Beware of Buying Young People's Blood to Prevent Aging, FDA Says

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-02-19/beware-of-buying-young-people-s-blood-to-prevent-aging-fda-says

by leothekim • 7 years ago

83 98 7 years ago

gotocake3• 7 years ago

Proof if it were needed that money can’t buy you brains. Making the leap from rodent models where a juvenile and elderly rodent shared a circulatory system to transfusions is so breathtaking in its lack of basic sense that you have to wonder how these guys made it in tech to begin with. Never mind that we’re not rodents, and if we were we’d already be immortal with all we’ve cured mice of. Never mind the morality or risks, just focus on the stupidity of equivocating a pint of “young blood” with hooking your circulatory system to another organism!

Is it really shocking that cadging the use of a young endocrine system, kidneys, lungs etc might help an older organism? No. Is it shocking that supposedly intelligent people have managed to conflate that with a transfusion? Yes!

Hasz• 7 years ago

I think you've been downvoted for conflating "good idea" with "good product".

There's plenty of polished turds, that, marketed appropriately, will make their promoters and founders millions.

I agree with you though -- the leaps here are tremendous, and likely unfounded.

tomp2• 7 years ago

But why not? It seems that blood donation is a well-established medical practice, so presumably safe... So for minimal risk, you get a low-probability chance of tremendous benefit (life extension). Sounds very worth it.

gotocake3• 7 years ago

Blood transfusion comes with a host of risks which increase the more you do it. Call me old fashioned, but I’d like to save up for a time when my life depends on not having an infusion reaction!

I’m also getting the sense that you’re not quite getting what I’m saying about the difference between getting a bag of blood from a teenager, and having your circulatory system grafted onto a teenager. Even leaving aside the “we’re not mice” issue, you do see the difference not only in scale, but type right? Please say yes...

Junk_Collector4• 7 years ago

Blood transfusion has a number of significant risks, just not in comparison to the cases where it is employed.

From the FDA, "The more common risks are allergic reactions and transfusion associated circulatory overload and less common risks include transfusion related acute lung injury or transfusion associated circulatory overload and infectious disease transmission."

A Sense of impending doom is a side effect of an incompatible blood transfusion and is typically followed by death.

These companies are also mostly fly by night "move fast and break things" motto companies that do not undergo rigorous medical evaluations. A large part of the FDAs concern in their official statement is that these companies are not conducting clinical trials.

devwastaken2• 7 years ago

"why not" is always a good way of killing people. If you don't know why and how, you don't know it's effects. The whole 'well it won't kill you' mentality of false medicine ends up prolonging the time, if ever, of a person getting real treatments. This is an infectious mentality, not just one individuals choice for themselves.

notahacker• 7 years ago

Another way of framing it is that by regularly accepting a low but non-zero risk of very serious consequences of blood transfusion, you get a possibility of magic happening which currently exists in the realm of conjecture.

Not to mention that some people have established medical needs for plasma donations and the number of donors is not unlimited...

daveFNbuck3• 7 years ago

Well-established medical practices aren't necessarily safe, they just have benefits that tend to outweigh the risks in normal use. When there are no established benefits, even a small risk is too much.

DoreenMichele2• 7 years ago

Aside from very real medical concerns being covered in other comments, donors are typically anonymous. So I would be extremely leery of claims that it's from "young people" to begin with.

Blood intended to save your life makes no unverifiable claims about the age of the donor. They are pretty strict about who can give blood, but this is not per se a pertinent metric normally.

PhasmaFelis2• 7 years ago

But why not? It seems that blood donation is a well-established medical practice, so presumably safe.

It's safer than bleeding out and dying. That doesn't necessarily mean it's 100% risk free.

Junk_Collector4• 7 years ago

The only thing that advances faster than science is the rate at which psuedo-science co-opts it to sell people snake oil.

GreeniFi• 7 years ago

Business idea: wooden stakes for sale!!! I’ll make a killing.

Call me old fashioned, but I can’t believe this is a thing.

minikites• 7 years ago

Peter Thiel is going to be disappointed.

https://www.inc.com/jeff-bercovici/peter-thiel-young-blood.h...

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/08/peter-thiel-wants-to...

bitxbitxbitcoin2• 7 years ago

Fret not. He can invest in something else to cure that disappointment.

Junk_Collector4• 7 years ago

It has really come down to this. The FDA has to warn people that it is a bad idea to inject yourselves with other peoples blood.

I like the idea though. For centuries we've had motif's of the "evil queen" bathing in the blood of innocents to rejuvenate herself. Now in modern times we can move past the idea of wealthy elderly capitalistic vampires sucking the youth out of people indirectly to becoming literal vampires sucking the life out of the young directly.

bdamm• 7 years ago

As a once-young person I would not have had any problem selling my blood a pint at a time to help an elderly person feel rejuvenated, assuming that it worked and I was being paid for it. After all, I often gave away my blood for free, and go nothing in return except some juice, cookies, and a smile.

leothekim• 7 years ago

Formal statement from the FDA: https://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/u...

moate2• 7 years ago

Link currently broken (from their side)

DoreenMichele2• 7 years ago

Works just fine for me.

bytematic• 7 years ago

I feel like this headline could be from any century

bitxbitxbitcoin2• 7 years ago

Or from any country - such as Transylvania.

NeedMoreTea• 7 years ago

LOL I thought this was a crazy imagined thing for Gavin Belson. So I guess the SV thing was a satire of real life already?

ladybro• 7 years ago

https://gizmodo.com/peter-thiel-goes-on-the-record-about-inj...

warp_factor3• 7 years ago

I would be scared to inject myself with someone else's blood without science fully understanding what is going on yet.

whatshisface• 7 years ago

If you had dementia you would be even more scared. That's why quack medicine can survive in a world where rational information is available, it is terrifying to die.

jklinger4103• 7 years ago

The FDA is still on the fence about Marijuana, if that gives you any idea of where they are at on new technologies and drugs.

komali22• 7 years ago

Sure, but let's leave the FDA out of the picture for a second:

1. How much evidence is there that Marijuana is an effective treatment for certain diseases? How much evidence is there that Marijuana is harmful?

2. How much evidence is there that infusing young people's plasma into your blood treats any illnesses? How much evidence is there of risks associated with infusing plasma?

We don't need to include the FDA to take a look at how silly the idea is.

jklinger4103• 7 years ago

My comment is made to combat the tone of this thread that somehow an FDA warning is the same thing as negative proof.

The FDA is famously restricted by the Feds, often leaving them decades behind. This is like an OSHA type warning telling you not to inject plasma into yourself like an idiot.

joejerryronnie• 7 years ago

In college, I’m pretty certain I infused marijuana into my bloodstream for four straight years. The resultant life extension is still to be determined.

warp_factor3• 7 years ago

A lot of people are still on the fence. Science is not completely clear about what is happening with weed. And it is not always a "positive" drug.

I'm all for making it legal, but we should also realize that there is a multi-billion dollar lobby pushing with an agenda for legalization that tries to paint weed with all the advantages in the world.

devwastaken2• 7 years ago

There's also incredibly profitable cigarette business's that want to fund the opposite, and arguably have had much more influence and money to do so. Weed isn't a miracle, but it's also not evil either.

thebokehwokeh2• 7 years ago

You're obviously committing a straw man fallacy.

But based on this line of arguing, you're implying that young blood has actual biological benefits.

If so, can you back this claim up at all?

jklinger4103• 7 years ago

My point is that when science discovers something, good or bad, the FDA will be the last one to tell you.

The commenters in this thread seem to believe an FDA warning is some type of negative proof on this therapy. I just don't think that's the right way to read this.

moate2• 7 years ago

I feel like this is missing the part where the FDA just shut down Ambrosia.

Check out their site. It's just a note "In compliance with the FDA announcement issued February 19, 2019, we have ceased patient treatments."

https://www.ambrosiaplasma.com/

therealforsen• 7 years ago

That's creepy to associate young people's blood plasma with nectar of the gods.

wincy2• 7 years ago

Well the nectar of the gods made you immortal if you ate/drank it, right? So it seems appropriate considering what they purported to be selling.

buboard2• 7 years ago

oh wow indeed this seems more important.

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/aging/young-blood-company-amb...

they re probably not the only ones shutting down

youeeeeeediot• 7 years ago

sells one liter of blood plasma from donors between the ages of 16 and 25 for $8,000, according to its website.

I would be very curious to know what they typically paid the donor in that transaction.

awakeasleep• 7 years ago

It's typically a blood plasma internship, done for exposure to the wealthy clients.

kbenson• 7 years ago

Poe's law is so strong with this comment, I have no idea what to believe.

dx87• 7 years ago

Probably not a ton. I used to donate plasma every Friday for some beer money. I'd normally get 15-30 dollars. That number was higher than most as well, because I got paid extra due to receiving various vaccinations in the military.

glitcher• 7 years ago

Yet another example of reality making it very difficult for organizations like the Onion.

anonytrary• 7 years ago

You had me in the first half, not gonna lie.

e12e• 7 years ago

As far as I can tell, Bloomberg didn't actually link to an official statement, but the Verge did:

https://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/u...

pkaye• 7 years ago

Also I think if you ever need a kidney transplants, all the antibodies in your system from blood transfusions may make it hard to find a match.

edoo• 7 years ago

Having to vet the source of the children's blood you vampire like transfuse yourself with sounds like a billionaire problem.

danilocesar• 7 years ago

Sounds like 2019 tech vampires...

jotm• 7 years ago

Hey, stop putting blood boys out of their jobs!

CommieBobDole• 7 years ago

The statement says that there's no clinically-proven benefits. Have there been any clinical studies?

floatboth• 7 years ago

FDA subtweeting Larry Ellison here

newyankee• 7 years ago

this reads like an onion article but the skeptic in me suggests the rich know something we do not.

killjoywashere7• 7 years ago

As the medical director of a blood bank and donor center that produces plasma, please do not taint the public's perception of the blood supply with misuses like this. We have a hard enough time ensuring sufficient donors without calling into question our disposition of their generous donations. We do not condone this sort of use. If you think this is abstract, I am about to send an email to my surgical colleagues because we'll be out of the most precious donation tonight at midnight: platelets. You tighten the donor pool at all, and you will make platelet donations exponentially harder.

I can't overemphasize the risk this misuse of blood products represents to healthcare systems around the world. This is an anti-vax movement waiting to happen: "Billionaires looking for a fountain of youth get blood transfusions from young bucks? WTF?" blends easily into "Why should I donate blood if they're just going to sell it to billionaires?" This would be catastrophic for trauma resuscitation, surgeries of all kinds, and a variety of medical patients.

There should be severe penalties for soliciting service like this. Imagine if solid organ transplants were handled in the same way: "Young man, as a new intern, I'll give you a percentage of my Facebook stock in exchange for a kidney..."

The next problem: it will only take one high-profile transfusion reaction to crater the public trust. If the biology nerds in the audience want to distract you with fancy talk about the low risk of certain molecular things happening because "it's just plasma", skip it. Simple, mechanical transfusion-associated circulatory overload is plenty enough to kill an old guy with stiff arteries and hypertension.

And the worst part is the lack of science being used to drive a supply chain decision that's highly science-dependent. This is so ethically corrupt I don't even know where to begin. The FDA's statement pales in comparison to what I'm sure the inspectors are actually feeling right now.

Please, if you know someone soliciting this kind of transfusion (recipient or physician), encourage them to read the FDA statement.

insertnickname• 7 years ago

Given the lack of blood donors, what is your personal stance on paying people to donate blood to blood banks? (to be used strictly for "trauma resuscitation, surgeries of all kinds, and a variety of medical patients", not for voodoo science anti-aging treatments)

mannanj• 7 years ago

Wondering this as well. I used to donate blood, but why do it for free when technically speaking hospitals generate revenue off my blood? How hard would it be really to incentivize me to show up and compensate me for my time, after all, the doctors, nurses, etc who are handling our blood wouldn't do it for free so why should I?

killjoywashere7• 7 years ago

It significantly increases the risk of blood borne pathogens

JamesBarney4• 7 years ago

Imagine if solid organ transplants were handled in the same way: "Young man, as a new intern, I'll give you a percentage of my Facebook stock in exchange for a kidney..."

This is already true in Iran. Here's the first paragraph of the Wikipedia entry.

The practice of selling one's kidney for profit in Iran is legal and regulated by the government. In any given year, it is estimated that 1400 Iranians sell one of their kidneys to a recipient who was previously unknown to them.[1] Iran currently is the only country in the world that allows the sale of one's kidney for compensation (typically a payment); consequently, the country does not have either a waiting list or a shortage of available organs

d3ad1ysp0rk• 7 years ago

Your success criteria both reference the recipient. Often things can work out well for the wealthy and poorly for even those who "voluntarily" opt in.

rhcom2• 7 years ago

Weird though because that's only one organ and most of the others don't compare with spares.

mk4p• 7 years ago

Thanks for posting this - these are facets of the story I'd never have known otherwise

SilasX9• 7 years ago

Couldn't you fix this with paid, professional (but not full time), healthy blood donors? Compensation to donors would be a trivial cost of any operation performed with the blood, right?

Is this -- at risk of going there -- just another case where the effective solution is too disgust-evoking to try?

Edit: I agree that free donors will dry up under a system of compensation, but that's equally true of e.g. going to "all lumber must be donated" -> pay market prices to tree farms.

killjoywashere7• 7 years ago

Paying for blood is not new. It has been shown to increase the infectious disease risk in the blood supply.

Beware of Buying Young People's Blood to Prevent Aging, FDA Says

Related Stories