Blood Transfusions May Accelerate Alzheimer’s Progression

 Didn't your competent? doctor plan on giving you young blood if a transfusion was needed? Oh no, your doctor DOESN'T KNOW ABOUT IT? Incompetence from the board of directors and on down. Sounds like the hospital needs to be reconstituted!

• (young blood 30 posts to June 2014)

So this brings up the question for your doctor. Should all stroke survivors get blood transfusions from young people, maybe your grandchildren?

How young should the blood be?   

Blood Transfusions May Accelerate Alzheimer’s Progression

Summary: New research shows that blood from older animals can speed up Alzheimer’s-related changes in the brain, while young blood may slow them down. In a long-term experiment, mice engineered to develop Alzheimer’s symptoms received weekly blood infusions from either young or old donors.

Older blood increased amyloid buildup and worsened cognitive performance, while young blood appeared to have protective effects. Proteomic analysis revealed more than 250 altered proteins linked to synaptic signaling, calcium channels, and other pathways tied to neurodegeneration. The findings highlight circulating blood factors as potential targets for future Alzheimer’s therapies.

Key Facts

• Blood-Borne Influence: Aged blood accelerated amyloid buildup and cognitive decline in Alzheimer’s-model mice.
• Protective Effect: Young blood altered brain protein profiles in ways consistent with improved synaptic and neuronal function.
• Therapeutic Potential: Results point to blood-derived factors as a new frontier for Alzheimer’s interventions.

Source: Melisa Institute

Alzheimer’s disease is the most common form of dementia worldwide and continues to be one of the greatest public health challenges.

New research, published in the journal Aging-US, reveals that blood from aged mice can accelerate the progression of the disease, while young blood may have protective effects.

The study was led by researchers from Instituto Latinoamericano de Salud Cerebral (BrainLat) at Universidad Adolfo Ibáñez in conjunction with MELISA Institute, the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, and Universidad Mayor.

These results reinforce the idea that circulating factors in the blood can directly influence the progression of neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s. Credit: Neuroscience News

Alzheimer’s is characterized by the abnormal accumulation of beta-amyloid protein (Aβ) in the brain, forming plaques that disrupt communication between neurons and generate neurodegenerative processes.

Although this protein originates in the central nervous system, recent studies have suggested that it may also be present in the blood, opening new possibilities for understanding how the disease progresses.

To explore this hypothesis, the team used Tg2576 transgenic mice (a model widely used in Alzheimer’s research), which received weekly blood infusions from young and old mice for 30 weeks to assess whether factors present in the blood could modulate amyloid accumulation and the animals’ behavior.

“This collaborative work between various institutions reinforces the importance of understanding how systemic factors condition the brain environment and directly impact mechanisms that promote disease progression.

By demonstrating that peripheral signals derived from aged blood can modulate central processes in the pathophysiology of Alzheimer’s, these findings open new opportunities to study therapeutic targets aimed at the blood-brain axis,” explained Dr. Claudia Durán-Aniotz, from the Instituto Latinoamericano de Salud Cerebral (BrainLat) at Universidad Adolfo Ibáñez.

The team assessed cognitive performance using the Barnes test, the accumulation of amyloid plaques with histological and biochemical techniques, and performed a comprehensive proteomic analysis of the treated brains.

This analysis revealed more than 250 differentially expressed proteins, linked to synaptic functions, endocannabinoid signaling, and calcium channels, which could explain the observed changes.

Regarding MELISA Institute’s participation in this research, Mauricio Hernández, a proteomics expert at the research and biotechnology center, commented that “within this study, we conducted a large-scale proteomic analysis that allowed us to generate excellent quality data in this complex matrix like plasma, a technical challenge for any proteomics laboratory. Thanks to our state-of-the-art equipment (timsTOF Pro2), we are proud to have contributed to the production of a robust and high-quality scientific article.”

These results reinforce the idea that circulating factors in the blood can directly influence the progression of neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s. Understanding these mechanisms will allow for the identification of new therapeutic targets and preventative strategies. The next step will be to determine exactly what these factors are and whether it is possible to intervene in them in humans.

“It is a pleasure to contribute our proteomic capabilities to support innovative research initiatives like this study, which allow us to advance the knowledge and development of new therapies for neurodegenerative diseases, which are currently a global health problem,” emphasized Dr. Elard Koch, Chairman of MELISA Institute.

Funding:

C.DA. was supported by ANID/FONDECYT Regular 1210622, ANID/PIA/ANILLOS ACT210096, the Alzheimer’s Association (AARGD-24-1310017), ANID/FOVI240065 and ANID/Proyecto Exploracion 13240170 and MULTI-PARTNER CONSORTIUM TO EXPAND DEMENTIA RESEARCH IN LATIN AMERICA (ReDLat), supported by NIH research grant R01AG057234 funded by the National Institute of Aging (NIA) and the Fogarty International Center (FIC), an Alzheimer’s Association grant (SG-20-725707-ReDLat), the Rainwater Charitable Foundation, and the Global Brain Health Institute with additional support from the Bluefield Project to Cure Frontotemporal Dementia, an NIH contract (75NS95022C00031), and NIA under awards R01AG075775, R01AG082056, and R01AG083799.

The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health, the Alzheimer’s Association, Rainwater Charitable Foundation, Bluefield Project to Cure Frontotemporal Dementia, or the Global Brain Health Institute.

The contribution of RM and team in this work was supported by NIH grants RF1AG072491 and RF1AG059321. UW was supported by ANID/FONDECYT Regular 1240176.

Key Questions Answered:

Q: How did aged blood affect Alzheimer’s pathology in this study?

A: Mice that received blood from older donors showed faster amyloid plaque accumulation, altered brain protein profiles, and worse performance on cognitive tests. These changes suggest that circulating factors in aged blood actively promote processes linked to Alzheimer’s progression.

Q: What benefits did young blood provide in the Alzheimer’s mouse model?

A: Young blood shifted brain protein expression toward patterns associated with healthier synaptic signaling and reduced disease-related dysfunction. These protective effects point to specific molecular factors that may slow or counteract neurodegeneration.

Q: Why does this research matter for Alzheimer’s treatment development?

A: The findings reveal that the blood–brain axis plays a meaningful role in driving or slowing Alzheimer’s progression. Identifying the exact blood-borne molecules involved could lead to new therapeutic targets or preventative strategies aimed at modifying systemic factors rather than the brain alone.

Editorial Notes:

• This article was edited by a Neuroscience News editor.
• Journal paper reviewed in full.
• Additional context added by our staff.

About this Alzheimer’s disease research news

Author: Damian Vallejos
Source: Melisa Institute
Contact: Damian Vallejos – Melisa Institute
Image: The image is credited to Neuroscience News

Original Research: Open access.
“Infusion of blood from young and old mice modulates amyloid pathology” by Claudia Durán-Aniotz et al. Aging-US

Restrictive Versus A Liberal Transfusion Strategy in Patients With Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage: A Secondary Analysis of TRAIN Randomized Clinical Trial

 You better ask your competent? doctor NOW if this is a protocol in your hospital. You don't want to be telling your ER doctors what needs to be done.

Restrictive Versus A Liberal Transfusion Strategy in Patients With Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage: A Secondary Analysis of TRAIN Randomized Clinical Trial

hiara Faso, MD https://orcid.org/0009-0008-7959-832X chiarafaso95@gmail.com, Elisa Gouvea Bogossian, MD, PhD https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2062-465X, Carla Bittencourt Rynkowski, MD, PhD, Kirsten Moller, MD, PhD https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3058-1072, Piet Lormans, MD https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9978-1414, Manuel Quintana Diaz, MD, Anselmo Caricato, MD, … Show All … for the TRAIN Study Trial GroupAuthor Info & Affiliations

Stroke

New online

https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.125.050729

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Red blood cell transfusions are commonly administered to anemic patients with spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH); however, the optimal hemoglobin threshold to initiate transfusion is uncertain in this population. Therefore, we aimed to assess the impact of 2 different hemoglobin thresholds to guide transfusion on the neurological outcome of anemic critically ill patients with ICH.

METHODS:

This is a secondary analysis of a prospective, multicenter, phase 3 randomized study conducted in 72 intensive care units across 22 countries from 2017 to 2022. Eligible patients for the original trial had an acute brain injury, hemoglobin values ≤9 g/dL within the first 10 days after admission, and an expected intensive care unit stay of at least 72 hours; in this study, only patients with spontaneous ICH were assessed. Patients were randomly assigned to undergo a restrictive (transfusion triggered by hemoglobin ≤7 g/dL) or a liberal (transfusion triggered by hemoglobin ≤9 g/dL) strategy over a 28-day period. The primary outcome was the occurrence of an unfavorable neurological outcome, defined as a Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended score of 1 to 5, at 180 days following randomization.

RESULTS:

A total of 144 patients with spontaneous ICH were analyzed: 45.8% of them were male, with a mean age of 58.4 (SD, 13.4). Mean Glasgow Coma Scale on admission was 7.3 (SD, 3.3), and 75.7% of patients had a volume of hematoma >30 mL. Among all patients, 73 were randomized to the restrictive transfusion strategy, while 71 to the liberal one. Baseline characteristics were comparable between the 2 groups. At 180 days after randomization, patients assigned to the liberal transfusion strategy had a nonsignificant decrease in the probability of unfavorable neurological outcome (71.8 versus 84.7%; risk ratio, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.71–1.01]; P=0.06). Also, the occurrence of the composite outcome (mortality and organ failure at day 28) was significantly lower in the liberal group (71.8% versus 87.7%, risk ratio, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.69–0.97]; P=0.02).

CONCLUSIONS:

A liberal transfusion strategy was associated with a lower risk of mortality and organ failure, but not of unfavorable outcome in patients presenting with spontaneous ICH, compared with a restrictive strategy. However, the study cohort might have been underpowered to detect clinically relevant differences between the 2 interventions.

Graphical Abstract

C

Transfusion in Acute Brain Injury: Is Less Still More?

 Ask your competent? doctor how this informs your recovery.

Transfusion in Acute Brain Injury: Is Less Still More?

Blood transfusions are commonly given to patients with acute brain injury, but there is ongoing debate over whether a restrictive or liberal transfusion strategy is preferable. 

Results of the TRICC trial published more than two decades ago favored a restrictive strategy, which has largely guided transfusion practice. But results of the TRAIN study, recently published in JAMA, favor a more liberal transfusion strategy. 

“Overall, with the TRAIN results, I think practice will probably shift more toward consideration of a liberal transfusion strategy,” Nina Massad, MD, assistant professor of clinical neurology, Division of Neurocritical Care, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida, told Medscape Medical News. Massad was not involved in either study. 

TRICCed Into Restrictive Strategy?

Published in 1999, the landmark Transfusion Requirements in Critical Care (TRICC) trial, suggested that a restrictive strategy of red-cell transfusion is at least as effective as, and possibly superior, to a liberal transfusion strategy in critically ill patients.

The trial enrolled more than 800 critically ill but stable ICU patients with hemoglobin concentrations < 9.0 g/dL, with patients randomly allocated to either a conservative trigger for transfusion of < 7.0 g/dL or a liberal threshold of < 10.0 g/dL. 

Overall, mortality at 30 days was lower with the restrictive strategy (18.7% vs 23.3%), but the difference was not statistically significant (P = .11). Inpatient mortality was also lower in the restrictive group (22.2% vs 28.1%; P = .05) as was ICU mortality (13.9% vs 16.2%; P = .29).

The results led to shift in transfusion practice, with restrictive thresholds being widely adopted to avoid inappropriate use of a scarce resource, Alexis Turgeon, MD and Francois Lauzier, MD, Quebec University Hospital Center — Laval University Research Center, noted in a JAMA editorial. 

Yet, the TRICC trial has been called the most misinterpreted study in medicine. 

Among the concerns raised, the trial enrolled few neurocritically ill patients, did not include a subgroup analysis of those with acute brain injury and did not assess long-term functional outcomes, which are “more relevant to these patients than mortality and more impactful for clinical practice,” Turgeon and Lauzier pointed out. 

From TRICC to TRAIN

Enter the TRAIN trial, which showed that liberal transfusion was associated with better neurological outcomes in patients with acute brain injury. 

The trial was conducted at 72 ICUs across 22 countries and included 850 patients with acute traumatic brain injury (TBI), aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) or intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). All participants had a hemoglobin level below 9.0 g/dL within the first 10 days after injury and were expected to stay in the ICU for at least 72 hours. 

They were randomly assigned to liberal transfusion (triggered by hemoglobin < 9.0 g/dL) or restrictive transfusion (triggered by hemoglobin < 7.0 g/dL).

Patients receiving the liberal transfusion strategy had a significantly lower rate of unfavorable neurological outcomes (the primary outcome) at 6 months than those in the restrictive group (62.6% vs 72.6%; adjusted relative risk: 0.86; P = .002). 

The findings were consistent across all subgroups of brain injury and post hoc analyses, reported Fabio Silvio Taccone, MD, PhD, with the Free University of Brussels, Belgium, and colleagues. 

There were also fewer cerebral ischemic events in the liberal group (8.8% vs 13.5%; relative risk, 0.65). There was no effect on ICU or hospital length of stay, organ failure at 28 days or mortality. The liberal group required more transfusions than the restrictive group (median, 2 vs 0 units). 

HEMOTION Consistent With TRAIN 

The main findings of the TRAIN trial are consistent with those of the HEMOTION trial, a large-scale, multicenter international trial of 742 adults with moderate or severe TBI and anemia. 

In contrast to TRAIN, HEMOTION included only patients with TBI, used a higher liberal transfusion threshold (10 g/dL), and assessed brain injury severity in the emergency department following stabilization. 

Fewer patients in the liberal than restrictive group had an unfavorable neurological outcome (68.4% vs 73.5%).

However, a separate study published last spring found that a liberal (vs restrictive) transfusion strategy did not decrease the risk for an unfavorable neurologic outcome at 6 months in critically ill TBI patients.

Nonetheless, the weight of the new evidence shows that liberal transfusion thresholds appear “widely beneficial,” Turgeon and Lauzier note in their editorial. 

They added that blood products are now “safer than ever” and the rationale for advocating a restrictive strategy in the TRICC trial era — to “save precious resources without harming patients” — no longer holds.

“Fortunately, the weight of sparing precious resources has now been lifted from the shoulders of neurocritically ill patients, in whom serious concerns about the safety of a restrictive strategy have been raised by the TRAIN and HEMOTION trials. Based on the best available evidence, it is prudent to advocate a liberal transfusion strategy for these neurocritically ill patients,” Turgeon and Lauzier concluded. 

Practice Changing? 

Massad told Medscape Medical News the TRAIN study results “will likely change practice for many providers. I will probably consider a more liberal transfusion goal, particularly who seem to be at higher risk of tissue hypoxia — for example, vasospasm; concern for delayed cerebral ischemia; low brain tissue oxygenation on brain tissue oxygen monitoring.” 

Massad said it remains to be seen whether a liberal strategy helps prevent cerebral ischemia specifically. Another unanswered question concerns the optimal transfusion threshold in acute ischemic stroke.

She also noted that current guidelines from the Neurocritical Care Society for SAH state there is insufficient evidence to provide a recommendation to transfuse for a threshold higher than hemoglobin > 7.0 g/dL in SAH. 

There have been no guidelines to support a liberal transfusion strategy in ICH either, as there are limited studies on this. 

For TBI, the most recent Brain Trauma Foundation guidelines from 2016 do not address transfusion thresholds, although there have been suggestions from other groups to transfuse red-blood cells in the setting of low oxygen on brain tissue oxygenation monitoring, Massad noted. 

“My feeling is that a liberal strategy is going to start being reconsidered for subsequent guideline updates in acute brain injury. More definitive guideline recommendations are probably going to depend on further studies to corroborate these findings,” Massad said.

“Additional studies are currently ongoing, including one investigating this question specifically in SAH patients (SAHaRA trial), so this will hopefully help clarify the question in the SAH population,” she said. 

The TRAIN study was funded by the ESICM NeXT grant and La Fondation des Geules Cassées. Taccone had no relevant disclosures. Turgeon served as chief investigator, and Lauzier as co-principal investigator, of the HEMOTION trial. Massad had no relevant disclosures.

Liberal Blood Transfusion After Traumatic Brain Injury May Hold Benefit

 This is why this research should be done in stroke survivors, not just TBI. But NOTHING WILL OCCUR. We don't have two functioning brain cells anywhere in stroke medical leadership!

Of course your competent? doctor started working on stroke anemia 7 years ago! But you don't have a functioning stroke doctor, do you?

• anemia (2 posts to August 2016)

Impact of anemia on acute ischemic stroke outcomes: A systematic review of the literature

This line from there: Anemia has been reported in nearly 40% of acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients and is linked to significant morbidity and disability.

The latest here on TBI but should translate to stroke:

Liberal Blood Transfusion After Traumatic Brain Injury May Hold Benefit

Trial didn't meet primary outcome, but functional independence scores were better

by Judy George, Deputy Managing Editor, MedPage Today June 13, 2024

Key Takeaways

• A liberal blood transfusion strategy didn't reduce the risk of an unfavorable neurologic outcome at 6 months in critically ill patients with traumatic brain injury.
• However, it did lead to higher scores in some, but not all, measures of functional independence and quality of life.
• Transfusion strategy was not associated with either mortality or depression.

A liberal blood transfusion strategy didn't reduce the risk of an unfavorable neurologic outcome at 6 months in critically ill patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) but showed other possible benefits, the HEMOTION trial found.

An unfavorable outcome occurred in 68.4% of the liberal-strategy group and 73.5% of the restrictive-strategy group (adjusted difference 5.4 percentage points, 95% CI -2.9 to 13.7), according to Alexis Turgeon, MD, of CHU de Québec-Université Laval in Canada, and co-authors.

However, the liberal strategy was tied to higher scores in some, but not all, measures of functional independence and quality of life, the researchers reported in the New England Journal of Medicine. The findings were presented simultaneously at the Critical Care Reviewsmeeting in Belfast, Ireland.

Outcomes significantly favored the liberal group for the following secondary endpoints, with differences compared with restrictive transfusion of:

• 4.34 points in overall Functional Independence Measure scores
• 5.19 points in EuroQol visual analogue scale scores
• 0.06 points in the EuroQol five-dimension, five-level utility index scores

Between group differences were not significant for Quality of Life after Brain Injury scores or Patient Health Questionnaire-9 scores for depression. Minimally important differences for TBI have not been established for these measures and no adjustment was made for multiple comparisons, the researchers noted.

"The combined incidence of death and major disability was not statistically different between the two groups, but seemed [to be] favoring the liberal strategy in all analyses," Turgeon said in a statement.

"In light of the overall results of our study and considering the safety of current blood transfusions, the liberal strategy is probably the option that should be preferred in the acute phase of care to improve long-term prognosis following TBI," he suggested. "By improving oxygen transport to the brain during the acute phase of care, it may be possible to save more nerve cells in the days following a TBI, thereby preventing additional brain damage."

Anemia develops in most critically ill patients with TBI and may reduce oxygen to the brain and contribute to poor outcomes. Trials of transfusion strategies in critically ill adults and children showed no mortality benefit in maintaining high hemoglobin levels.

"However, these trials included very few patients with neurologic injuries and focused on mortality; they thus provide insufficient guidance for the care of patients with traumatic brain injury, for whom long-term neurologic function is the most important outcome," Turgeon and co-authors wrote.

"Clinical guidelines and reviews comparing the effects of liberal transfusion strategies with those of restrictive transfusion strategies emphasize that current data are not sufficient to guide transfusion practices in patients with traumatic brain injury," they added.

From September 2017 to April 2023, HEMOTION randomized 742 adults with moderate or severe TBI and anemia to receive transfusion of red cells according to a liberal strategy (transfusions triggered by a hemoglobin level ≤10 g/dL) or a restrictive strategy (transfusions started at a hemoglobin ≤7 g/dL). The study was conducted in 34 hospitals in Canada, the United Kingdom, France, and Brazil.

Trial inclusion criteria specified a Glasgow Coma Scale score of 3 to 12 (scores range from 3 to 15, and lower scores indicate lower levels of consciousness). Most participants were men (72.7%), the mean age was about 48, and 73.2% had severe traumatic brain injury. More than two-thirds had extracranial injuries.

The primary endpoint was an unfavorable outcome at 6 months on the Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOS-E). Scores on this scale range from 1 (death) to 8 (a full return to normal life). HEMOTION researchers defined an unfavorable outcome using a sliding dichotomy of GOS-E scores, according to the prognosis of each patient at baseline. Secondary outcomes included mortality, functional independence, quality of life, and depression at 6 months.

The relative risk of an unfavorable GOS-E outcome in the liberal group versus the restrictive group was 0.93 (95% CI 0.83-1.04). Findings were consistent across patients with the worst, intermediate, and best predicted prognoses and in sensitivity analyses.

Mortality was 26.8% in the liberal group and 26.3% in the restrictive group at 6 months. Venous thromboembolic events occurred in 8.4% of each group. Acute respiratory distress syndrome emerged in 3.3% of the liberal-approach group and 0.8% of the restrictive group.

The trial recruited only patients with anemia, which is a population that tends to have more severe TBI at baseline, Turgeon and co-authors noted. "Detection of small treatment effects becomes more challenging as the baseline risk increases," they observed. In addition, the liberal and restrictive groups had some imbalances at baseline.

• Judy George covers neurology and neuroscience news for MedPage Today, writing about brain aging, Alzheimer’s, dementia, MS, rare diseases, epilepsy, autism, headache, stroke, Parkinson’s, ALS, concussion, CTE, sleep, pain, and more. Follow

Disclosures

The HEMOTION trial was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and others.

Turgeon reported being the Canada Research Chair in Critical Care Neurology and Trauma.

Co-authors disclosed relationships with academic institutions, non-profit groups, and industry.

Primary Source

New England Journal of Medicine

Source Reference: opens in a new tab or windowTurgeon AF, et al "Liberal or restrictive transfusion strategy in patients with traumatic brain injury" N Engl J Med 2024; DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa240436.

The Elusive Philosopher’s Stone in Young Blood

How young of blood do you need to get the the rejuvenating power in the young blood? Our doctors should be extremely interested in this to actually help us recover.
http://circres.ahajournals.org/content/117/11/906.extract?etoc

1. Haipeng Sun,
2. Yibin Wang

+ Author Affiliations

1. From the Key Laboratory of Cell Differentiation and Apoptosis of Ministry of Education, Department of Pathophysiology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China; and Division of Molecular Medicine, Departments of Anesthesiology, Medicine and Physiology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles.

1. Correspondence to Yibin Wang, PhD, 650 Charles E. Young Dr, Room CHS 569, Los Angeles, CA 90095. E-mail yibinwang@mednet.ucla.edu

Key Words:

• Editorials
• aging
• Gdf11 protein, mouse
• hypertrophy
• rejuvenation

According to legend, soon after the first Chinese Qin Emperor united China around 250 BC, he sent out a troop of young men and women to search for the elixir of life in the eastern seas to extend his life forever. With great expectation and fanfare, the searching party departed but never returned. However, our quests for the elusive life-renewing Philosopher’s Stone have never ceased either in Harry Potter’s wizard world or in biomedical research, and a sighting of the magical rejuvenating power continues to generate excitement and understandably high expectations.

Article, see p 926

In 2005, a landmark study by Conboy et al¹ first demonstrated the rejuvenating power of the blood of young animals using a heterochronic parabiosis approach where the circulation of a young and an old mouse was surgically joined together. This finding set off a race to find the putative systemic circulating factor(s) that can reverse aging. Since 2013, in a series of reports, researchers, including Harvard scientists Amy Wagers and Richard Lee, have found that blood from young mice could reverse aging-related pathological features in muscle and brain following a heterochronic parabiosis procedure.^2–4 In particular, circulating growth differentiation factor 11 (GDF11) was identified as the serum factor responsible for the rejuvenating power in the young blood.^2–4 These reports generated a wave of commentaries from leading scientific journals and sensational reports from mainstream news outlets, relating these observations to the discovery of the mythic elixir of life given the …

[Full Text of this Article]

The modus operandi of a vampire is pretty straightforward: drink blood, live forever.

Another reference to getting young blood transfusions. You'll have to ask your doctor exactly how young that person has to be to see if one of your grandchildren fits the bill. Red cross rules, 16 with parental consent. Is that young enough? Or are you going to have to get a black market doctor to take blood from younger kids and transfuse it into you?
http://neuwritesd.org/2014/10/31/young-blood/

Could lab-grown platelets replace donor blood?

This is an important question for your doctor to answer. I'm going to demand young blood transfusions in order to increase my cognition after my next stroke and this may make it easier.

Young Blood Revitalizes the Aging Brain

Lab grown here: 

Platelet bioreactor-on-a-chip 

1. ↵* Corresponding author; email: drjthon@gmail.com

Key points

• We have developed a biomimetic microfluidic platelet bioreactor that recapitulates bone marrow and blood vessel microenvironments.
• Application of shear stress in this bioreactor triggers physiological proplatelet production, and platelet release.

Abstract

Platelet transfusions total >2.17 million apheresis-equivalent units/year in the United States and are derived entirely from human donors despite clinically significant immunogenicity, associated risk of sepsis, and inventory shortages due to high demand and 5-day shelf life. To take advantage of known physiological drivers of thrombopoiesis we have developed a microfluidic human platelet bioreactor that recapitulates bone marrow stiffness, extracellular matrix composition, micro-channel size, hemodynamic vascular shear stress, and endothelial cell contacts, and supports high-resolution live-cell microscopy and quantification of platelet production. Physiological shear stresses triggered proplatelet initiation, reproduced ex vivo bone marrow proplatelet production, and generated functional platelets. Modeling human bone marrow composition and hemodynamics in vitro obviates risks associated with platelet procurement and storage to help meet growing transfusion needs.

Young Blood Revitalizes the Aging Brain

This may be in mice but what the hell is the downside of getting young blood transfusions? Ask your doctor, and not politely. Your doctor just needs to figure out what a 3 month old mouse would correspond to in humans. Are your doctors even thinking about your cognitive needs at all?
http://brainblogger.com/2014/06/13/young-blood-revitalizes-the-aging-brain/
Aged mice exposed to young blood for five weeks showed a significant increase in the number of cells in the hippocampus, a structure important for learning and memory, positive for signaling molecules (including Erg-1, c-Fos, and pCREB) important for learning processes. In addition, these aged mice showed a significantly increased number of dendritic spines, portions of brain cells that receive signals in order to help transmit information, in the dentate gyrus of the hippocampus.

More at link, including references.

Young blood reverses age-related impairments in cognitive function and synaptic plasticity in mice

This was written up a year ago here:
http://oc1dean.blogspot.com/2013/05/factor-that-reverses-aging-of-heart.html
Why haven't we seen any human trials? I'm sure we could get grandchildren to donate blood. And if it works this would be so damned simple to implement. All the more reason to cultivate young friends. Well this is in mice but would you attempt this anyway?
http://www.nature.com/nm/journal/vaop/ncurrent/abs/nm.3569.html
As human lifespan increases, a greater fraction of the population is suffering from age-related cognitive impairments, making it important to elucidate a means to combat the effects of aging^{1, 2}. Here we report that exposure of an aged animal to young blood can counteract and reverse pre-existing effects of brain aging at the molecular, structural, functional and cognitive level. Genome-wide microarray analysis of heterochronic parabionts—in which circulatory systems of young and aged animals are connected—identified synaptic plasticity–related transcriptional changes in the hippocampus of aged mice. Dendritic spine density of mature neurons increased and synaptic plasticity improved in the hippocampus of aged heterochronic parabionts. At the cognitive level, systemic administration of young blood plasma into aged mice improved age-related cognitive impairments in both contextual fear conditioning and spatial learning and memory. Structural and cognitive enhancements elicited by exposure to young blood are mediated, in part, by activation of the cyclic AMP response element binding protein (Creb) in the aged hippocampus. Our data indicate that exposure of aged mice to young blood late in life is capable of rejuvenating synaptic plasticity and improving cognitive function.

Black Kids Now Less Likely to Die from Stroke

And how long before your doctor tells you about this clinical trial and your kids? 10-20 years? 

Black Kids Now Less Likely to Die from Stroke

Only 2 paragraphs here, rest at link.
Publication of the STOP trial, in which long-term blood transfusions were effective for preventing stroke in children with sickle cell anemia, was associated with a reduction in the racial disparity in stroke mortality, researchers found.
Compared with white children, black children had a greater risk of dying from ischemic stroke both before and after the trial results were announced, but the relative risk declined from 1.74 (95% CI 1.42-2.13) to 1.27 (95% CI 0.99-1.64), according to Laura Lehman, MD, of Boston Children's Hospital, and Heather Fullerton, MD, of the University of California San Francisco.

Factor That Reverses Aging of Heart Discovered - young blood

This matches up with the earlier report of young mice blood transfusions helping recovery. See below
http://harvardmagazine.com/2013/05/heart-aging-reversal-factor-found-in-mice?utm_source=Harvard+Magazine+e-mail+newsletters&utm_campaign=1e2dda5a8c-THIS_WEEK&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_d59fecc95b-1e2dda5a8c-85119777
Researchers at the Harvard Stem Cell institute have discovered a substance in the blood of young mice that reverses a major effect of aging in the hearts of old mice. The substance, called GDF-11, is an obscure member of the transforming growth factor family of proteins; it was identified by Forst family professor of stem cell and regenerative biology Amy Wagers and Harvard Medical School professor Richard T. Lee, working with a startup company, SomaLogic, that has developed a technology for analyzing factors in the blood. Lee and Wagers report their finding that GDF-11 reverses cardiac hypertrophy, or thickening of the heart muscle, in mice, in the May 9 issue of the journal Cell.
The heart’s walls thicken with age—the primary cause of cardiac failure in humans, explains Lee, a practicing cardiologist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital. Yet in the study, when older mice were given the factor, he says, “we could reverse the heart aging in a very short period of time.” The change from a thickened, fibrotic heart to the smooth-muscled heart of youth is so dramatic, it is reportedly visible to the naked eye.
Wagers had previously discovered, during research in which the circulatory system of a young mouse was surgically joined to that of an old one, that a factor circulating in the blood could reverse aging in skeletal muscle and the spinal cord (see “A Hidden Youthfulness”). But because the heart, unlike many other organs, does not have a known ability to regenerate naturally, she did not expect to see a similar effect there. “The effect of blood-based factors is broader than we anticipated,” she says now.
Nor had Wagers, in her earlier experiments, been able to identify which factor, among the many thousands that circulate in blood, was responsible for the regeneration that she observed. Now she and Lee will take a closer look at the effects of GDF-11. It is known to be important in in-utero development, Lee says, but “its role in adults has not been explored.”
Wagers said in a press-conference call that other organs in the body contain cells with surface receptors designed to interact with the protein, which circulates freely in the bloodstream. The presence of the receptors suggests that GDF-11 may have an effect on those tissues as well, so she and Lee plan to investigate whether the protein has a similar rejuvenating effect on the organs themselves. The researchers hope they may have discovered a substance that is broadly involved in the physiological pathways of aging. Says Wagers, “We should have that answer soon.”

This was the key paragraph from the earlier post:
These results suggest that chemicals found in the blood of old mice inhibit the generation of new brain cells, whereas chemicals in the blood of young mice promote it. The researchers then injected blood from young or old mice into young adults. Again, they found that animals injected with old blood had far fewer newborn neurons in the hippocampus than those injected with young blood, confirming that old blood contains soluble factors that inhibit neurogenesis. 

So this brings up the question for your doctor. Should all stroke survivors get blood transfusions from young people, maybe your grandchildren?
How young should the blood be?