Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Medicine

Leprosy Bacteria Might Be Able To Regenerate Organs (bbc.com) 48

The BBC reports: Leprosy bacteria may hold the secret to safely repairing and regenerating the body, researchers at the University of Edinburgh say. Animal experiments have uncovered the bacteria's remarkable ability to almost double the size of livers by stimulating healthy growth.

It is a sneakily selfish act that gives the bacteria more tissue to infect. But working out how they do it could lead to new age-defying therapies, the scientists say....

The bacterium that causes [leprosy], Mycobacterium leprae, has other, unusual properties, including the ability to perform "biological alchemy", converting one type of bodily tissue into another, which are fascinating scientists. So the researchers turned to another animals that catches the disease — armadillos. The experiments, which were performed in the US, showed the infection heads to the armoured animals' livers, where it performed a controlled hijacking of the organ to reprogram it for its own purpose.... You might expect such growth to be defective or even cancerous — but detailed analysis showed it was both healthy and functional, complete with the usual array of blood vessels and bile ducts.

"It is kind of mind-blowing," Prof Rambukkana said. "How do they do that? There is no cell therapy that can do that."

The bacteria appears to be "rewinding the developmental clock" on the liver cells, the BBC writes, transforming them into a younger, faster-growing state. "The hope is the approach can be harnessed for repairing the livers of people waiting for a transplant — or even to reverse some of the damage caused by ageing elsewhere in the body."

Thanks to long-time Slashdot reader Z00L00K for submitting the story!
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Leprosy Bacteria Might Be Able To Regenerate Organs

Comments Filter:
  • Does this mean . . . (Score:4, Informative)

    by quonset ( 4839537 ) on Sunday November 20, 2022 @06:13PM (#63066843)

    We can become like Wolverine or Deadpool?

    On a (very) slightly more serious topic, if this can be successfully done, would this also mean people's lives would be extended? Assuming you don't die from an accident or disease, you die from old age as your body breaks down. If this allows for regrowing of organs, and could be adapted to every area of the body itself, would people live longer, better lives? How could this affect the brain?

    Inquiring minds want to know.

    • It might mean i can drink like a fish till I am 90!
    • We can become like Wolverine or Deadpool?

      On a (very) slightly more serious topic, if this can be successfully done, would this also mean people's lives would be extended? Assuming you don't die from an accident or disease, you die from old age as your body breaks down. If this allows for regrowing of organs, and could be adapted to every area of the body itself, would people live longer, better lives? How could this affect the brain?

      Inquiring minds want to know.

      Assuming a therapy that can regenerate every bit of the body, you'll still collect mutations and get all sorts of cancers. I assume as you alluded to, your brain won't be able to handle it. Just as our brains weren't prepared for the information age (all the lamenting over social media, misinformation, etc), I assume living 50 years longer than any other human will also introduce some novel complications. Most 100yos devote their day to staying alive and healthy. If you're not being distracted by chroni

      • Assuming a therapy that can regenerate every bit of the body, you'll still collect mutations and get all sorts of cancers.

        So... exactly like Deadpool?

    • Pros: longer life.

      Cons: sent to live in a leper colony.

    • These bacteria will turn your brain into a large liver.
  • by sudonim2 ( 2073156 ) on Sunday November 20, 2022 @06:27PM (#63066861)
    As with all these things, they don't really add to life extension so much as improving quality of life for the lifespans we already have. Mainly because, on a long enough timeline, all these treatments drastically raise the rates of cancer. Cancer is what kills you if nothing else does. And those lucky few who have disproportionately low levels of onco-genes live to around 120 and die from cellular exhaustion. Even then, if you repair and replace organs such that they don't reach lethal levels of senescence, they'll just develop new and exciting forms of cancer.
    • Re:Cancer (Score:4, Informative)

      by backslashdot ( 95548 ) on Sunday November 20, 2022 @07:00PM (#63066915)

      They specifically address that in the publication by looking for cancer gene expression or malformations. They didn't find any such abnormalities which is why they are saying it appears different than liver enlargement caused by other things.

      • The basic causes of cancer are replication and respiration. Considering that both of those things are needed for us to consider a cell alive, you're never going to get around cancer. Cancer is the price we pay for evolution. Without evolution, we'd rapidly fall behind the Red Queen and be wiped out.

    • by mark-t ( 151149 )

      This is why we need to transcend the limits of the biological, and embrace cybernetics, and ideally to upload one's consciousness into a machine that does not age and will not die.

      The strictly biological form that we currently inhabit can therefore be thought of as something akin to a kind of "larval" stage. Still meriting being worthy of life, but not yet fulfilled to its greatest potential.

      • by cusco ( 717999 )

        The Singularity is near . . .

        • The Singularity is near . . .

          --
          "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin

          Love the combination of Humans-should-live-forever comment with humans-are-dumbshit-morons SIG.

        • The Singularity is just the Rapture for Christians who don't believe in God. Which is what most people who call themselves Atheists are.

          • by mark-t ( 151149 )
            It was my understanding that the Singularity was the emergence of a machine intelligence that is independent of humanity, what what I was suggesting is more along the lines of merely merging of the two. We become borg, basically.
            • The Singularity refers to the creation of general AI that can improve itself exponentially. But it also refers to brain uploading and several other ideas. It's generally a poorly conceived and often internally conflicting. Which just makes it more like the Rapture.

      • This fantasy is a way for people who adhere to standard Christian philology but no longer maintain the belief in the supernatural that undergirds the philosophies derived from it. The Singularity is a rebranded Rapture or Armageddon. Uploading is a rebranded afterlife. Roko's Basilisk is a rebranded God with a rebranded Hell. None of it has any basis in reality. It's like how psionics exists in science fiction because science made magic unrealistic but the genre is largely just recycled romantic novels from

        • by mark-t ( 151149 )
          You are conflating personal belief with provable facts, Your conclusion is lacking in any citations or evidence to support it. Many things that were once considered completely impossible for humans to ever accomplish are well within our technological grasp today, and often even taken for granted.
    • Hmm, cancer is primarily a mitochondrial disease. The illness causes cellular mitochondria to produce insufficient quantities of what they are supposed to and produce other unwanted molecules that cause problems. The patient lacks ATP energy and tumor cells donâ(TM)t undergo apoptosis so they keep multiplying, etc. I have it and read up some.
      • None of that is true. You're very wrong and are Dunning-Kruger-ing yourself into thinking you understand the subject.

    • So, elephants have 20 copies of the tumor suppressing gene P53. Elephants apparently are more resistant to cancer as a result.

      https://www.nationalgeographic... [nationalgeographic.com]

      If we can gene-edit more copies of P53 into people, you might make yourself a cancer-resistant human, capable of living longer without cancer.

      That said, the idea of brain degradation at advanced age scares me. What good is it to be alive at 110 if you have the mental capacity of a four year old, or below?

      It seems completely pointless to me to live a

      • The larger your body size, the larger a tumor can grow before it kills you. The larger a tumor grows, the longer it takes to reach that size. The longer a tumor exists, the more likely those tumors cells are to stop cooperating to vascularize the tumor. This means if you can let tumors grow big enough, you can get the vast majority to kill themselves by depriving themselves of blood supply. It's why larger bodied animal live longer. Anti-tumor genes help with this, but you really just need large size more t

    • by kackle ( 910159 )

      Cancer is what kills you if nothing else does.

      I used to think that until I learned about inflammation within the body; I wonder if it's more preventable than I originally thought. Sugar (which is inflammatory), for example, feeds tumors. A guy got the Nobel for proving this.

      • Sugar feeds everything because it's a simple, energy dense, carbohydrate molecule that's easily oxidized to release said energy. It is the preferred molecule for powering aerobic respiration. There is a balance between maximizing short term survival and maximizing long term survival. Where the lines on the graph cross is the effective limit of an organism's lifespan. Humans are already riding the hoary edge of those lines. Possible improvements are marginal at best.

        • by kackle ( 910159 )
          Sure. But I haven't followed up on the research (that Nobel was given a century ago), but I wonder whether a "non-sugar" diet would then help starve such tumors.
          • It helps, which is why the American Cancer Society keeps trying to get warning labels put on stuff with lots of added refined sugar. It won't stop it, though. And any carbohydrates get turned into sugars, anyway. And an actual no-carb diet is very bad for you.
  • by Tablizer ( 95088 ) on Sunday November 20, 2022 @06:30PM (#63066863) Journal

    ...not test on bats, okay?

  • by backslashdot ( 95548 ) on Sunday November 20, 2022 @06:51PM (#63066897)

    This is an important and exciting study, but there are some caveats. The liver is the only organ that is known to regenerate very well. In other words, you can cut off a big chunk of it, and it will regenerate. That's been known for thousands of years. Anyway, from the publication: "Additional studies are needed to compare the effects of ML infection with a more conventional liver injury-repair approach in armadillos, particularly to identify molecular pathways that discriminate the hepatic response to injury versus ML." It's not very convincing yet whether the bacteria is doing that regeneration or if it's just injuring the liver and promoting that response.

    In other words, we still need to find out whether this regeneration differs from the repair pathways that activate if you cut off a piece of liver and it grows back. It does seem to make the liver a lot bigger though while maintaining its organized architecture (ie, different than inflammation etc.). MANY things can cause liver enlargement (hepatomegaly), but usually, the architecture is messed up.

    Reference on liver regeneration: https://www.mayo.edu/research/... [mayo.edu]

  • ...bigger wanker. The bad news it falls off if sucked too hard.

  • "the bacteria's remarkable ability to almost double the size of livers "

    My uncle could do that just with booze.

    • My uncle could do that just with booze.

      This might be able to fix that.

      • In my case, I'd need to catch leprosy a few times. Maybe more. Mostly, there's just a vodka bottle where my liver's supposed to be.

        But in all seriousness, young-ish people are dying from diseases related to excess alcohol consumption, at unprecedented rates. Anything that helps some of them to survive, I think, is a good thing.

  • by nospam007 ( 722110 ) * on Sunday November 20, 2022 @08:09PM (#63067063)

    But it would probably fall apart at the end.

  • ... doing freaky shit to armadillos? I can see the benefit, but this is just a uniquely disturbing line of research.
    • Armadillos are one of the only other good models for leprosy than humans, and they proved a while back they caught it from humans from the Old World which was pretty neat. Too lazy to find a link at the moment but give it a brief Google search.
    • by Entrope ( 68843 )

      Leprous Armadillos was the name of my post-punk nu gaze band, but we fell apart.

  • by Petersko ( 564140 ) on Monday November 21, 2022 @01:24AM (#63067521)

    I actually managed to stop drinking before causing irreparable damage to my liver... and I might not have had to worry about it? I like drinking. This might change my retirement plans.

    • You can drink for the rest of your life. Just donâ(TM)t count on it being very long.
    • I have liver, kidney and brain damage but still drink. Only at night, and only to sleep (it's not "recreational" for me), but, still, a lot. And while I don't feel physically addicted to it, I am unfortunately addicted to sleep, and it's very, very hard for me to sleep without it. Which makes me addicted at least indirectly. Which also means it'll probably be at least a big part of the reason I die.

      But I'm upper-middle aged already, with other health problems above and beyond those likely caused or wo

  • Guess what is used to treat leprosy?

    Thalidomide. Yeah, it's still around, mostly for this specific purpose.

Every successful person has had failures but repeated failure is no guarantee of eventual success.

Working...