The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
So, when I'm thinking about what could be in young blood that could be rejuvenating, I can imagine that there's sort of a possible double dissociation there. That as we get older, we're having little, let's just call them micro injuries that we're not aware of all the time. And that infusing young blood into that person um would make them feel better. So, you're counteracting the bad stuff. But there's another picture where you're supplying something that's pro- youthful.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
And the composition changes dramatically from young to old. We have this picture that I always like to show when I give a a talk about our work where we have um several thousand individuals and we measure 3,000 proteins in them and then we use collars to show low levels or high levels of proteins and you see this dramatic change from young people to old people in a way that you can pick one sample and you can say this person must be about that old.
So we saw that the concentration of their proteins was very different in young people and old people. So do the proteins in our body change because they respond to the aging of the brain for example or do they actually drive the aging of the brain?
This new study suggests there proteins in old blood that are responsible for accelerating aging.