       
Contact
Us
Staff
|
 |
Longevity researcher Thomas Perls: study proves growth hormone injections
are harmful
By
Brian Fitzgerald
Ponce de Leon searched in vain for the fountain of youth, and those today
looking to extend their lives by taking human growth hormone (HGH) will
discover little more than a fountain of misinformation, according to BU
longevity researcher Thomas Perls. They may also have a nearly 50-50 chance
of falling victim to the hormone’s side effects.
Ads tout such claims for the hormone as “energizing your body’s
master energy center,” but results of a clinical study published
in the November 13 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association
(JAMA) show that while the HGH injections did increase lean muscle mass
and fat loss in test subjects, the gains were accompanied by adverse reactions
in almost half the cases. Perls, a MED associate professor, whose own
longevity research examines nutrition, lifestyles, and genes -- not magic
hormone energy potions -- hopes that the JAMA study will ring the “death
knell” for the use of HGH as an anti-aging agent.
Perls says that these questionable anti-aging medicines, which have grown
into a multibillion-dollar-a-year business recently, is nothing new. “There
has been a long history of advertising hormones, dating back to the 1700s,
as a fountain of youth,” he says. “I think that what we’re
experiencing today is really no different from the snake oil salesmanship
that took place back then.”
Despite the hype of a previous study a decade ago suggesting the possibility
that HGH can stave off some of the negative effects of aging -- including
decreased muscle mass and strength, increased body fat, thinning of the
bones, and a decline in cardiovascular endurance -- Perls says that there
is no convincing evidence that current anti-aging remedies can slow aging
or increase longevity in humans. “At the same time,” he says,
“there have been studies that prove not only that they do not work,
but that they cause harm. And the research published in JAMA is a high-profile
study showing just that.”
The recent study, conducted jointly by investigators from the National
Institute on Aging (NIA) Intramural Research Program and investigators
from the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in Baltimore, suggests
that growth hormone and related substances, particularly given in combination
with testosterone in older men, “may one day be a promising therapeutic
of certain age-related conditions,” says Marc R. Blackman, the study’s
lead investigator. Still, “it is not ready for prime time. There
is much we still don’t know about its efficacy,” he continues,
“and more importantly, there are too many known and potential adverse
consequences associated with it. It is a fascinating and promising area
of research, but at this time we can’t recommend it for use outside
of a carefully controlled and monitored clinical trial.”
Numerous side effects, including prediabetes, diabetes, aching joints,
and swollen tissues, are cited in the study, which was supported by grants
from the NIA and the National Center for Research Sources. Although a
6.8 percent increase in strength was reported in men who took HGH and
testosterone, between 24 and 46 percent of those treated with HGH experienced
peripheral edema, carpal tunnel syndrome, and joint pain. The study involved
57 healthy men and 74 healthy women aged 65 to 88.
HGH is manufactured by the pituitary gland, a pea-sized structure at the
base of the brain. After age 35, although the body continues to produce
the hormone, it releases less of it. HGH injections increase pituitary
output, but in many cases exacerbate resistance to insulin, the hormone
that allows blood sugar, or glucose, to be taken into the body’s
cells and used for energy.
Anti-aging hucksters
“There are reputable companies, such as Genzyme, that make HGH for
FDA-approved uses, such as treating children whose pituitary glands do
not make amounts of the hormone sufficient for normal growth,” says
Perls. “But there are more than a thousand of these anti-aging hucksters
-- or practitioners, as they would undoubtedly prefer to be called --
who make the stuff for people who don’t have childhood growth hormone
deficiency.”
Proponents of HGH, including Dr. Ronald Klatz, president of the American
Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine in Chicago, say that the side effects reported
in the JAMA study were caused by doses of the hormone that were inappropriately
high -- two to three times higher, they say, than needed for rejuvenation
purposes. Perls says that a follow-up study administering reduced doses
may help clear the air. “It would be worthwhile to deal with any
criticisms of the study, however unfounded they are, with an additional
study,” says Perls. “But I’m not sure how easy it would
be to do another study because of the incidence of side effects.”
Some federal officials have estimated the number of older adults injecting
HGH at 25,000 to 30,000, with a price tag of $15,000 a year for each person.
Writing prescriptions for the hormone as an anti-aging treatment is not
illegal, but it has generated a bitter debate between the gerontological
medical establishment and doctors who run “anti-aging clinics.”
Thousands of other people use less expensive growth hormone pills and
sprays, which don’t work, according to S. Mitchell Harman, one of
the JAMA study researchers, because the HGH molecule is too large to pass
into the bloodstream unless injected.
“They’ll come up with anything to entice the public,”
says Perls. “First it was melatonin. Then it was DHEA.” Melatonin,
a hormone produced by the pineal gland, and dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA),
a hormone produced by the adrenal glands, are available without a prescription
because they are classified as food supplements. Blasted by the NIA, these
heavily promoted “miracle” compounds became popular with aging
baby boomers in the early 1990s, but sales tapered off about five years
ago. “They had bad side effects and weren’t selling on the
market. After human growth hormone is no longer popular, they’ll
come up with something else,” says Perls. “The ones that promote
these so-called aging cures don’t care about the science, they just
care about their pocketbooks.”
Fountain of aging well
There is no fountain of youth, he says, but there is what he likes to
call “the fountain of aging well.”
In 1994, Perls and MED research associate Margery Hutter Silver, then
researchers at Harvard, launched the New England Centenarian Study (NECS)
-- the largest genetic study of people over 100 years old in the world.
Perls and Silver, who came to BU last February, write in their book Living
to 100: Lessons in Living to Your Maximum Potential at Any Age (Basic
Books, 1999) that one key to surviving to an old age is no real secret.
“The only thing we know that can really slow down aging, and perhaps
also delay the diseases associated with aging, is caloric restriction,”
Perls says. Indeed, obesity is rare among centenarians.
The researchers with the NECS, now based at Boston Medical Center, also
discovered a “genetic booster rocket” for longevity after
analyzing the genomes of 308 centenarians and their siblings. They pinpointed
a region on human chromosome 4 that is likely to contain a gene or genes
associated with extraordinary life expectancy. “With scientists
at a company called Centagenetix in Cambridge, we’ve been working
to find the gene that plays a role in lifespan,” says Perls. Exploring
the gene’s biochemical pathways could lead to the development of
a drug that mimics the effect of the gene -- with benefits outweighing
the risks, unlike the current so-called anti-aging supplements.
George Bernard Shaw was in his 90s when he gave this bit of advice to
young people: “Do not try to live forever. You will not succeed.”
However, says Perls, “most of us have what it takes to get to our
mid to late 80s in very good health if we regularly exercise, maintain
a lean body mass, and don’t smoke -- doing those things will enable
most of us to preserve our health and vitality.”
|
 |