Log in

View Full Version : Scientist says a "cure for aging" in sight



Nothing Human Is Alien
5th July 2011, 05:43
LONDON (Reuters) – If Aubrey de Grey's predictions are right, the first person who will live to see their 150th birthday has already been born. And the first person to live for 1,000 years could be less than 20 years younger.

A biomedical gerontologist and chief scientist of a foundation dedicated to longevity research, de Grey reckons that within his own lifetime doctors could have all the tools they need to "cure" aging -- banishing diseases that come with it and extending life indefinitely.

"I'd say we have a 50/50 chance of bringing aging under what I'd call a decisive level of medical control within the next 25 years or so," de Grey said in an interview before delivering a lecture at Britain's Royal Institution academy of science.

"And what I mean by decisive is the same sort of medical control that we have over most infectious diseases today."

De Grey sees a time when people will go to their doctors for regular "maintenance," which by then will include gene therapies, stem cell therapies, immune stimulation and a range of other advanced medical techniques to keep them in good shape.

De Grey lives near Cambridge University where he won his doctorate in 2000 and is chief scientific officer of the non-profit California-based SENS (Strategies for Engineered Negligible Senescence) Foundation, which he co-founded in 2009.

He describes aging as the lifelong accumulation of various types of molecular and cellular damage throughout the body.

"The idea is to engage in what you might call preventative geriatrics, where you go in to periodically repair that molecular and cellular damage before it gets to the level of abundance that is pathogenic," he explained.

CHALLENGE

Exactly how far and how fast life expectancy will increase in the future is a subject of some debate, but the trend is clear. An average of three months is being added to life expectancy every year at the moment and experts estimate there could be a million centenarians across the world by 2030.

To date, the world's longest-living person on record lived to 122 and in Japan alone there were more than 44,000 centenarians in 2010.

Some researchers say, however, that the trend toward longer lifespan may falter due to an epidemic of obesity now spilling over from rich nations into the developing world.

De Grey's ideas may seem far-fetched, but $20,000 offered in 2005 by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Technology Review journal for any molecular biologist who showed that de Grey's SENS theory was "so wrong that it was unworthy of learned debate" was never won.

The judges on that panel were prompted into action by an angry put-down of de Grey from a group of nine leading scientists who dismissed his work as "pseudo science."

They concluded that this label was not fair, arguing instead that SENS "exists in a middle ground of yet-to-be-tested ideas that some people may find intriguing but which others are free to doubt."

CELL THERAPY

For some, the prospect of living for hundreds of years is not particularly attractive, either, as it conjures up an image of generations of sick, weak old people and societies increasingly less able to cope.

But de Grey says that's not what he's working for. Keeping the killer diseases of old age at bay is the primary focus.

"This is absolutely not a matter of keeping people alive in a bad state of health," he told Reuters. "This is about preventing people from getting sick as a result of old age. The particular therapies that we are working on will only deliver long life as a side effect of delivering better health."

De Grey divides the damage caused by aging into seven main categories for which repair techniques need to be developed if his prediction for continual maintenance is to come true.

He notes that while for some categories, the science is still in its earliest stages, there are others where it's already almost there.

"Stem cell therapy is a big part of this. It's designed to reverse one type of damage, namely the loss of cells when cells die and are not automatically replaced, and it's already in clinical trials (in humans)," he said.

Stem cell therapies are currently being trialed in people with spinal cord injuries, and de Grey and others say they may one day be used to find ways to repair disease-damaged brains and hearts.

NO AGE LIMIT

Cardiovascular diseases are the world's biggest age-related killers and de Grey says there is a long way to go on these though researchers have figured out the path to follow.

Heart diseases that cause heart failure, heart attacks and strokes are brought about by the accumulation of certain types of what de Grey calls "molecular garbage" -- byproducts of the body's metabolic processes -- which our bodies are not able to break down or excrete.

"The garbage accumulates inside the cell, and eventually it gets in the way of the cell's workings," he said.

De Grey is working with colleagues in the United States to identify enzymes in other species that can break down the garbage and clean out the cells -- and the aim then is to devise genetic therapies to give this capability to humans.

"If we could do that in the case of certain modified forms of cholesterol which accumulate in cells of the artery wall, then we simply would not get cardiovascular disease," he said.

De Grey is reluctant to make firm predictions about how long people will be able to live in future, but he does say that with each major advance in longevity, scientists will buy more time to make yet more scientific progress.

In his view, this means that the first person who will live to 1,000 is likely to be born less than 20 years after the first person to reach 150.

"I call it longevity escape velocity -- where we have a sufficiently comprehensive panel of therapies to enable us to push back the ill health of old age faster than time is passing. And that way, we buy ourselves enough time to develop more therapies further as time goes on," he said.

"What we can actually predict in terms of how long people will live is absolutely nothing, because it will be determined by the risk of death from other causes like accidents," he said.

"But there really shouldn't be any limit imposed by how long ago you were born. The whole point of maintenance is that it works indefinitely."

agnixie
5th July 2011, 11:42
De Grey is an advisor for the Singularity Institute, which is immediately suspect. He's also mostly backed by his own research institute, the main journal of his scientific organization is basically a circlejerk (about 2/3 of their paper citations are self-citations according to wikipedia; I didn't realize it was that much) and the editorial board is the same people who do this rejuvenation research. Most outside voices in biology have pointed out that he's been unable to actually give any result.

From a quick check up on the wikipedia article for De Grey, I'm tempted to hunt down the debate in Technology Review about his organization, as its basic conclusion was basically that studying it was a good idea for fundamental research but that they had no compelling case for the actual scientific basis of their existence as a research center.

Basically, I tend to stay wary of futurologists with a pet theory.

Jimmie Higgins
5th July 2011, 13:23
Interesting read, thanks for posting it.


De Grey sees a time when people will go to their doctors for regular "maintenance,"At this point I'd be happy to see the day when I could go see a doctor for a regular check-up or when I'm sick. :P

Olentzero
5th July 2011, 13:44
Exactly. Let's see if we can't get a system that can provide medical care and a decent existence to the world's population first before we start tackling the ethics - let alone the science - of indefinitely prolonging the human lifespan.

Revolution starts with U
5th July 2011, 14:43
I could just see it now: "An age limit of 250 years is required for political office." And only management and ownership will be able to afford it.... :sleep:

But either way, I remember seeing a report on Discovery that there would be a pill out by 2010 that would extend life expectancy to an avg 150 years... that didn't pan out. As another poster said, it is good to "shy away from futurists with their pet theories."

Forward Union
5th July 2011, 14:45
Source for this?

Nothing Human Is Alien
5th July 2011, 18:32
Source for this?

LONDON (Reuters) - If Aubrey de Grey's predictions are right, the first person who will live to see their 150th birthday has already been born. And the first person to live for 1,000 years could be less than 20 years younger.

Lenina Rosenweg
5th July 2011, 18:42
Okay so can we have some sort of RevLeft reunion in 2161?There won't be internet forums by then but highly sophisticated VR simulations we can beam ourselves into.I'll be the cute panda avatar. The world of course will be socialist or it won't exist. Anyway, I'll bring the marshmallows.

RedAnarchist
5th July 2011, 19:34
I could just see it now: "An age limit of 250 years is required for political office." And only management and ownership will be able to afford it.... :sleep:

Even if we put it that high, career politicians won't have gained enough wisdom to actually do anything for their country's people, or for the world.

Coach Trotsky
5th July 2011, 19:54
Even if we put it that high, career politicians won't have gained enough wisdom to actually do anything for their country's people, or for the world.

If there are any career politicians left 200 years into the future from now, shame on us.

x371322
5th July 2011, 20:25
This is nothing new. Guys like De Grey have been preaching this stuff for quite some time now. I've always been a fan of their theories, though I don't necessarily have much faith in them, no matter how I used to. Whether it's De Grey or Kurzweil, or whomever, it always seems that their predictions are biased towards themselves. They want to actually live to see these things play out themselves. I do believe we will eventually beat aging, and live indefinitely (for the most part). But not in the time frame they like to expect. They take Moore's law, and try to apply it to scientific discoveries. It just doesn't work that way. Technological growth may often be exponential... but scientific growth is not. It's just not that simple.

Believe me, I hope I'm wrong. I'm very much an advocate of his ideas. I just don't see eye to eye on the timing. The work has to start somewhere, no doubt. And I'm glad there's people like him out there to push for it. Death is worth resisting.

I guess you could say I'm playing the "wait and see" card.

x371322
5th July 2011, 21:08
Hmm. Oddly enough I just spotted this. Definitely relevant. A new drug that apparently increases lifespan by decades (maybe).

http://dvice.com/archives/2011/07/new-drug-could.php

Weezer
5th July 2011, 21:24
Even if this process becomes a reality, I can guarantee you only the wealthy would be able to afford it.

eyedrop
5th July 2011, 23:24
I like the optimism and hope they are right, but I'm to much of a cynic and pessimist to believe it's more than a pipedream at the moment.


Even if this process becomes a reality, I can guarantee you only the wealthy would be able to afford it.


Or imagine the horror of having to get a loan with 300 years of down-payments for a 301 years of extended life treatments.

Jose Gracchus
6th July 2011, 05:23
Because I can't wait to be ruled by immortal bourgeois.

ÑóẊîöʼn
6th July 2011, 07:59
Like with all other medical procedures, there should be considerable social and political pressures to ensure that life extension therapies, if and when they appear, can be mass produced so that the greatest amount of people can benefit from them.

Or like frightened peasants we could ban all such research and flee into the peace and safety of a new dark age.

bcbm
6th July 2011, 08:09
Or like frightened peasants we could ban all such research and flee into the peace and safety of a new dark age.

wtf are you talking about?

ÑóẊîöʼn
6th July 2011, 08:30
wtf are you talking about?

There seems to be this attitude of "if only the rich can have it, then nobody should have it" - in spite of the fact that plenty of inventions started out as expensive things available only to the rich.

It's not like life extension treatments are going to be made out of the tears of workers' children or anything like that - biotechnology isn't a particularly heavy industry.

bcbm
6th July 2011, 08:33
i don't think anybody said nobody should have it or suggesting the research stop, just predicting if produced in our current system it would be only available to a few. and even being critical of this i don't think qualifies for wishing for "a new dark ages" thats a bit over the top

Mr. Cervantes
6th July 2011, 09:05
Overpopulation would keep growing exponentially especially with prolonged mortality where eventually we would have to start choosing who get's to keep on living and who get's to die.

Of course those who get to live indefinately will be those who can afford their immortality where death will be left to the remainder of us.

If humanity ever becomes that insane or absurd I'd say right around that time a asteroid should be delivered to our corner of the universe.

Sperm-Doll Setsuna
6th July 2011, 09:09
Overpopulation would keep growing exponentially especially with prolonged mortality where eventually we would have to start choosing who get's to keep on living and who get's to die.

Of course those who get to live indefinately will be those who can afford their immortality where death will be left to the remainder of us.

If humanity ever becomes that insane I'd say right around that time a asteroid should be delivered to our corner of the universe.

This might of course also become a catalyst for uprising and opposition to the system, though, so it is kind of a double-edged sword or however you call it, since it is such a blatant case of injustice.

ÑóẊîöʼn
7th July 2011, 07:29
i don't think anybody said nobody should have it or suggesting the research stop, just predicting if produced in our current system it would be only available to a few. and even being critical of this i don't think qualifies for wishing for "a new dark ages" thats a bit over the top

Statements like "I can't wait to be ruled by immortal bourgeois" suggest a focus on the negative that excludes the possibility that such a technology could have a more egalitarian function. It's moaning about potential problems instead of brainstorming ways of getting around those problems.

bcbm
7th July 2011, 10:14
we already know the way around it, but until we are lynching ceos with bankers guts or whatever, we reserve the right to moan

agnixie
7th July 2011, 14:50
I know it's an interesting hypothetical, but the researcher is still a Kurzweilist who publishes mostly in an echo chamber.

maskerade
8th July 2011, 23:47
I don't know, this guy has a pretty big beard so I'm inclined to take him seriously.

ÑóẊîöʼn
10th July 2011, 03:34
I know it's an interesting hypothetical, but the researcher is still a Kurzweilist who publishes mostly in an echo chamber.

I'm told that Kurzweil's quest for everlasting life is motivated by the deaths of at least two of those who were very close to him. This explains the fervor with which he makes his seriously over-optimistic predictions and also why he's displaying "crank" symptoms such as his carefully managed regimen of pills.

But I will say this in Kurzweil's favour - at least he understands that whatever the answer is, it will be naturalistic and discoverable through scientific means. Certainly that's the approach to the question most likely to yield useful results.

The Vegan Marxist
10th July 2011, 05:02
I'm told that Kurzweil's quest for everlasting life is motivated by the deaths of at least two of those who were very close to him. This explains the fervor with which he makes his seriously over-optimistic predictions and also why he's displaying "crank" symptoms such as his carefully managed regimen of pills.

But I will say this in Kurzweil's favour - at least he understands that whatever the answer is, it will be naturalistic and discoverable through scientific means. Certainly that's the approach to the question most likely to yield useful results.

The death of his father was what motivated him, I believe. At least that's what he said in his documentary - which I highly recommend for all to watch if you haven't already.