Common Energy Drink Ingredient Taurine 'May Slow Aging Process' 140
Scientists are calling for a major clinical trial to investigate the potential benefits of taurine supplementation, a substance commonly found in energy drinks. Animal studies have shown that replenishing taurine levels to more youthful levels can slow down the aging process, improve health, and even extend lifespans in mice. The Guardian reports: Prof Henning Wackerhage, a molecular exercise physiologist on the team at the Technical University of Munich, said a trial would compare how humans fared after taking daily taurine or placebo supplements. "It will probably be very difficult to look at whether they live longer, but at least we can check if they live healthier for longer, and that of course is the goal for medicine."
Yadav's team homed in on taurine as a potential driver of the ageing process in 2012 when an analysis of blood compounds found that levels of the amino acid dropped dramatically with age in mice, monkeys and humans. By the age of 60, taurine levels in a typical person slumped to one-third of that seen in five-year-olds, they found. The discovery prompted the team to test the impact of extra taurine on middle-aged mice. "Whatever we checked, taurine-supplemented mice were healthier and appeared younger than the control mice," Yadav said, noting they had denser bones, stronger muscles, better memory and younger looking immune systems. "Taurine made animals live healthier and longer lives by affecting all the major hallmarks of ageing." Beyond improving health, mice on taurine lived longer -- on average an extra 10% for males and 12% for females, amounting to an additional three to four months, the equivalent of seven or eight human years. A comparable dose for humans would be three to six grams a day.
The scientists next looked at whether boosting taurine benefited animals that were much closer biologically to humans. A six-month trial in middle-aged macaques found that a daily taurine pill appeared to boost health by preventing weight gain, lowering blood glucose and improving bone density and the immune system. Other evidence suggests taurine supplementation may have some effect in humans. Yadav and his team analysed medical data from 12,000 Europeans aged 60 and over. Those with higher taurine levels had less obesity, type 2 diabetes and high blood pressure, and lower levels of inflammation. Strenuous sessions on an exercise bike were found to boost taurine levels, the researchers report in Science.
Without a major trial to demonstrate the safety or any benefits of taurine supplements, the scientists are not recommending people boost their intake through pills, energy drinks or dietary changes. Taurine is made naturally in the body and is found in meat and shellfish diets, but the healthiest diets are largely plant-based. Some energy drinks contain taurine, but the scientists warn they also contain other substances that may not be safe to consume at high levels.
Yadav's team homed in on taurine as a potential driver of the ageing process in 2012 when an analysis of blood compounds found that levels of the amino acid dropped dramatically with age in mice, monkeys and humans. By the age of 60, taurine levels in a typical person slumped to one-third of that seen in five-year-olds, they found. The discovery prompted the team to test the impact of extra taurine on middle-aged mice. "Whatever we checked, taurine-supplemented mice were healthier and appeared younger than the control mice," Yadav said, noting they had denser bones, stronger muscles, better memory and younger looking immune systems. "Taurine made animals live healthier and longer lives by affecting all the major hallmarks of ageing." Beyond improving health, mice on taurine lived longer -- on average an extra 10% for males and 12% for females, amounting to an additional three to four months, the equivalent of seven or eight human years. A comparable dose for humans would be three to six grams a day.
The scientists next looked at whether boosting taurine benefited animals that were much closer biologically to humans. A six-month trial in middle-aged macaques found that a daily taurine pill appeared to boost health by preventing weight gain, lowering blood glucose and improving bone density and the immune system. Other evidence suggests taurine supplementation may have some effect in humans. Yadav and his team analysed medical data from 12,000 Europeans aged 60 and over. Those with higher taurine levels had less obesity, type 2 diabetes and high blood pressure, and lower levels of inflammation. Strenuous sessions on an exercise bike were found to boost taurine levels, the researchers report in Science.
Without a major trial to demonstrate the safety or any benefits of taurine supplements, the scientists are not recommending people boost their intake through pills, energy drinks or dietary changes. Taurine is made naturally in the body and is found in meat and shellfish diets, but the healthiest diets are largely plant-based. Some energy drinks contain taurine, but the scientists warn they also contain other substances that may not be safe to consume at high levels.
Main ingredient in Ripobitan D (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It used to. Kinda. [wikipedia.org]
Now it's a bit different. [srad.jp]
Re: (Score:2)
Unicode? A real nerd would insist on SJIS!
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, great plan there Japan [clevelandclinic.org].
Seems relevant [nih.gov]
5-hour energy (Score:3)
In Japan, it's one of the major ingredients in a lot of energy drinks (which people suck down daily). Then again, they also frequently contain nicotine. Shit's weird over here.
Here in America, the two main ingredients of 5-hour energy are tyrosine and taurine, along with about 200 mg of caffeine.
As an experiment, if you walk or hike try taking a 5-hour energy along and sipping from it every 20 minutes or so. It helps focus your thoughts.
Re: (Score:2)
Focused creativity (Score:4, Insightful)
I've always found walking and hiking help focus my thoughts without the need for energy drinks (which is nice for someone with ADHD).
It's the combination of the dopamine that comes from walking and the lack of priming from external influences.
It takes about 30 to 45 minutes for the priming signals to get quiet in your brain, after which you can achieve a type of clarity that few people get in their daily lives.
John Cleese wrote a book about it, Brian Tracy calls it the "superconscious mind", and in the 1920's a monk names Sertllianges published a book about it. Cleese also did a video [youtube.com] on it.
It's really useful if you are at university and have difficult classes. Take a long walk after class and try to mentally compose the information as a lecture or explanation you would give to a new student. That internalizes the information and gives you a much better command of the subject.
Re:Focused creativity (Score:4, Informative)
John Cleese has some very weird thoughts and is a regular attendee of the Esalen institute.. I'd trust him on matters of comedy but not with his new age looneyism, though there certainly is potential for crossover there.
Re: (Score:2)
What is it about nutrition (Score:3)
You know eating the correct nutrition will make you live longer, right? Is this considered news somehow?
As for taurine, it is a necessary nutrient added to all cat food. If your cat does not get enough of it he or she will go blind.
Re:What is it about nutrition (Score:5, Funny)
Why spend $4 on an energy drink when you can get the same taurine from a can of cat food for 50 cents?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Agreed. I’ve been eating cat food for years and it keeps getting better and better. I feel great.
A clear benefit of being a furry. ;)
Re:What is it about nutrition (Score:5, Informative)
Please note the amount required before they saw effects from taurine - six times the maximum you can obtain via food supplements if you follow the maximum dose recommendations, and many times more again than could be obtained from food. Nobody has the faintest idea what that sort of quantity would do to a human.
Re: What is it about nutrition (Score:2)
Apparently, the safe max dose is 1 gram per 10 kilograms of body weight. However, ask your doctor, I'm not a doctor.
Yadav whom? (Score:2)
"Yadav's team..." Is it really so hard to identify the source of information before quoting them (without quotes)?
Slashdot fails again.
Yeah, it is that simple (Score:4, Informative)
If you believe any single magic ingredient can increase your life by 10%, you are a fool. If you have a minimal knowledge of human history, modern medicine, evolution/God, mice life extension studies, human fallacious thought OR aging, you would realize this is ridiculous.
Single ingredients that help humans live longer are called vitamins and all the main ones have been discovered. We would have found a plant that makes it and developed a taste for them (Citrus plants have vitamin D which we need)/God would have given us the ability to make it.
Most mice live 18 months. 10% longer life = +2 months. They never have time to get the various aging related problems we get after 50 years of partying hard. Those drinks, tobacco, marijuana, steaks, bacon (yum bacon), sleepless nights, sex, etc. all take a toll on us that mice do not get. If drug x extends mice life by +2 months, it will not be a 10% increase for us, but a ONE month increase because of all the extra aging we do.
Aging is a complex process involving many different things, including telomeres, various buildups (in arteries, lymph tubes, etc), genetic damage, and many other factors. One chemical will not fix all of that.
You want to know how to live twice as long? Figure out a way to clone new organs that do not have any of those issues and transplant them into our bodies. No chemical could compete with that because we would be replacing the body parts rather than trying to fixing them.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
... We would have found a plant that makes it and developed a taste for them (Citrus plants have vitamin D which we need)/God would have given us the ability to make it.
.
Just to be pedantic: Citrus fruits contain vitamin C. Our bodies already make vitamin D, when skin is exposed to sunlight, though we can also absorb it from foods, notably oily fish, and eggs.
(I know you know this, but I can't help 'needing' to correct the error...)
Re: (Score:3)
Please note the AMOUNT required - six times the maximum you can obtain via food supplements, and many times larger still than you could obtain from food. This sort of quantity is simply not possible to eat and would not have been found in studies on vitamins.
That doesn't mean that you're wrong, it may well not add 10% to life expectancy, but if you're right then you're right for the wrong reasons.
Re: (Score:2)
> We would have found a plant that makes it and developed a taste for them
No. We are not optimized for achievable longevity and we don't eat an evolutionary diet.
Which plant do we crave with high levels of K2/MK-7?
Outside of obscure fungus you won't find it, even though it's a wonder drug for getting calcification out of the vascular endothelium and back into the bones.
How many people eat Natto?
How many Europeans get enough D in winter to prevent adverse events?
If we lived in a tropical zone and ate most
Re: (Score:2)
How many people eat Natto?
I've tried! I just can't get into it. Do you eat Natto? Any recommendations for form factor?
Nonsense. (Score:2)
No one is saying this is a miracle cure to ageing as you seem to be implying and the idea that this could lead to an overall small improvement in health in old age is hardly far fetched.
We would have found a plant that makes it and developed a taste for them (Citrus plants have vitamin D which we need)/God would have given us the ability to make it.
I don't know anything about the "God" part but if you RTFS you'll see that humans do in fact make their own taurine and by the age of 60 we are producing 1/3 on average as much as at our peak. The idea that replacing this missing taurine might improve health as it has in test animals is not crazy at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Those drinks, tobacco, marijuana, steaks, bacon (yum bacon), sleepless nights, sex, etc. all take a toll on us that mice do not get.
What about the toll a lack of sex takes on us (the Slashdot crowd that actually is married)? Or were you referring to all that vehement wanking amongst the non married Slashdotters? Isn't that just tennis elbow..? Wouldn't expect that to reduce lifespan.
Re: (Score:2)
Single ingredients that help humans live longer are called vitamins and all the main ones have been discovered. We would have found a plant that makes it and developed a taste for them (Citrus plants have vitamin D which we need)/God would have given us the ability to make it.
This doesn't make sense to me. The vast majority of all human breeding is completed by age 40. I would argue that having long-lived parents and grandparents could help with survival and success of children, but again, there's an age cap. Say, having living relatives is strong positive for the first 20 years of life. So, I think you can make an argument that living up to approximately age 60 could be evolutionarily selected for. BUT, is living to 90, or 100, or 110 a strength, evolutionarily speaking?
Re: (Score:2)
Cats certainly need it (Score:3)
https://www.petmd.com/blogs/nu... [petmd.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nature has intentions? I never knew ;-)
My bad for anthropomorphizing nature. They are not intentions, they are just rules :-)
Re: (Score:2)
Nature has intentions? I never knew ;-)
My bad for anthropomorphizing nature. They are not intentions, they are just rules :-)
Good. She hates that.
Re: (Score:2)
Cat food is typically supplemented with taurine.
So cat food is actually good for old people. Both sides should be able to spin that into a hysterical diatribe.
The bag of cat food I have handy has 0.12% taurine.
Re: (Score:2)
Because cats can't synthesize it. Taurine, not cat food :)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Of course they are. That's where all the indoor/outdoor cats go during the day. Bear in mind that cats are the only species known to have domesticated humans, which proves they're smart enough to do this.
Ew (Score:3, Insightful)
> but the healthiest diets are largely plant-based.
Great, more vegan propaganda.
Re: (Score:2)
Funniest part to me is that the healthiest diet known right now is carnivore diet. No plant based anything, just freshly cooked meat.
But getting your gut biome adapted to it is an utter bitch. You'll have diarrhea for at least a month, probably more like three as microbes in your gut change composition to match the diet. Then it levels off and you're generally good to go as long as you remember it needs to be fresh meat. Otherwise, scurvy is coming for you.
And sticking to this diet is also a bitch. It's exp
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
>Funniest part to me is that the healthiest diet known right now is carnivore diet. No plant based anything, just freshly cooked meat.
>But getting your gut biome adapted to it is an utter bitch. You'll have diarrhea for at least a month, probably more like three as microbes in your gut change composition to match the diet.
No me. It's pretty plain sailing. Take magnesium, potassium and Taurine supplements during the transition to ward off headaches and watch the fat fall away, muscles improve and infla
Re: (Score:2)
Funniest part to me is that the healthiest diet known right now is carnivore diet. No plant based anything, just freshly cooked meat.
Care to cite some proof for this?
I found this (Score:2)
Healthline [healthline.com] says the studies don't support the health claims of an all-meat diet and it clearly lacks important nutrients.
But, people with an agenda only care about studies when they support that agenda.
Re: (Score:2)
ESG and SEL insure that you cannot have those studies. They cannot be funded without losing relevant scores and making all funding much more expensive.
Re: (Score:2)
Can't. Every time someone tries to study it, they get warned that host organisation's ESG and SEL scores will go down because of it, so no funding is available.
We do know however that vegan is one of the worst diets to have, as most people cannot maintain it for more than a year, and while causal links cannot be looked at for same reasons of ESG and SEL scores of host organisation going down, they're also correlated with significant increase in both general and clinical depression, significant health proble
Re: (Score:2)
It seems very implausible that an "all meat" diet would be the "healthiest". It would contradict most of what we know about a healthy diet.
First of all, if you're talking about *lean* meat, you would need to eat enormous amounts to meet your daily caloric needs. (Assuming a caloric intake of 2000/d, that would require somewhere between 30-60 ounces a day of "lean" beef-- the exact number depends on the cut of beef and how lean it is). By the time you eat that much beef, you are taking in somewhere about
Re: (Score:2)
>First of all, if you're talking about *lean* meat.
I self evidently don't in modern context. In ancient context, until about a hundred years ago in most Western nation, all but the tiny handful of the richest people lived on a starvation diet.
You can still see this in nations where this break point between "starvation diet for most during childhood" and "abundance died for most during childhood" came a bit later so there are still people alive. In places like Japan, if you order people oldest to youngest
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sorry, but you have been fed incorrect information. There are established methods for measuring the vitamin C content in food, which have been available for over a century. When you claim that every single analysis of the vitamin C content in meat has been falsified as part of a "vegan conspiracy", you are convincing no one but yourself.
With regard to fiber, there is a little more to it than the question of whether your food will "move through the GI tract". Food always moves through the GI tract, un
Re: (Score:2)
>When you claim that every single analysis of the vitamin C content in meat has been falsified as part of a "vegan conspiracy", you are convincing no one but yourself.
Myself and sources that even something as pro-plant based diet promotion as wikipedia uses in their articles. You stand alone with your outdated anti-scientific consensus conviction here. World has moved on from that misconception at least a decade ago.
>With regard to fiber, there is a little more to it than the question of whether your
Re: (Score:2)
I'd want to see some major data on a meat only diet before ever trying it as going off memory those groups of humans well in our past who ate diets that were the most similar to this were not the longest lived of their era. I could be remembering that wrong but given our evolutionary ancestors and the mixed diet they always ate I also find the meat only diet far fetched in that context as well. I mean, if a meat only diet was our best diet why did we evolve with such shitty teeth for eating meat?
Re: (Score:2)
You're not going to see any. ESG and SEL ensure that no organisation can currently give any financing to such a study, as it would tank said organisation's ESG and SEL scores, meaning all financing for the organisation would become significantly more expensive.
This is a taboo area of research because of how modern funding works.
Re: (Score:2)
If you're explaining something to someone using acronyms is one of the worst things you can do. I have no idea what groups you are referencing even after an internet search.
Re: (Score:2)
First of all, I'm not trying to sell you on anything. I just noted something that I found funny. That's it.
Also, it's intriguing for me that you are telling me you didn't find any information on the single biggest and most important corporate investment scoring system and educational system investment scoring system currently in existence. What kind of search history do you have that whatever pitch engine you use to search the internet failed to find results for those two?
Re: (Score:2)
First of all, I'm not trying to sell you on anything. I just noted something that I found funny. That's it.
Who says you were? I'm just commenting on things you said. If you dont like that then maybe dont post in a forum as that's sort of the whole point.
Forgive me for thinking I was talking to a reasonable person, I'll be leaving now.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm even more intrigued by your search history now. You went really out of your way to misconstrue my point, AND you're someone who can't find matches in his search history on ESG and SEL.
You're truly a unicorn in this world, and I want to know more about you!
Re: (Score:2)
Look at you dial in exactly where you think you can find fault.
Tell you what, explain to me exactly why me being familiar with these acronyms is actually a core part of the discussion we started off talking about and isnt you just trying to find fault. If you can give a good answer to that I'll be happy to talk to you.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not looking for faults at all. Like I mentioned above, I really don't care about said diet's adoption.
What I am interested however, is how on earth did you manage to get a search engine fail to answer the questions of "what is ESG" and "what is SEL"? Search engines nowadays are pitch engines, so they pitch you things they think you may be interested in. Now I'll answer your question, in hope that you will answer mine, because I'm genuinely intrigued:
Acronyms above stand for two measurement systems. ESG
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not looking for faults at all. Like I mentioned above, I really don't care about said diet's adoption.
Yes you are. You clearly have no interest in talking about an all meat diet or how practical that would be and are instead hyper focused on a completely unimportant tangent. If you're not trying to find fault then what are you doing? Did you just got lost?
Re: (Score:2)
>Tell you what, explain to me exactly why me being familiar with these acronyms is actually a core part of the discussion we started off talking about and isnt you just trying to find fault. If you can give a good answer to that I'll be happy to talk to you.
I explained it in great detail above. Show some courtesy and kindly answer my question in turn.
Re: (Score:2)
Carnivore is just a fad diet with no empirical evidence behind it, and the theories behind it is counter to what we know to be healthy.
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/skeptical-of-the-carnivore-diet/
The carnivore diet is just another diet fad focusing on eliminating allegedly bad food categories and restricting diet to only good food categories. The theoretical justification for this approach is highly flawed, and there is no empirical evidence to support it. Further, there are multiple lines of evidence that restricting one’s diet to only meat and eggs is a bad thing for health.
There is also another layer to the carnivore diet fad. If such a diet were widely adopted it would be entirely unsustainable. The feed conversion ratio for beef, the meat most recommended by proponents, is anywhere from 6x to 25x. So even if we take the most favorable number, the world would have to grow about six times as many calories as it does now in order to convert all those calories to beef for people to eat. This is far beyond the world’s capacity, especially for land and water use.
Inherent, therefore, in the carnivore diet is that this is a diet for select elites. Everyone else can eat plants. This adds an unsavory aspect to what is already a pseudoscientific and harmful fad.
Re: (Score:2)
As I already mentioned in other posts, ESG and SEL ensure that no money can be allocated to relevant research.
We do know that "multiple lines of evidence" have been funded and later debunked as vegetarian and vegan movements became more and more permanent fixtures of relevant academia. For example, the common claim of "you'll have scurvy due to deficiency of vitamin C" has been debunked fairly recently in its totality.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That moment when you don't understand that I applied this exact sentiment to the claim of "healthiness" of plant based diets.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
>No one except you brought up plant based diets
End of the second sentence of last paragraph of the OP:
>but the healthiest diets are largely plant-based
Are you feeling embarrassment yet, or are you just trolling now?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, I replied to a person who posted this:
https://slashdot.org/comments.... [slashdot.org]
"> but the healthiest diets are largely plant-based.
Great, more vegan propaganda."
And you replied to this post of mine.
Seriously, you're really bad at this "arguing about specific points" thing. See, this is a forum where I can just go up the discussion chain to see the original post and then throw it back into your face with a link.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So far, you threw out two bold faced lies in my face. I debunked both with receipts.
And you're just going to ignore your bad behavior and pretend it never happened so you can keep on spinning your stupid narrative.
Strike three troll boy. You're out. Go and munch on some grass.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Do you know how I know you're not munching on grass?
You have energy to still troll.
Re: (Score:2)
troll claims the guy that argues against OP constantly in comments to me when I'm not OP and I am making completely different arguments. And now you say that you know that I'm not munching grass when in the previous comment you explicitly accused me of doing that.
Either you are seriously mental or you are engaged in so many simultaneous arguments with people that you are confusing which thread is which. In any case this is all extremely surreal. Voi vittu!
Re: (Score:2)
Do you know how I know you're still not munching on grass?
You have energy to still troll.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I find it funny when after trying a few times to provide informative or at least insightful commentary and getting mid level trolling in return, I mirror the attitude directed at me. And person getting the same attitude they were projecting gets pissed about... the attitude.
So last few posts, we went me/you 50/50 on trolling, instead of 0/100 we had at the start. And now you're moaning about it. And that's funny to me.
Re: (Score:2)
no you have not mirrored anything. Remember that I provided arguments to which you so far have refused to answer, instead you started to argue against arguments that I never made (aka vegan stuff), when I asked why you did those strange answers you went down a long and strange road of trying to make sense of you replying to me as if I was OP and how that somehow was logical since I replied to one of your posts to OP.
So no there have been 0 trolling from me, I dare you to quote a single one of my comments in
Re: (Score:2)
You really are cute and funny when you're butthurt about finally getting your attitude mirrored back at you after half a dozen posts. So much huffing and puffing.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Done that above. Not doing it again. I'm not your husband, so huffing and puffing isn't going to get you anywhere with me.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That bit of bad reporting lept out at me too. (Score:3)
It's utterly pathetic. Worse, The Guardian doesn't care. That's where journalism is now, subjective and politically motivated.
Re: (Score:2)
That would be very bad vegan propaganda. Five seconds on Wikipedia:
"Taurine occurs naturally in fish and meat.[17][18][19] The mean daily intake from omnivore diets was determined to be around 58 mg (range from 9 to 372 mg) and to be low or negligible from a strict vegan diet. In another study, taurine intake was estimated to be generally less than 200 mg/day, even in individuals eating a high-meat diet. According to a third study, taurine consumption was estimated to vary between 40 and 400 mg/day.[20]
The
Healthy people drink energy drinks? (Score:2)
I don't think so. My friend loved them and ended up in the hospital.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because the doctor said "Stop drinking this shit. It Put you in the hospital."
Thank you! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Well, no, Red Bull won't have nearly enough taurine in it to make the slightest difference. 6 grams is six times more than the maximum recommended dose per day for humans, and that's what MICE needed. We've no idea how much humans would need, but it's reasonable to scale by body mass. And it's simply not possible to digest that amount of taurine even with supplements.
Re: Thank you! (Score:2)
Not in those doses (Score:2)
The amount in you average energy drink wonâ(TM)t do anything. Youâ(TM)d need a much higher dose in the form of a supplement. And then it only works if youâ(TM)re a cloned lab mouse.
Iâ(TM)d hold off until more research is done.
Re: (Score:2)
The equivalent human dose is stated to be 3-6g per day which is entirely achievable via energy drinks (although gross). 3-6mos of Taurine supplementation at 3g/day can be had for about £35. I know because I just bought some.
Taurine powder (Score:3)
Yadav's team homed a potential driver in 2012 (Score:3)
Red Bull got it wrong (Score:5, Funny)
Red Bull doesn't give you wings, it delays you getting them.
1 g / kg of body weight per day? (Score:2)
Give a little, take a little (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Now that's a weird food sensitivity.
Re: (Score:2)
Oxygen sounds a bit too much like Oxycodone. I suggest you stop intaking Oxygen...
Re: (Score:2)
I was curious as to the nature of this provisional patent filing, but a search of the Patent office site proved fruitless. In fact pretty much the only 'additional' information I could find was the following line: "Columbia University has applied for patents for medical uses of taurine, a spokesperson for the university said in an email."
I can't help thinking that the patent system is seriously borked!
Re: (Score:3)
I am sure a suitably framed ChatGPT dialogue will bring up an answer to satisfy your curiosity. (It may look more convincing than many provisional patent applications.)