DailyTech - Researchers Determine AUF1 Gene Controls Inflammation/Cancer/Accelerated Aging

Submit News

Science Researchers Determine AUF1 Gene Controls Inflammation/Cancer/Accelerated Aging
Tiffany Kaiser - May 28, 2012 2:32 PM

19 comment(s) - last by alcalde.. on Jun 7 at 1:01 AM

(Source: sciencebuzz.org)

Researchers described the gene as a "medical and scientific trinity"

NYU School of Medicine researchers have found that the connection between inflammation, accelerated aging and cancer lies in one specific gene.

Robert J. Schneider, PhD, study leader from NYU School of Medicine, along with an NYU team, have found that a single gene, AUF1, is responsible for the correlation between inflammation, accelerated aging and cancer, and can control all three.

For years, it was understood that AUF1 controlled inflammation, and it was also known that there was a connection between inflammation, accelerated aging and cancer. However, the reason for the connection was unknown.

Now, Schneider and his team have figured out this mystery connection. According to the team, the AUF1 gene not only controls inflammatory response, but also activates the enzyme telomerase to repair the ends of chromosomes. This decreases inflammation and prevents rapid aging and cancer development.

"This was certainly an unexpected finding," said Schneider. "It is rather uncommon for one gene to have two very different and very significant functions that tie together control of aging and inflammation. The two, if not regulated properly, can eventually lead to cancer development. It's an exciting scientific find.

"AUF1 is a medical and scientific trinity. Nature has designed a way to simultaneously turn off harmful inflammation and repair our chromosomes, thereby suppressing aging at the cellular level and in the whole animal."

The study was published in the journal Molecular Cell.

Source: e! Science News

Comments

Threshold

Username
Password
remember me

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

will be buried soon

By talikarni on 5/28/2012 6:23:22 PM , Rating: 2

Considering drug companies and doctors want people to keep spending money on pills that reduce their ills, and stay just healthy enough to keep living but sick enough to keep coming back. If all of a sudden people started getting cured, they wouldn't be able to afford that 4th Porsche, so they will bury this research any day now.

RE: will be buried soon

By aurareturn on 5/29/2012 2:16:06 AM , Rating: 2

talikarni,

I absolutely think that you are spot on.

This is one of the biggest fears I have. These drug companies will sell you a drug to cure a wart but may cause death or increase cancer risk. It's ridiculous and I really don't understand why people haven't woke up from this nightmare.

You really think they will come up with a 100% cure for cancer, aids, etc.? Of course not. Health is a business. If you are cured, they get no business.

I highly suggest that you guys check out earthclinic.com for natural cures for common problems.

Parent

RE: will be buried soon

By aurareturn on 5/29/2012 2:21:09 AM , Rating: 2

I also want to ask everyone this:

What do you think about researchers receiving donation money for cancer/disease research?

I've always figured, why would a researcher want to find a cure if the money keeps pouring in and you're making a killing? What's the motivation there?

There should be more visibility into what our money is actually doing when we donate or when our tax dollars go into health research.

Parent

RE: will be buried soon

By Noya on 5/29/12, Rating: -1

RE: will be buried soon

By Reclaimer77 on 5/29/2012 8:29:15 AM , Rating: 2

You're an ignorant dick, you know that right? A cancer cure would be locked away by "corporate interests" (as if), so you make a scene at a Safeway and piss all over volunteers collecting breast cancer donations? It just wasn't enough for you to make a choice to not donate, you had to attention whore and show your shitty world view to everyone lol.

Parent

RE: will be buried soon

By Paj on 5/29/2012 9:59:48 AM , Rating: 2

What a generous soul you are. Fight the good fight brother!
:/

You are aware that there isn't currently, nor will there ever be, a single catch-all 'cure for cancer', right? Cancer isnt a single of disease, its a cornucopia of conditions with a multitude of causes, risk factors, and epidemiologies.

Having said that, cancer survival rates keep improving decade on decade, and organisations such as the charity you refused to support have played a big role in that. Think about that next time a volunteer asks you for a modicum of financial support for a noble cause - they're probably doing more good for the world than you ever will.

Parent

RE: will be buried soon

By michael2k on 5/29/2012 12:33:29 PM , Rating: 2

Do you really hate women that much?

Parent

RE: will be buried soon

By michael2k on 5/29/2012 2:28:59 PM , Rating: 2

Because researchers are part of the population that have cancer, know of people with cancer, know people with cancer, and have had friends/family/relatives die of cancer.

Ergo they want to eliminate cancer.

Just off the top of my head I've had one classmate die of leukemia at age 9, one uncle die of stomach cancer at age 70 and one aunt die of an unidentified cancer at age 55. From word of mouth I've had several "in laws" also die of cancer. I also have a classmate who, while cancer free, has have had four or five female relatives die of breast cancer before the age of 60 (such that one of her living relatives had an elective double mastectomy at age 40!) and a couple friends of friends in the same boat.

If I were a cancer researcher, I would certainly want to have lengthened the lifespan of my own family members as well as myself!

Parent

RE: will be buried soon

By MrBlastman on 5/30/2012 12:03:20 PM , Rating: 2

quote:
What do you think about researchers receiving donation money for cancer/disease research?

I've always figured, why would a researcher want to find a cure if the money keeps pouring in and you're making a killing? What's the motivation there?

You went from a healthy paranoid to a little over the edge there. I'm sure there are _some_ researchers out there that do what they do because of money alone, but there are many out there who do not.

Almost half of my family is full of scientific researchers of one form or another and none of them are in it for the money. Yes, some of them have done well, but at the end of the day it is their passion for science and drive to help others and society that really motivates them.

Getting a PHD in the sciences requires an extreme amount of effort and dedication. Enough so to dissuade most people from even attempting it that are driven by "money" alone. Most will say screw it and go the B-School route to try and make fast bucks. Getting a doctorate is anything but glorious and sprinkled with divine earthly pleasures. The path is full of sacrifice and hard work.

It isn't flawless, some might slip through, but they are few and I think ultimately most who pursue the higher path do it because they want to be there to accomplish something greater than themselves... not just money.

The executives of the public companies though--they aren't these researchers. They are in it for a business and thus this is where I draw a distinction between plausibility and fiction. It's totally plausible that the executives might want to milk people and keep them hanging on for just one more pill--the researchers though, I think most (not all) of them want to do good for everyone.

Parent

RE: will be buried soon

By 91TTZ on 5/29/2012 10:31:10 AM , Rating: 2

Those "natural" cures for illnesses often have no proof that they work. In other words, they're fooling you.

Parent

RE: will be buried soon

By bennyg on 5/29/2012 12:24:09 PM , Rating: 2

Not arguing that a lot of crap advice that exists on the internet that doesn't work.

Am arguing that quality, properly applied natural/non-medical treatments do "work" brilliantly. A trained and educated natural therapist could possibly even manage to treat your closed mind! I also enjoy the irony of those standing behind the "evidence-base" do so with such blinding faith.

In response to OP, having dabbled in medical research (yech) I favour an explanation of ineptitude over conspiracy any day. It will go nowhere because the opinions of the study authors are completely based on conjecture, but more importantly there is no foreseeable return on investment present yet which means chances of further funding are next to f-all.

Parent

RE: will be buried soon

By alcalde on 6/7/2012 1:01:08 AM , Rating: 2

As Tim Minchin put it, these "natural/non-medical treatments" are treatments that either haven't been proven to work or have been proven not to work. If they had been proven to work, they'd be called "medicine".

Parent

RE: will be buried soon

By alcalde on 6/7/2012 12:56:47 AM , Rating: 2

Sorry, I'll stick with evidence-based medicine rather than a shady website filled with anonymous anecdotes.

Try asking yourself this: do you really think doctors, pharmacologists, etc. wake up every morning and ask themselves how they can debilitate their patients to make more money?

>It's ridiculous and I really don't understand why people haven't woke
>up from this nightmare.

The "nightmare" of modern medicine that has so greatly extended our average lifespan? That's hardly a nightmare. Try telling the parents of children who die in Africa from diseases we've eliminated in the first world, those who die because of a lack of vacinations, etc., that they should be greatful they're not living our "nightmare".

>You really think they will come up with a 100% cure for cancer,
>aids, etc.? Of course not. Health is a business. If you are cured,
>they get no business.

All of the dedicated researchers working around the world in cancer and AIDS research are in on this conspiracy too? It's all a sham? All of the people who are in clinical trials are all being given sugar pills, I assume? And that recent story about researchers having such great success with an experimental prostate cancer treatment that they ended the trial early to get the control group on the treatment as well - that was just planted in the press by the Council On Foreign Relations or the Freemasons, right?

On a similar note, do police intentionally fail to arrest criminals because no crime means no jobs? Do firefighters give out faulty smoke alarms because they want more deaths to convince towns to open up more firehouses? Are the physicists at the LHC intentionally overlooking the Higgs so that their funding continues? Do real estate agents intentionally steer you to houses they know you won't like so that you'll move again soon and they'll get more commissions? Do auto makers intentionally put faults in their vehicles so that you'll buy another car sooner?

Do you see how silly this gets when you apply this reasoning to other areas?

This should not be one of your biggest fears. There is no vast, worldwide conspiracy to make you ill for profit. Treatments are never "buried". You insult and offend all of the good, ethical people involved in medical research (one of whom saved my mother's life and managed to halt a rare autoimmune disease that was eating away her muscles). Relax. Just try to ask yourself "Is this the MOST likely explanation, or the LEAST likely explanation?" when you're tempted to jump onboard a conspiracy bandwagon. It helps put things in perspective.

Parent

RE: will be buried soon

By Flunk on 5/29/2012 8:18:22 AM , Rating: 2

I doubt it, it's a competitive industry and this research could lead to a massive number of drugs and other treatments. Trust me, everyone wants to cure cancer. The drug companies just want to charge you an arm and a leg to do it.

Of course, I'm not saying this research will lead to a cancer cure. Although there is some potential.

Parent

RE: will be buried soon

By 91TTZ on 5/29/2012 10:29:58 AM , Rating: 2

Sounds like a wacko conspiracy theory to me. This crap belongs on a site where they talk about 9/11 "truth" and JFK theories.

Parent

What % of the variance is explained?

By hydrata on 5/29/2012 12:07:39 AM , Rating: 2

I haven't read the original journal article, but often genomics explains very little of the total variance. While researchers may believe that a particular gene is responsible for a range or 40-70% of variance, our current methods and technologies are only able to statistically explain 2% or less of the actual variance. There is still much work to be done in the field of genomics and one cannot discount gene * environment interactions.
Though this is an important discovery, much work will need to be done and people should not assume this discovery will have an immediately noticeable impact on society.
Regression associations with this little variance can be done with a variety of factors.
"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted." - Albert Einstein

double edged swords

By bennyg on 5/29/2012 11:51:47 AM , Rating: 2

"Health" is not about bruteforcing something high or low but about bringing about moderation.

We need inflammation - it's the mechanism by which the body stimulates healing (Suppressing it with corticoids has severe side effects)

We need oxidative stress and free radicals - so our macrophages have some H2O2 to kill engulfed pathogens with and so cellular biochemistry can have some reactions occur. (None of them = dead)

We need telomeres to protect vital genes near the terminal ends of chromosomes and reduce chromosome fusion and translocation events - but inappropriately turned on, telomerase contributes to uncontrolled cell proliferation and carcinogenesis.

In reality - goal of living forever just as far away as ever. We humans are designed with an expiry date - focus should be on living well not living long (something that will become acutely obvious with the coming storm of neurodegenerative disease)