• neom 3 hours ago
• bakoo 2 hours ago

Great, finally Leonardo DiCaprio will be able to find his life partner.

• ethanj8011 an hour ago

From the abstract of the paper, significantly more nuance.

> Despite persistent immune aging phenotypes, GzmK deficiency markedly attenuated organ aging, effectively uncoupling immune and tissue aging... These findings identify GzmK as a tissue-specific driver of organismal aging but not immune aging or systemic inflammaging.

• RobotToaster 3 hours ago

Paywall

• StilesCrisis 3 hours ago

Thank God! Finally, mice that don't age!

• A_D_E_P_T 2 hours ago

Interestingly, their lifespans would probably be affected very little.

> GzmK does not affect steady-state immune aging or aged immune responses after challenge

Virtually all old mice die of cancer, especially in the lab. If GzmK doesn't mitigate immune system aging, GzmK-null mice are still going to die of cancer, for little or no change in lifespan. (But presumably an improved healthspan due to reduced soft tissue and bone aging.)

• hagbard_c 34 minutes ago

> Virtually all old mice die of cancer, especially in the lab

Bret Weinstein did research on this topic which suggested that this is caused by lab mice having extraordinarily long telomeres which cause them to be good at cell repair but bad at limiting neoplasm growth due to delayed apoptosis. The result of this combination would be that lab tests on potential damage done by preparations on these mice is less valid 'cause they are better at repairing such damage than the average mammal due to those long telomeres. It also means nearly all these mice succumb to cancer. They're not normal mice, at all.

The reserve-capacity hypothesis: evolutionary origins and modern implications of the trade-off between tumor-suppression and tissue-repair

Bret S Weinstein 1 , Deborah Ciszek

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11909679/

• therein an hour ago

> Virtually all old mice die of cancer, especially in the lab

Is this related to them being cloned? Did anyone try to get some random mice or is that too taboo?

• cyberax 36 minutes ago

No, even wild mice or rats are cancer magnets. If you have a pet rat, it will likely die of cancer.

This is a huge problem for medical research. Imagine that you conduct a safety test of your compound on mice, and 25% of the test group die of cancer within 1 year. That's bad, right? Well, the control group also has 20% cancer rate.

• nativeit 3 hours ago

I’d unironically love to have a pet rat that lives longer than a few years.

• deadbabe 2 hours ago

A good idea for a startup might be a pet shop where you can buy all kinds of weird genetically altered mice! Or custom order!

• SeanAnderson an hour ago

and then we can have pets stuck forever at shelters!

... :( I'll see myself out.

• KyleSanderson 2 hours ago

Can't wait for this to escape in New York City. Ageless undying sewer rats - what a utopia haha.

• agnosticmantis 4 hours ago

In mice.

• derektank 3 hours ago

Humans have the same protein. Knock out studies in mice have historically been very informative about human biology (with some exceptions). That’s very different from drug studies, where the molecules not only have to have the same effect in the model species, but also all off target effects have to be similar. That’s a higher barrier to clear and why mice studies of pharmaceutical interventions should (and do) face higher scrutiny.

• _s_a_m_ 2 hours ago

interesting, i exactly read the opposite position from biologists that the mice experiments are now very useful when it comes to applicability to humans. I guess we have every possible oppinion.

• arijun an hour ago

The reasoning they gave seems plausible, what reasoning do your biologists give for holding the opposite position?