Japanese study uncovers protein that keeps skin youthful | Hacker News Reader

Japanese study uncovers protein that keeps skin youthful

japantimes.co.jp

232 pointsclouddrover60 comments

The (original articles) title is a bit misleading. They only verified the importance of a specific protein and then found compounds that for mice helped the boost protein production in mice, they still need a lot more research to find something that would help human skin look youthful.

That makes it sound like it's still only theory that it would benefit mice. But they actually tried it:

> They isolated two chemical compounds — Y27632 and apocynin — and tested both on skin cells, with positive results. “Application of these drugs to full-thickness skin wounds significantly promoted wound repair,” the study said.

What a time to be a mouse.

There is SERIOUS money to be made in the beauty market. I do not succumb, but the majority of my girlfriends purchase a large variety of face products at the cost of hundreds per year. Many of the products are unscientific (and fortunately don't do any harm) but abound with rejuvenation property claims. A product that might actually work? Wow.

> "Many of the products are unscientific (and fortunately don't do any harm) but abound with rejuvenation property claims."

For example: it's amazing to me how many facial products such as face masks contain collagen.

Do people think that your body just takes collagen from your epidermis and adds it to your skin?

Most people don’t think that much. They see the ad, see the brand and maybe check validation with their girlfriends.

sure, but it's not just skin products. The Paleo/Keto/Bulletproof movement is gung-ho on the supposed miracle that is bone broth. From claims that collagen in the diet equals collagen in the body to unique/magical properties of whatever they think it contains are rampant. Drinks, protein powders, supplements - it's everywhere. Just like eating a lot of protein doesn't make you ripped, I would think more people would understand that even though the saying is "you are what you eat", it's not LITERAL.

It is literal. Everything you are made out of is something you have eaten

That doesn't mean that eating muscles makes you muscular though obvs (any more than eating mussels makes you mussel-ar)

> "That doesn't mean that eating muscles makes you muscular though obvs (any more than eating mussels makes you mussel-ar)"

Yea that's what I meant by literal, as in you aren't a pig if you eat pigs, you aren't muscular if you eat muscle. You are made up of the building blocks of the thing you ate, but that does not make you the thing itself.

Maybe literal wasn't the right word? Anyways, doesn't really matter.

Eating a lot of protein is definitely necessary but not sufficient to get ripped. You absolutely are what you eat - literally (though it's true not everything is digested and absorbed).

These aren't good analogies to make.

Hydroxyproline is conditionally essential, particularly in older and injured populations, and collagen is a rich source of it. Research has demonstrated that collagen supplementation reduces arthritis symptoms and increases collagen synthesis. That being said, unless you're getting 15+g of collagen (the amount used in one study I recall) in your bone broth it probably isn't doing much.

Protein up to a point improves protein synthesis, and it also has the nice side effect that it is inefficiently stored as fat, both from a thermodynamic and hormonal standpoint. So a random high protein diet is more likely to get someone "ripped" than a random low protein diet.

Hydroxyproline is found in collagen but your body can synthesize Hydroxyproline so it's not like collagen is the only way to get what you need which is how people/products make it sound. Any known benefits from taking in glycine, proline, and hydroxyproline in the form of collagen are very specific to a small portion of the population (such as OCD sufferers) and, as you mentioned, only in very large doses. There are certainly ways to improve your skin/connective tissue without buying into what is mostly a marketing gimmick.

But, it's go bee sting oil! Of course it's good for you.

The number of these commercials that claim something is good for you because it has some random, natural oil in it, is staggering. There's plenty of natural acids that will melt you into a pile of goo. i wouldn't want to put those on my face.

If the collagen is hydrolyzed into individual amino acids, then yes, it is absorbed by the skin and used by molecular enzymes to assemble collagen.

This assumes the enzymes are functioning correctly and have the capacity to synthesize more collagen.

These mechanisms are well understood and elucidated in good biochemistry and nutrition textbooks.

Retinol has very strong and noticeable affects actually. I use it for acne.

There is serious money BEING made; I did a quick google, it's a half a trillion dollar worldwide industry.

A few hundred a year? I know people that spend that in a month, or on the whim for high end products. Beauty is series business.

Link to paper: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332186913_Stem_cell...

“We are working on other epithelial organs as well to find out (whether) similar competition may underlie long-term tissue maintenance as well as organ aging,” she said." Wonder if this will be benificial to live-expectancy in the long run.

Yeah, this sounds more like a starting point to general regeneration than just looking youthful:

> “Application of these drugs to full-thickness skin wounds significantly promoted wound repair,” the study said.

I guess scars might be a thing of the past in a generation or two as well.

I wonder how this protein can affect tissue with cancer cells.

So - "They isolated two chemical compounds — Y27632 and apocynin — and tested both on skin cells, with positive results."

Search for Apocynin first...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apocynin

"Apocynin was first described by Oswald Schmiedeberg, a German pharmacologist, in 1883 and was first isolated by Horace Finnemore,[1] in 1908, from the root of Canadian hemp (Apocynum cannabinum).[2] At the time, this plant was already used for its known effectiveness against edema and heart problems."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apocynum_cannabinum

"Apocynum cannabinum (dogbane, amy root, hemp dogbane, prairie dogbane, Indian hemp, rheumatism root, or wild cotton)[2] is a perennial herbaceous plant that grows throughout much of North America - in the southern half of Canada and throughout the United States.[1][3] It is a poisonous plant: Apocynum means "poisonous to dogs". All parts of the plant are poisonous and can cause cardiac arrest if ingested."

...

"Apocynum cannabinum was much employed by various Native American tribes who used it to treat a wide variety of complaints including rheumatism, coughs, pox, whooping cough, asthma, internal parasites, diarrhoea and also to increase milk flow in lactating mothers.[6] The root has been used as a tonic, cardiotonic, diaphoretic, diuretic, emetic (induces vomitting) and expectorant.[9][6] It is harvested in the autumn and dried for later use. The fresh root is the most active part medicinally."

And it seems to be one of the medicinal plants that the north American locals have known about long before Europeans rocked up.

Then if I search for Y27632, I get stuff like;

https://www.reprocell.com/small-molecules-c1/stemolecule-y27...

"Y27632 is a cell-permeable small molecule Rho-associated kinase (ROCK) inhibitor1. Y27632 has been found to prevent apoptosis as well as enhance the survival and cloning efficiency of dissociated human embryonic stem (ES) cells without affecting their self-renewal properties or pluripotency2. This molecule has also been shown to enhance survival during the transplantation of ES cell-derived neural precursors3. Y27632 in combination with Pifithrin-u significantly improves cell recovery after cryopreservation"

Does anybody here know what the similarities are likely to be between those two compounds and if Apocynum has already being used dermatalogically? Given the history it seems very unlikey that it wouldnt have already been made into a topical skin cream by someone before now. I'm also guessing that the people who make Y27632 are going to be cranking up production right about now and giggling a lot.

From a comment here (https://news.nukleosome.com/t/anti-aging-discovery-could-lea...) quoting the study authors:

"We selected candidate chemicals that potentially increased the stem cell property [Apocynin] or reduced production of reactive oxygen species [Y-27632]"

Thanks. I find it interesting that they are reporting success hitting two apparently seperate trigger mechanisms of the same process in the same study. I wonder how this will hold up in further studies as this seems kinda lucky.

Was chatting about this with someone on Health News. I doubt it's lucky - the two compounds have been examined together in several previous studies; https://www.nature.com/articles/hr2005119

Are you a biologist by the way?

Nahh, just have full spectrum curiosity. I mess around with pixels and robots mostly.

edit - and I have just gone down a rabbithole while I should be wiring LEDs. Am gonna stop now and go back later to find out what all the words mean.

More synthetic please

title?

Yay! :)

Sounds like an multi billion dollar business. That will increase the gap between wealthy and poor even more. But well, that's the world we live in.

I'm ok with that. Cars and computers were also only available to rich people at first. The alternative is not having them at all.

Actually there's literally infinite alternatives. Simple logic.

With sort of thinking we would all be peasants scratching out a living in the dirt always on the verge of starvation.

The trend of technology is the rich get something first and over time access trickles down to everyone.

"But well, that's the world we live in."

- Sunday afternoon thought of George Washington, sipping on a glass of wine in a certain alternate universe one Sunday afternoon.

I always hear this comment and yet no one can provide one example where a technology or innovation was similar in the past. From air travel, electric cars and medicine, the rich get it first before prices drop for mass marketability.

It is fairly easy, as a thought experiment, to project such a trend of accelerating accrual of benefits of technology to the plutocracy to a future point where your statement is no longer true.

Tesla was, is and for some time will be only for the rich. More adoption, competition and improved processes of manufacturing will drive the price down for the masses.

You mean the electric car?

Because a lot of companies make electric cars. In China, for example, there are a couple hundred electric car companies.

The Chinese will buy electric cars by the tens of millions and everything will change. It doesn’t matter if Tesla is still expensive.

Isn't that kind of his point? Initial innovation is expensive, but it soon becomes affordable for all, and thus innovation is good for everyone

1.3 million electric vehicles were sold last year in China.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/08/fitch-says-chinese-electric-...

Tesla is a premium brand. There are other more affordable EV’s being sold in China.

We’re way past initial innovation.

The largest car market in the world is migrating to EV’s.

It already is a multi billion dollar business. And cyberpunkish dystopia stuff like "poor get old & decrepit while rich extends youth" already exists in several ways(health, food, in US "legal roiding"... Same shit as it's always been.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com