studying are

\- gradual DNA damage, which is quite inevitable

\- collagen degradation, which affects the eyes and all cartilaginous tissues.

~~~
zmmmmm
Yes, it is confusing, since there is no wider context given in the article at
all. The conventional story I hear about ageing is that telomeres in
replicating cells become shorter until the DNA no longer replicates and the
cell either dies or seriously malfunctions. As a significant proportion of the
cells in your body move into this state you "age".

So I'm struggling to relate this phenomena to the mitochondrial story
described in the article - it's not clear to me whether these are independent
aspects of ageing or somehow related?

~~~
Filligree
Independent. There are, oh, I think I once saw a lost of about fifteen major
known causes of ageing.

Some are worse than others; this is one of the really serious ones, but not
#1. Others of note are... \- Intracellular debris \- Intercellular debris \-
Gradual macroscopic degeneration from incomplete healing/scarring \-
Progressive DNA damage, with any number of consequences (e.g. cancer) \-
Asymptotic loss of some brain functions (e.g. learning)

I could go on. For evolutionary reasons all of these hit at roughly the same
time, which means uploading remains the most promising approach for
_completely_ eliminating ageing.

Well, almost completely. Upload someone, and you eliminate degeneration below
the firmware/software layer, but you still need to cope with a brain that
didn't evolve to last for centuries.

~~~
kbenson
_uploading remains the most promising approach for completely eliminating
ageing_

If so, in the future the equivalent of CryptoLocker will be a terrorist weapon
that takes hostages.

~~~
hmsimha
I also see a strong future for bitcoin in this scenario. Virtual minds are
going to have a hard time paying for things with cash. They'll probably want
some form of currency to pay for their Amazon EC2 instances to offload various
components of their sentience, essentially slowing down their perception of
the passage of time so they can get more accomplished faster.

~~~
Filligree
Right.

Because there's no way, today, to pay for an EC2 instance without involving
physical cash.

------
ChuckMcM
I always wonder about this quote,

 _“Whether that means we’ll all live to 150, I don’t know, but the important
part is that we don’t spend the last 20 to 30 years of our lives in bad
health.”_

Imagine a process that makes you feel like you are 25 right up until you body
gives up at a physical age of 100 or something. Do you end up doing riskier
things because you don't "feel" old? And if you did would you die sooner? Its
an interesting question for me. I'm not sure how that would work.

(and of course if they are successful (which I hope they are) then we're
talking about pushing back retirement until 90 or maybe 95 right?)

~~~
sliverstorm
_if they are successful (which I hope they are) then we 're talking about
pushing back retirement until 90 or maybe 95 right?_

Which I would be totally OK with. Imagine how much more scientific progress we
could make if we had 70-year veterans of their field with the sharp mind of a
27-year-old!

~~~
ams6110
Who says their minds will be sharp? This discovery is about muscle aging.

~~~
agumonkey
Good point indeed, that said, even physical health can be a toll on your mind.
Freed from that you can spend more time thinking instead of aching.

------
roadster72
>researchers confident that side-effects will be minimal due to the fact the
compound is naturally occurring.

There are a lot of naturally occurring poisons too. I'm curious, how does the
substance being naturally occurring have anything to do with the side-effects?

~~~
DennisP
They mean it's naturally occurring in the human body. And I'm not sure but I
think they're not boosting it much beyond natural youthful levels.

------
DonGateley
I wonder why the study has nothing to say about the longevity of the treated
mice compared to controls. Maybe it costs too much for experimenting with
extended effects and maybe they want something for their next paper.

The biggest problem of course is sociological with only the top tiny% able to
afford it. The psychological divide between have and have not will grow in
ways completely unacceptable to the (100-tiny)% and could stimulate
revolutionary tendencies among the masses to even things out. The top tiny%
really should be considering pouring lots of their money into making the
treatment cheap enough to not create a divide so intolerable that it will
perish under its own weight.

------
teh_aimee
Some seriously interesting comments here, on a very interesting piece of
research!

If any of you wanted your comments to be a part of the post-publication review
record for the paper (either as reviews or as discussion points), you can head
over to the Publons website at
[https://publons.com/p/3318/](https://publons.com/p/3318/) to leave them!

Disclaimer - yep, I currently help out at Publons :)

------
mrfusion
I wonder if these researchers could win the mprize [1] for this?

[1] [http://www.mprize.org/](http://www.mprize.org/)

------
codex
Can anyone explain how this compound differs from the NAD you can buy as a
supplement, if at all?

~~~
mrfusion
Well I do see this quote:

"Turner said a “magic pill” that reverses ageing is several years away,
partially due to the cost of the compound, which would be about $50,000 a day
for a human."

So in guessing there's some special processing of the compound or a special
way to get it into each cell somehow.

~~~
kolev
Currently, you can buy NADH, which seem different, or NAD+ precursors (Niacin,
Niacinamide) or Niagen
([https://chromadex.com/Ingredients/NIAGEN.html](https://chromadex.com/Ingredients/NIAGEN.html)),
which is proprietary and suppoedly increasing NAD+ levels. It's pretty
expensive as of now compared to Niacin, but, still, $50/month isn't that much.
Combining Niagen with Resveratrol should do the trick.

~~~
brador
Any expected or potential side effects?

------
yawz
Hmm... As I'm new here I'm a little confused. I posted the same article
yesterday but this one posted by Mizza got picked up quite heavily. Does the
poster's "karma" have something to do with it? Or is it just a coincidence?

~~~
Mizza
Sundays typically are more accepting of this kind of content. I also posted a
link to the article in Cell as a comment with the submission.

 _shrug_

It's really just timing though.

~~~
yawz
;) Thanks for the response.

------
mattsfrey
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomorrow_and_Tomorrow_and_Tomor...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomorrow_and_Tomorrow_and_Tomorrow_\(short_story\))

------
Tycho
It's interesting, even if we halted aging so that people could theoretically
live forever, we would as a culture have to embrace a sort of 'death by
probability.'

~~~
Filligree
Not for long, I bet. We'd find ways to make backups.

------
drhouse_md
[http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-12-20/scientists-develop-
ant...](http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-12-20/scientists-develop-anti-ageing-
process-in-mice/5168580)

I found this article on the subject more informative, it contains 2 media
clips, 1 video, 1 audio, with the scientists involved with the study.

------
evincarofautumn
NAD is an interesting chemical anyway for its electrical properties. I had an
idle thought once upon a time that you might be able to make some kind of
liquid binary computer with it, given how readily you can “toggle” it between
NAD+ and NADH. I don’t know nearly enough about it, though.

------
sifarat
Question is, would it make one, 'young at heart' too. Possibly No. And this is
all what matters.

As for $50K/Day price tag, it makes it loud and clear, this drug is for the
filthy riches at least for couple of years, my average joe and jenny will
remain old and ugly. :/

------
jarnix
Great for the mice.

I don't understand this phrase "Turner said a “magic pill” that reverses
ageing is several years away, partially due to the cost of the compound, which
would be about $50,000 a day for a human." ?

$50,000 a day for a human ? What is the effect of a day of treatment ?

~~~
BadassFractal
50k at first, 5 bucks eventually, hopefully.

------
gingerlime
I wonder whether the researchers were tempted to try this on themselves. Or
the lab costs of producing it[1] would effectively prevent it?

[1] quoted at $50k per day, not sure how many days a person needs...

------
polskibus
They should put it on kickstarter, asking for donations and early adopters.
I'm pretty sure they would've fulfilled their goals in a week or less.

~~~
saalweachter
Pledge $X or more

Y backers

ONE EXTRA DAY OF LIFE.

~~~
D-Coder
Someone once asked me why I'm so interested in life-elongation technology. I
said, "I'm BETTING MY LIFE on it!"

------
nnnnni
IF this is true and IF this really works in humans, you _know_ that the only
people that will ever be able to afford it will be the "1%".

------
ballard
How might this compound compare to HGH, etc. by getting in top physical shape
by working out (a lot), healthy diet and sleep?

------
roschdal
Peter Thiel, you know where you should invest now. This is a product every
human being will pay for.

------
X4
Okaaayyy... Can I buy NAD+? Or is the magic in using sIRNA[1] to inject NAD+
into the pathway?

I have read on Wikipedia that our body can generate it.

Moneyquote: _" In organisms, NAD+ can be synthesized from simple building-
blocks (de novo) from the amino acids tryptophan or aspartic acid. In an
alternative fashion, more complex components of the coenzymes are taken up
from food as the vitamin called niacin. Similar compounds are released by
reactions that break down the structure of NAD+. These preformed components
then pass through a salvage pathway that recycles them back into the active
form. Some NAD+ is also converted into nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide
phosphate (NADP+); the chemistry of this related coenzyme is similar to that
of NAD+, but it has different roles in metabolism."_ [2]

And: _" This NAD+ is carried into the mitochondrion by a specific membrane
transport protein, since the coenzyme cannot diffuse across membranes."_ Link:
[http://www.jbc.org/content/281/3/1524](http://www.jbc.org/content/281/3/1524)
[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16291748](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16291748)

I can buy Tryptophan [3] and D-Aspartic Acid (DAA) [4] pretty easily and
legaly. Would an overdose in Tryptophan have the same effect? UPDATE:
[http://aminoacidstudies.org/l-tryptophan/](http://aminoacidstudies.org/l-tryptophan/)
Yes, Tryptophan overdose is bad!

I'm sorry, I'm pretty good at absorbing all kinds of scientific materials, but
I am really not familiar with all the "body science". That's why I'm asking
you, if you know what would happen with regular Tryptophan overdose. I know
that DAA can destroy Neurons when overdosed and should only be used according
to the RDA.

I don't buy that it's sooo expensive. That's either because researcher's
monthly wage is astronomers, or the lab equipment they think is needed is too
expensive. I am sure it can be done much much cheaper without the advantages
of mass production. You and I currently synthesize the NAD+ thing for free!!
The problem they solved, should be repeatable with cheaper equipment or even
at home. I would like to have a cat, dog, hamsters or fish that live longer.
(Parrot's already live pretty long, but I guess they'd be funnier with more
NAD too) \--

[1]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_interfering_RNA](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_interfering_RNA)

[2]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicotinamide_adenine_dinucleoti...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicotinamide_adenine_dinucleotide)

[3]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tryptophan](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tryptophan)

[4]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D-aspartic_acid](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D-aspartic_acid)

