In June, Stanford biologist Tony Wyss-Coray
took the TED stage to describe no less than “an
absolutely amazing development in aging
research” ( How young blood might help reverse
aging. Yes, really). His research has shown that
proteins found in the blood of younger mice can
dramatically reverse the effects of aging when
given to older mice. The implications are huge,
perhaps ushering in a new era for the treatment of
diseases like Alzheimer’s and maybe — just
maybe — providing a way to treat aging itself.
But the same research has also triggered some
hand-wringing, and it’s not hard to guess why. If
turning back the clock on our bodies is as simple
as infusing ourselves with “young blood,” won’t
young blood become a commodity? And if it
does, what will that mean for the world’s most
vulnerable children? “I am petrified to think of
the industry this would create,” wrote Todd L. in
response to Wyss-Coray’s talk. “Think of how
third-world children are treated now for
inexpensive electronics and clothes. They would
be treated like cattle to have their plasma
harvested.”
How founded are fears about a black market in
young blood? Here are three factors to consider:

1. It’s still very early days for this research.
Scientists have not yet identified the specific
factors in young plasma that are responsible for
Wyss-Coray’s results. And once they do, that’s
still just a first step. Then they’d likely need to
figure out how to inject those factors at much
greater concentrations than they naturally occur,
and how best to mix them with other ingredients,
such as synthetic antibodies designed to
counteract the pro-aging factors found in older
blood. It is also still possible that activating stem
cells — as young plasma is believed to do — will
prove carcinogenic and thus too risky for humans.

2. Giving blood is nothing like donating a
kidney.
Let’s say for the sake of argument that
transfusions of young blood do have a positive
effect on humans, that young blood proves adept
at combating not only neurodegenerative diseases
like Alzheimer’s but also the ravages of aging
itself. What then?
It’s important to understand that blood is not the
same thing as a kidney or a slice of liver. In fact,
plasma differs from organs that tend to be
criminally trafficked in several significant ways
— the first being that it’s not illegal to sell.
The National Organ Transplant Act (NOTA),
which outlaws the sale of soft tissue organs,
excludes plasma. In fact, in the United States,
donors can and do earn up to $200 a month for
plasma donations. Several companies — and
several hundred donation centers — collect tens
of thousands of such donations every single day.
Those donations are routinely used in a wide
spectrum of pharmaceutical products, including
treatments for blood disorders like hemophilia.
Donors are for the most part little taxed by this
process because — and here’s the second big
difference between blood and soft-tissue organs
— the body can regenerate the lost plasma in
about a week’s time. In fact, an average person
can donate plasma about twice a week without
any appreciable risk to his or her own health.
That’s not to say that there aren’t issues here.

3. More than likely, this technology won’t end
up being about reversing or aging at all. It’ll be
about helping people to heal faster.
To have any lasting effect, blood plasma would
have to be administered to a patient at regular
intervals. (Compare this with a kidney transplant,
which, however complicated and risky it might
be, still involves only a single operation for both
the donor and the recipient.) Anyone seeking to
benefit from young blood — be it to treat
Alzheimer’s or to stave off the ravages of aging
itself — would need weekly, or even daily,
transfusions. That calculus changes the picture
considerably, and makes it far less likely that a
bloody black market would be viable. “It’s far
more involved than a single surgery or even a few
transfusions,” Wyss-Coray says. “The patient’s
loved ones would have to be willing to subject
them to untested blood, over and over again.”
That’s one of the reasons why, for now,
researchers have more modest aims in mind,
thinking more about using young blood to heal
rather than reverse aging. For instance, it might
be that short-term infusions help elderly patients
heal faster from surgeries or falls. “It wouldn’t
necessarily be about making them young again,”
Wyss-Coray says. “It would be more about
making them healthier.”
Wyss-Coray’s corporate affiliates have launched
a small-scale human trial (just 18 or so subjects)
to test the efficacy of young plasma in early and
mid-stage Alzheimer’s patients, but that trial will
proceed slowly and we won’t see results for many
months yet.
Of course, neither black markets nor prospective
patients will necessarily wait that long. Already,
Wyss-Coray says, his inbox is flooded with notes
from Alzheimer’s patients and aging billionaires
alike, all of them seeking some form of
consultation or treatment. But that’s not a reason
to stop the research. What it means is that we
should proceed with open but cautious minds.
Public dialogue — predicated on facts, not
misinformation — will go a long way towards
dispelling some of the worries that are likely to
creep up around “young blood” science. And
people armed with facts will be far less likely to
subject themselves or others to undue risks.

ok i have seen. what next ?

well, all this almajiri them go hear this time. mean while check out ma signature