The article includes a citation that explicitly states the opposite. Specifically citation 20 from the section "The Twist" (which is itself all about this idea):

> [20] Mehdipour, M. et al. “Rejuvenation of three germ layers tissues by exchanging old blood plasma with saline-albumin.” Aging 12(10), 8790–8819, 2020. The UC Berkeley team found that diluting old blood plasma with saline and albumin produced rejuvenating effects comparable to young blood — suggesting the mechanism is removing pro-aging factors rather than adding youth factors. This was, at the time of publication, the strongest evidence that old blood is the problem, not that young blood is the solution.

Maybe regularly donating blood would have more negative effects from losing good stuff than positive effects from losing bad stuff, or maybe not. There is evidence that it could be a net positive though.

And even aside from the buildup of crud due to normal aging, environmental crud (nano/microplastics, PFAS, etc) is not produced by the body. It's still not totally settled science whether all of those things have negative effects, but regular blood donation would help clear it out, at least a little.

The article confirms what I just wrote. Albumins are proteins. If you add more albumins, the ratio changes.

dilution = change of ratio. Just giving blood is not dilution.

I was waiting for someone to consider the idea of synthetic dilutants.

But a further horror is: you’re dumping your crud on the person getting your transfusion? I guess it’s better than dying in ER.