I found this article very interesing and educational.
Therefore I want to give something back to you guys, namely a study I found on NCBI, “Long-term administration of the mitochondria-targeted antioxidant mitoquinone mesylate fails to attenuate age-related oxidative damage or rescue the loss of muscle mass and function associated with aging of skeletal muscle”.
Maybe MitoQ is not so promising after all, but please check it out for yourselves here:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5067250/
Hope to have helped.
Have a good weekend & stay healty,
Chris
Has anyone notice an improvement in blood pressure?
]]>How about this recent study:
The targeted anti‐oxidant MitoQ causes mitochondrial swelling and depolarization in kidney tissue
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5880956/
Any comments?
]]>Thanks PP, fair call, each to their own.
Here’s a quote from that article:
“MitoQ treatment dose dependently increased the proportion of SSEA1-negative cells, as a possible sign of impaired stemness of the iPSC. This was not associated with increased cell death.”
Notice that the researchers say that it’s a “possible” sign of impaired stemness. Yet the cells didn’t actually die. So they are already questioning their own conjecture of impaired stemness due to SSEA1-negativity.
SSEA1-positive cells are found in around 50% of adenocarcinomas (a type of cancer) and are indicative of Hodgkin’s lymphoma.
And yet increasing SSEA1-negative cells is bad? SSEA1 positive cells are highly tumorigenic (in vivo) and can turn into SSEA1 negative. [R – https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19427293%5D
Also, the variance to N value ratios on the study’s graphs are appalling when matched with their conclusions.
I’m at least going to keep taking it. If anything this only adds to my case. Thank you.
]]>