Cytogerontology since 1881: A reappraisal of August Weismann and a review of modern progress

Cytogerontology, the science of cellular ageing, originated in 1881 with the prediction by August Weismann that the somatic cells of higher animals have limited division potential. Weismann's prediction was derived by considering the role of natural selection in regulating the duration of an organism's life. For various reasons, Weismann's ideas on ageing fell into neglect following his death in 1914, and cytogerontology has only reappeared as a major research area following the demonstration by Hayflick and Moorhead in the early 1960s that diploid human fibroblasts are restricted to a finite number of divisions in vitro. In this review we give a detailed account of Weismann's theory, and we reveal that his ideas were both more extensive in their scope and more pertinent to current research than is generally recognised. We also appraise the progress which has been made over the past hundred years in investigating the causes of ageing, with particular emphasis being given to (i) the evolution of ageing, and (ii) ageing at the cellular level. We critically assess the current state of knowledge in these areas and recommend a series of points as primary targets for future research

History of clinical transplantation

How transplantation came to be a clinical discipline can be pieced together by perusing two volumes of reminiscences collected by Paul I. Terasaki in 1991-1992 from many of the persons who were directly involved. One volume was devoted to the discovery of the major histocompatibility complex (MHC), with particular reference to the human leukocyte antigens (HLAs) that are widely used today for tissue matching.1 The other focused on milestones in the development of clinical transplantation.2 All the contributions described in both volumes can be traced back in one way or other to the demonstration in the mid-1940s by Peter Brian Medawar that the rejection of allografts is an immunological phenomenon.3,4 © 2008 Springer New York

History of clinical transplantation

The emergence of transplantation has seen the development of increasingly potent immunosuppressive agents, progressively better methods of tissue and organ preservation, refinements in histocompatibility matching, and numerous innovations is surgical techniques. Such efforts in combination ultimately made it possible to successfully engraft all of the organs and bone marrow cells in humans. At a more fundamental level, however, the transplantation enterprise hinged on two seminal turning points. The first was the recognition by Billingham, Brent, and Medawar in 1953 that it was possible to induce chimerism-associated neonatal tolerance deliberately. This discovery escalated over the next 15 years to the first successful bone marrow transplantations in humans in 1968. The second turning point was the demonstration during the early 1960s that canine and human organ allografts could self-induce tolerance with the aid of immunosuppression. By the end of 1962, however, it had been incorrectly concluded that turning points one and two involved different immune mechanisms. The error was not corrected until well into the 1990s. In this historical account, the vast literature that sprang up during the intervening 30 years has been summarized. Although admirably documenting empiric progress in clinical transplantation, its failure to explain organ allograft acceptance predestined organ recipients to lifetime immunosuppression and precluded fundamental changes in the treatment policies. After it was discovered in 1992 that long-surviving organ transplant recipient had persistent microchimerism, it was possible to see the mechanistic commonality of organ and bone marrow transplantation. A clarifying central principle of immunology could then be synthesized with which to guide efforts to induce tolerance systematically to human tissues and perhaps ultimately to xenografts

International Society of Sports Nutrition Position Stand: Probiotics.

Position statement: The International Society of Sports Nutrition (ISSN) provides an objective and critical review of the mechanisms and use of probiotic supplementation to optimize the health, performance, and recovery of athletes. Based on the current available literature, the conclusions of the ISSN are as follows: 1)Probiotics are live microorganisms that, when administered in adequate amounts, confer a health benefit on the host (FAO/WHO).2)Probiotic administration has been linked to a multitude of health benefits, with gut and immune health being the most researched applications.3)Despite the existence of shared, core mechanisms for probiotic function, health benefits of probiotics are strain- and dose-dependent.4)Athletes have varying gut microbiota compositions that appear to reflect the activity level of the host in comparison to sedentary people, with the differences linked primarily to the volume of exercise and amount of protein consumption. Whether differences in gut microbiota composition affect probiotic efficacy is unknown.5)The main function of the gut is to digest food and absorb nutrients. In athletic populations, certain probiotics strains can increase absorption of key nutrients such as amino acids from protein, and affect the pharmacology and physiological properties of multiple food components.6)Immune depression in athletes worsens with excessive training load, psychological stress, disturbed sleep, and environmental extremes, all of which can contribute to an increased risk of respiratory tract infections. In certain situations, including exposure to crowds, foreign travel and poor hygiene at home, and training or competition venues, athletes' exposure to pathogens may be elevated leading to increased rates of infections. Approximately 70% of the immune system is located in the gut and probiotic supplementation has been shown to promote a healthy immune response. In an athletic population, specific probiotic strains can reduce the number of episodes, severity and duration of upper respiratory tract infections.7)Intense, prolonged exercise, especially in the heat, has been shown to increase gut permeability which potentially can result in systemic toxemia. Specific probiotic strains can improve the integrity of the gut-barrier function in athletes.8)Administration of selected anti-inflammatory probiotic strains have been linked to improved recovery from muscle-damaging exercise.9)The minimal effective dose and method of administration (potency per serving, single vs. split dose, delivery form) of a specific probiotic strain depends on validation studies for this particular strain. Products that contain probiotics must include the genus, species, and strain of each live microorganism on its label as well as the total estimated quantity of each probiotic strain at the end of the product's shelf life, as measured by colony forming units (CFU) or live cells.10)Preclinical and early human research has shown potential probiotic benefits relevant to an athletic population that include improved body composition and lean body mass, normalizing age-related declines in testosterone levels, reductions in cortisol levels indicating improved responses to a physical or mental stressor, reduction of exercise-induced lactate, and increased neurotransmitter synthesis, cognition and mood. However, these potential benefits require validation in more rigorous human studies and in an athletic population