Cookies   I display ads to cover the expenses. See the privacy policy for more information. You can keep or reject the ads.

Video thumbnail
Welcome Aubrey de Grey - the chief science
officer of SENS Research Foundation. He has
been working on regenerative medicine
and strategies for
reducing the deleterious effects of
aging for quite some time now, so yes
thanks very much for joining us!
There's been quite a bit of our funding
progress at SENS - I thought it would be
good to start there. I think the
co-founder of etherium donated millions
to the organization recently which is
really great! Aubrey: Yeah we're very happy about it.
I mean in fact over the past few
months it's been quite.. well the
situation with funding has been fairly
difficult for us for the past couple of
years because the money that I donated
back in 2011 ran out in 2016.. on schedule
we had we made a decision right at the
beginning that we would spend it over a
period of five years - and it was very
well spent - but of course it did mean
that we had a big shortfall to find from
other places. And it was pretty tight
during last year. But as you say towards
the end of last year we had a bunch of
very good news - in fact we had four
donors come in at a seven-digit level
totaling about six and a half million
dollars ($6,500,000 USD) - all crypto currencies: three Bitcoin
donors and one, as you mentioned about
2.4 million through Vitalik Buterin.
The three Bitcoin donors are all anonymous
but that's ok, their
money isn't - so very very happy about
that it's certainly gonna make our lives
a lot easier for the next little while
of course we're not going to spend it all at once, becauyse
we don't know whether the same thing is likely to
happen going forward - but it certainly means that we're on a much secure
footing than we were. Adam: Right, so that's great that
the work can continue. So what kinds of research projects will
that money help fund? Aubrey: Well, first of all it that we will be able to expand some of
the projects that we're already doing.
One in particular that we're doing at
the Buck Institute with Judy Campisi
looking at stimulating the immune system
to get rid of senescence cells we are
currently planning an expansion of that
project which will in fact happen partly
intuitive lab and partly in our own
facility down in Mountain View so it's
gonna be nice we're already looking at a
few new projects to start we've had
quite a shopping list for quite a while
and it's definitely time that we were
able to start funding those projects and
of course it also makes sense to do that
because we have had plenty of success
over the past couple of years in
graduating some of our projects in other
words getting to the point where they
could be spun out into private startup
companies that can acquire investment
and that of course frees up more
resources both in terms of money and in
terms of space for us to do more work
fantastic okay so Ajax therapeutics is
one of those oh no so Ajax therapeutics
is a subsidiary of Byers time which is
the company currently run by Mike west
of course in earlier life founded both
Jaron and advanced cell technology so
Ajax is not a spin on some sense
Research Foundation it's a subsidiary of
buy time and I think the reason he's
probably mentioned it was because about
six months ago Mike persuaded me to join
Ajax in a part-time position about 30%
effort so my title berry vice president
of new technology discovery and what I'm
doing that basically is very nicely
complementary to the work that we do at
cents as most of the audience we know
cents is kind of a seven-point plan for
defeating aging which divides the
various types of damage that the body
accumulates
to these seven major categories and
three of those categories are to do with
either having too few cells of the
thought we need or too many cells of the
thought that we don't want whereas the
other four categories are molecular they
are to do with changes that happen
either inside the cell or in the
extracellular space now the progress
that we have made of sense Research
Foundation over the years has been most
impressive actually on the molecular
aspects all four of them have seen a lot
of progress as a result of our work and
the cellular side you know we've worked
on it but I guess our efforts there have
been less impressive in terms of their
actual progress whereas my quests work
throughout the twenty years they've been
in this field or more now has been very
much focused on the cellular side on
stem cells and on eliminating cancer and
eliminating senescence cells so it's
very appropriate that Mike and I should
finally find a way to work together
and of course I've looked up to Mike
very much all this time that we've known
each other so you know I'm really
delighted at this new Association that I
have well done yes it's great has good
alliances in the field now it's
interesting I hope in another interview
of yours that um you've stepped back
from the Turing certain lines of
research because the industry has taken
on has taken up this line of research
and it's showing that like what you're
doing is providing existence proof for
helping providing its existence proof of
certain lines of research that other
companies or or outfits or organizations
can continue the research where they
where they have funding to do so so that
anymore it's it like if you your goal is
to put yourself out of work
well cut I mean so that's a bit of an
oversimplification I mean certainly in
principle the ultimate goal of cents
Research Foundation is indeed to put
ourselves out of a job to be able to get
all of the projects that really matter
to a point where they're being pursued
capably and aggressively in the private
sector or by other people
but they're in no danger of getting to
that point anytime soon we have
succeeded in in spinning out quite a few
projects so far a total of five into
startup companies but we've certainly
got plenty more to go and you know our
business model will remain in very much
that the foundation you know of itself
is not really well placed to do the
whole job and obviously there are a lot
of people out there who just don't like
giving money away anyway they but they
prefer to invest rather than to donate
so it makes sense that we should pull
herself in the position of being the
effectively the spearhead of the engine
room of the industry throughout getting
products this level of proof of concept
that they become attractive to at least
the more visionary type of investor that
we tend to talk to but yes I mean
certainly I can't see I see myself being
able to step back from any of this for a
little while yeah and the foundation
profit certainly also is likely to
continue to play an absolutely
indispensable role for some time in fact
I just should say one look about that
which is that often when we speak to
people who are predominantly of an
investment mindset as opposed to
philanthropic we try to persuade them
that actually they should donate to the
foundation as well as investing in our
spinouts simply because if they donate
then they get access to information they
get to talk to us a lot more they get to
understand what's coming and they get
into a position to be the lead investor
the first investor the seed investor in
some new project but maybe spinning out
in the future and I'm pleased to say but
that argument has seemed to be
persuasive so most of the people that
are investing in our spin our companies
are also giving us substantial donation
money as well and I'm hoping that action
will continue yeah I mean it is a
philanthropic endeavor to trying to
reduce suffering in the world by I get
it having better medicine and access to
the minute and having it like research
and
and everything means that it'll be we'll
be getting to a time I quit a lot of
fast work cheaper and more affordable
for everybody to have access to this
benefit to these sorts of therapeutics
that are ultimately stave off the
damages accumulated as the process of
Aging at the moment so it's not just
about making money and it's great if you
can as well and it is really a
philanthropic endeavor I'd like to
stress that sure yeah so I'm it's
interesting III thought I I could talk a
big talk by Jennifer Doudna who's the
co-founder of CRISPR and some of people
talking about the implications of such a
technology you know I got this in they
were very careful about how they
presented and curated the information
for public consumption that also the
consumption for other scientists but it
seems to be on one hand we're getting to
the stage where science is having more
faith in the long term view of
regenerative medicine and it's not just
like a buzz word it's actually in
industry now which is very which is
great but also what I'm worried about is
some of the dialogue and some of the
uses of language to express these ideas
that might frighten away investors or
scientists who are working at the
coalface
or funding the coalface industry that
will ultimately make the material
progress in this field so you know
immortality is the word which is bandied
out quite a bit
among all the transhumanist community in
the month there are a lot of titles sort
of talking about this research or in
media we also it's a new thing your
language yeah I mean certainly we do
have to be careful I mean of course
there's a balance there one can't be too
careful you know I think that
gerontologists have a community rather
shot themselves in the foot over the
years over the past 20 or 30 years by a
way to aggressively Thrawn's anything
translational you know from even talking
about doing something about aging
certainly in the past five or ten years
that problem how
been alleviated it's talked about about
doing something but even now very still
a great deal of fear about talking to
radically you know people will now be
people in gerontologist mainstream
geologists will now be perfectly happy
look about damage repair grading and
addressing aging as Adam conquered and
the problem which of course it's exactly
what I've been saying for the past
thirty years plus you won't get any
Terran talent any man's finger
oncologist going anywhere near longevity
a scheduler will run away very fast when
one talks about radical longevity and
yes the media is a good part of the
problem here because the media of course
are in the business of selling they
first maybe they have stuff and so they
will tend to use words like well time to
downplay the fact that the longevity
benefits of this work are simply a side
effect of the health benefits which is
of course the absolute central message
that we have to get across in order to
get people to understand that this is
worth doing and that it's a really
important mission so I mean in your
experience what what worked with
different with different crowds I mean
when you're talking to a bunch of
scientists what words and what language
and won't you use or you you let incline
to you and when you're talking to a
bunch of friends few minutes ago
futurism
well actually it's neither of those two
communities than a problematic well I'm
talking to myself I don't need to talk
about you know the social implications
or anything I all just I'll just talk
about the site somewhere you know it's
just a perfectly straightforward
technical conversation it doesn't get
into any kind of difficulties when I'm
talking to
transhumanists life extensionists you
know techno visionary shall we say then
again I don't have a problem because
basically they know all about this stuff
already and the language is not really
the issue so the really the problem
comes when I talk to the general public
whether directly giving talks or whether
talking through media there I have to
you know be on the one hand very
aggressive in saying look we need to
take this problem seriously but also I
need to be very aggressive in diverting
the audience or the interviewer or
whatever from any kind of distortion in
terms of you know immortality or
whatever so that people can see that
this is serious science serious serious
pioneering technology and not just
science fiction and one thing that I've
been emphasizing for a long time and I
think it's really you know starting to
have is that there's only so much that I
had one individual can do I mean
obviously I do have this kind of you
know spiritual leader role in this field
but at the same time you know I have a
particular way of saying things a
particular style of discourse and
communication which isn't will just
resonate with everybody nobody can reach
everybody so we absolutely require in
this field to have an increasing
diversity of advocates out there people
who are willing to get up on stage and
on camera and say these things in their
own way and you know communicate better
than I can with some with certain
audiences I believe that you know that
is happening increasingly now of course
you yourself have done so you know
that's that's really excellent but it's
not a moment too soon
we really really need more of that
absolutely well okay for my benefit and
and for other people who are doing like
podcasts or interviews and maybe doing
some documentaries what would you say
would be some good key messages to focus
on and enter what kind of dialogue do
you think would produce the best sort of
mileage in your opinion or what would
you personally like to be so I think
really I want to divide my answer to
that question into two parts first of
all message it with regard to the
feasibility of all of this and then
messing it with regards to the
desirability and the importance of all
of this so on the feasibility side I
think what we need to emphasize is first
of all the progress
both bye yes aging specific
organizations like Center Research
Foundation and by mainstream researchers
in mainstream universities around the
world in actually putting together their
damage repair panel of interventions
that we need and secondly the general
acceptance of and you know embracing of
that whole paradigm forward to be
defeating a aging by the you know I
talked a great deal these days about
this famous paper that came out in 2013
called the hallmarks of age published by
five very senior and respected
biologists from Europe I think it's I
think it's correct to say that that
paper is the single most highly cited
paper in the biology of Aging of this
decade we wouldn't because essentially
it's just a complete reinvention of what
I publish 11 years previously the first
paper on sans which were cited about
twice by anywhere other than me you know
so so this is extremely good news of
course it's a bit of a shame that I
didn't get more of the credit but at the
same time you know the fact that this is
out now you know being so heavily
referenced and it's just it's such a
touchstone to define the legitimacy of
this kind of approach you know that's
that's extremely good news all that
needs to be do not just some crazy
harebrained idea being spouted by one
isolated guy with a beard and a strange
accent only um on the desirability side
you know there's so many arguments that
people put forward for why this might or
might not be a good thing in people why
it might be a bad thing why we might
create problems as a result of solving
the problem we have today or what the
problem we have today isn't really a
problem and you know I've been
challenging those concerns for a very
long time now it's not easy to get the
message across that we need to take this
seriously um you know I keep getting
better at this I keep coming up with new
ways to knock down these arguments but
everyone needs their own ways you need
to figure out the best way to actually
do this and some argument to gets very
ineffective you know one of my favorite
unfavorite arguments is quite a lot of
transhumanists when they're confronted
with a concern that if we didn't have
aging we would have overpopulation on
the earth they'll say oh don't worry
will emigrate into space now you know
first of all that's an extremely
unlikely solution to the problem but
also even if it were likely solution to
the problem it's definitely not a
persuasive one because the kind of
people who are raising this concern in
the first place and not the kind of
people who want to go to space though
you know we should be careful and think
a little bit about the psychology of the
people that we're talking to and I've
certainly found that over the years the
most effective arguments are ones that
are much more general essentially
focusing on the fact that this is all
about health and that you know nobody
wants to get Alzheimer's nobody wants
anybody else to get outsiders and this
is all about simply stopping people from
getting out samples or indeed any of the
other things that come but all people
get and that lead longevity effect is
purely a side effect and now I also
talked a lot about you know a sense of
proportion about you know the
possibility that we might create other
problems has to be evaluated by actually
us even the question would these
problems genuinely be more serious than
the problem we have today you know these
are the kinds of things that I think one
needs to get across in conversations
about this absolutely so I mean it's
great to talk about a long term impact
and you know expanding throughout the
cosmos and having lots of life existing
on different planets sort of going
somewhere it independent but that's not
something that people the general public
need to be persuaded about at this stage
if we never were to get to that space in
the future maybe then then we can sort
of it's much worse than that it's not
that the general public is waiting of
this for a long time to come what it is
is that what one does by talking about
by talking in those kinds of ways it's
one actively alienates the public you
know the public decides that the person
they're talking to is a lunatic and they
are dissuaded from listening to anything
else that the person
so you know you've got to get you've got
it you've got you know create a
foundation of credibility into your
conversation before you try to persuade
anyone of anything all right
yes people like you know futurist like
myself even attempted into the idea that
they try to conduct or become sort of
mad visionary is it's somewhat a virtue
and talking about like these wild
possible futures not at nine Aries is
good clickbait but it's um you know if
you're right hey you hit the jackpot
anybody will say wow this I know it has
got a crystal ball yeah but in the long
term maybe in the short term that as
well though this is a problem now okay
so how are we going at her achieve a
mouth rejuvenation well is that going to
happen like in the next ten years do you
think is a good chance I'm subject to
continued funding like you've seen over
the last few look I certainly do I think
that the time friend was about 10 years
which I started putting forward about 13
years ago has come down to probably
about six years you know it hasn't come
down as fast I would like obviously but
and absolutely because the funding has
been inadequate I think we could be
talking in the region of five or six
years now
and that's because all of the components
that we need to put together are now
moving forward quite nicely in
particular I think that we have really
made the decisive breakthroughs in what
arguably are the two single most
difficult components of sense namely
mitochondrial mutations and
extracellular cross-linking in both of
those cases the approaches that we have
felt were necessary
welcome generally agree now that the be
the way to go but no progress had been
made by anybody for at least 15 years
and in both cases we've funded and
getting mitochondrial mutations the work
that we've been doing our own had in the
case of cross-linking the work that we
fund our University and Connecticut in
both cases you know we've we've really
unlocked it and things are moving
forward quite nicely now so I believe
that there's a very good chance that all
of these will be in place within the
next five years or so of course we have
to do more than that we have to actually
combine these things at worse that's
developing them individually and there's
certainly plenty to do there so one
thing that we are already looking at in
beginning the process of combining
things that already somewhat work just
in order to you know to unearth any
unforeseen interactions that might exist
you know sooner rather than later
so yeah the zone certainly long way to
go but if funding continues to be
adequate I wouldn't say it's adequate
even now but the funding it is to
increase then I think we were a good job
I think if so viewers whatever what kind
what the goal are very much my mouse
rejuvenation is and what it might
represented assigned to the community -
Anna just give us a quick rundown about
the implications of achieving such a
thing yeah sure so I defined robust
mouth rejuvenation way back about 14
years ago as the point where we can take
a bunch of normal mice that of a
long-lived strain so that we haven't got
any concerns about there being
inherently sick so typically live about
three years on average and we do nothing
whatsoever to them until they are two
years old so until they're in middle age
and then we throw the kitchen sink at
them we do a whole bunch of different
interventions at that point and the
result is they live an average of five
years total rather than only three years
so in other words we basically travel
their remaining lifespan from one year
to three now
I touched those numbers quite
conservatively because my goal was and
is to produce a result in the laboratory
with mice there is sufficiently dramatic
in terms of rejuvenation
the mainstream gerontology community
will be willing to do what I did to
actually go out on stage and on camera
and say yes it is only a matter of time
before we get this rejuvenation thing
working for humans and you know
longevity escape velocity is a foregone
conclusion after that now that's going
to take a really impressive result
simply because the mainstream tarantella
community have a lot of vested interests
you know they have the next grant
application to get funded and they have
to worry about peer review and you know
getting promoted and all that kind of
stuff and you know that has definitely
caused the gerontology community to be
extremely conservative but the reason I
considered very input to be so essential
is because at the end of the day they
are the people who hold the keys of
general public trust and expectation in
what's going to happen if remotes to the
chair until I say then everyone's going
to believe this you know Oprah Winfrey
is gonna say let's have a war on Aging
and you know it's gonna be war on Aging
like what's it's going to be impossible
to get elected unless you have a
manifesto commitment to do that so
that's why I've always focused on mice
to a greater extent really than the
actual scientific argument might suggest
because of course mice and humans are
somewhat different and these days with
the way that things have gone especially
with the way that things have gone in
terms of the expert opinion in this area
I think that we might actually get to
that level of public position of the
mainstream community with a lot of less
impressive results than the one I just
described you know if we only got one
extra year out of mice rather than two I
think that would probably be enough and
so these kinds of reasons together of
course with the fact that progress is
being made in developing the component
it's these kinds of reasons that lead me
to the feeling in five years we've got a
pretty damn good chance of getting that
wow that's impressive I mean considering
in 2018
nearly decade 2020s like 2023 2024 2025
this could be a real thing but the
emphasis is the the research still needs
to continue in order for that to happen
you still need donations so yeah that
that unimpressive like oh yeah I'm
looking forward to listening to the
dialogue in in the media and amongst on
the street about this sort of thing when
other thing occurred yeah to hear that
from you is is very very impressive and
then yeah so um okay so I've got a
couple of questions here in the chat
room one of them is about an Alzheimer's
drug called a jew canaan Adu CA and um
maybe i don't know how to pronounce that
um what's your take okay so it's one of
quite a number of antibodies that has
been developed over the past several
years that are targeted against will I
beat up which is of course one of the
major proteins that accumulate in clumps
in the brain in Oxana disease and really
I would add that whole area as pretty
much a solved problem now the removal of
amyloid by the immune system was first
reported in mice by a group in the
private sector called alam
pharmaceuticals back in 1999 and
actually that was one of the papers that
led me that i put together into the
grand scheme of science in 2000 first
place so i didn't run a long time
clinical trials in this area were
initiated really rather quickly not with
this particular antibody but with an
earlier one by a number of different
companies and i'll through a bit of
messing about they figured out how to do
it so now it's pretty clear that if you
if you do it right you can really
decisively get rid of amyloid in the
brain in alzheimer's patients no bad
news is that only very modest if any
that cognitive benefits have been seen
in these trial
and go dry off now that to me is not a
problem it's not a surprise either
simply because Alzheimer's is a
multifactorial disease apart from
anything else not only do we have this
amyloid accumulating we also have
another type of aggregate called tangles
which are made of a different protein
called tau and but those accumulate
inside cells so it's harder to get to
them with antibodies and we're actually
pursuing an alternative approach try to
get rid of tangles but yeah I mean I
believe that it's no surprise that if
you only get rid of one component of a
multi-component problem then you don't
see very much in terms of postponement
of pathologies in just the same way that
I wouldn't expect that we would have
much increase in overall healthy
longevity
if we fix five of the seven strands
effects we really got to fix the more
reasonable Wow so yeah I'm happy about
this but I regard it as a drug as an
approach that we kind of have in our
back pocket to be ready to be combined
with other things in the future it's not
so much that it has particular benefits
right now another question is even what
to generally know what your views are on
cancer at the moment with subject to
current research program what what in
making much progress I mean cancer is a
big field I mean it's not just one thing
but given eviews on where we're at with
cancer so serviceable let's deal with
the question of whether cancer is one
thing or many things so of course it
depends how you look at it you can argue
for either of those two positions and
certainly my approach since the
beginning has been to try to find ways
to attack cancer as one thing in other
words to find commonalities between all
cancers and of course the one that sense
are focused on is to and there's the
idea if we were to prevent cancers from
extending their tail in theirs then we'd
be done because all cancers have to do
that most of them do it with the well
known enzyme telomerase and then about
15% and
where the completely different system
that is still poorly understood now
actually I have to confess that this
area is one of our few non successes we
worked for several years on this non
telomere telomere independent approach
to telomere elongation in a hope that we
might be able to get somewhere with it
but very much like everybody else who's
worked in this area our progress was
very very slow and essentially we have
must bought that project right now we
have decided that we just can't
prioritize because we don't have a half
of a clear idea about how to get
anywhere to make a next step with the
kind of money that we have um however
another part of the reason why I'm not
too worried about the fact that we've
mothball this is that an alternative
approach to combating cancer which have
always been in my mind it's always been
feature the sense conferences and so on
is making good progress now and that of
course is cancer immunotherapy so cancer
immunotherapy is a concept that's been
around for decades and it made very very
very little progress for a long long
time but then maybe for over eight years
ago people started to find things out
that have changed or that there are two
major approaches to attacking cancer
with the immune system or I should say
more accurately to stimulating the
body's natural ability to attack cancer
with immune system um one of them is
very personalized
it's called karti chimeric antigen
receptors - which is an engineering of
t-cells and the other one involves drugs
that inhibit something called
checkpoints which cell cancer cell is it
relates in order to grow both of these
approaches and indeed the combination of
those two approaches have seen very
considerable results and of course the
creation of quite big companies now so
if if Kyson true no and you know it's
really a it's really got a lot of
momentum I believe actually that the
best is yet to come in this area some of
the most exciting work that I know of
is hopefully doing something even more
personalized and even more aggressive
than the things I just mentioned by
identifying what a cornea in cancer the
antigen is a peptide that is not
normally synthesized by the cell and it
only synthesized by the cancer the cause
of changes to the DNA sequence some kind
of the mutations that the cancer has
accumulated these neo antigens may not
have anything to do with why the cancer
is a cancer but nevertheless all the
cancer cells mecklen so if the immune
system can be trained to identify them
then you've got a very good therapy work
that has been done over the past couple
of year in Harvard has identified that
if you if you find a lot of these Leo
antigens like 20 in a single patient and
you basically vaccinate against all of
them then you really really you know
wind up the immune system and the
results are extremely impressive so far
as far as I'm aware the best ones that
the only results of the been a very
small Phase one clinical trial with just
half a dozen patients but the success
was just out of this world like every
single one of these patients with late
stage melanoma had complete remission so
you know this is better than you've ever
seen any and I'm extremely excited by it
and following it very closely
so it's possible just possible that
within the next couple of years we will
be in a situation where the whole anti
salome arrays approach to attacking
cancer can be sidelined you know it's
already we already we've always known
that it's a very ambitious approach any
telomere approach because it has big
side effects in a number of other
tissues which would have to be
compensated by stem cell therapy and a
number of people who are generally on
board with the rest of sense think that
approach to combating cancer is
basically a non-starter I think that's a
strong but it's definitely very hard so
if we could really get cancer
immunotherapy to work nobody
happier than me fantastic now George
Church has been sort of working on a
eating a well apparently David Ellison
acidities is claimed to fix aging within
six years who epigenetics would review
having it ready as medicine within ten
years I haven't heard him say that but
that's one of the questions in the chat
room or one of the discussion topics
would you like to address that I don't
really know quite what George was
referring to that
that that quote appears has certainly
been very widely distributed but you
know I mean we all get slightly misquote
ease in the media all the time so I
wouldn't put too I wouldn't I wouldn't
put too much weight on it honest
I think he's you know he's obviously an
extremely smart and extremely
knowledgeable guy and he's doing a wide
range of extremely exciting stuff in his
lab but you know we all know how
difficult this is so you know let's hope
for the best
another concern is that people for
autoimmune diseases that according to
some people seem incurable at the moment
what are your who are dealing with yeah
I mean for sure what are new problems
are a big deal in medicine and they do
get worse with aging now the interesting
it's basically the same reason why we
also lose general ability to fight off
infections with it and indeed to attack
cancer for that matter come back to the
previous topic and the reason is
essentially the immune system loses
precision the immune system as his two
arms of much you probably know the
innate system and the adaptive side of
the immune system and the adaptive side
works by having a vast variety of
different cells with different
rearrangements of particular parts of
the genome that confer specificity of
the immune cell to a particular target
it may or may not encounter it sometime
in the future now that what's called
poly clonality that while a very very
wide diversity diminishes over and
because it diminishes that means that
the cells which are which are targeted
towards a given problem for the immune
system tend to be less precisely adapted
to it let's optimize for a on average
therefore the get water immunity you've
kind of got the same thing but the
immune system always has to be very
faithful in distinguishing between
things that are foreign and need to be
got rid of authorial and are actually
part of the body and that ability also
but that is that discrimination ability
also diminishes for the same reason so I
think basically that the autoimmune
problems with aging have a good chance
of being quite powerfully addressed by
the same measures that we are already
developing to rejuvenate the immune
system and release by for example
generating the thymus and by eliminating
basically senescent immune cells that
are accumulating in bloodstream and
elsewhere okay another question is which
bottleneck do you believe needs the most
attention behalf of the community
already convinced aging reversal
technologies is an important problem to
solve I'm sorry could you repeat that
question we only got harvest okay um so
what bottlenecks I think do you do you
think needs the most attention on behalf
of the community who already can
convince that regenerative medicine and
anti-aging medicines are a good thing
Wow Thanks I would certainly say that
even though cents Research Foundation
and other organization
have been quite fortunate over the past
few months in terms of obtaining new
funding nevertheless the funding is
still by far not adequate and that the
shortening the shortfall from what we
really need is still by far the major
problem we know how to spend money we
know what kind of product need to be
done we also have the people the world
leading scientists who are in the best
position to actually perform this work
if we could better to do it you know
these are people who have been with the
community for a long time the work that
we want them to do if interesting and
it's you know valuable and so on so it's
just a matter of providing them with the
resources and as such I think that the
priority of the whole community still
needs to be to continue the process of
getting persuading people where the
wealthy people or less wealthy matter to
get on board with this and to actually
supply financial support to all of this
the second thing I would say is that as
we become closer and closer to the point
of robust mass rejuvenation we need to
do more and more to get decision makers
that's possibly policymakers to
understand and anticipate what's coming
I believe that the ultimate goal of
saving as many lives as possible
comes down what only two developing
these therapies as quickly as possible
but also to ensuring that once they are
developed they get disseminated it
quickly as possible to as many people to
that wise forward planning a lot of
forward planning what we absolutely do
not need is a situation in which these
therapies arrive or indeed these
therapies become widely anticipated by
the public when policymakers and
decision makers and businesses are
simply haven't thought about it they're
simply taken by surprise we're a
complete fucking chaos happens and you
know a lot of so I think when I talk to
anyone who
of humanity policymaking government
level or in the private sector and
insurance companies for example pension
funds those people you know whenever I
talk to them I always emphasize how
absolutely urgent it is to have to have
proper discussions about this I talked
about anticipate agree anticipation by
which I mean of course getting ready for
the public to be anticipating all of
this as opposed to the current situation
where the public is still desperately
trying to carry on thinking that the
whole thing is science fiction is never
going to happen
you mentioned like there's a few
incentives there there's a philanthropic
incentive and there's the incentive of
personal I guess health right the
personal motive of making it to a longer
term future and also is the economic
incentive yeah I guess think we want to
know what is the best arguments you've
seen so far the but the clearest I guess
you've seen so far and these areas if
you can point people to them or you know
briefly um well I guess you know the
main thing that one has to do in order
to be effective as an advocate in this
area is not necessarily to take people
who are opposed and get them to be in
favor of it that's a big ask you know
even if one couldn't get it make an
incremental difference you know getting
people who are undecided to be in favor
of it or getting people who are opposed
to it to at least be more reticent in
their opposition and not try and
persuade other people to be opposed you
know this is still quite big just you
know I can actually point to at least a
couple of very wealthy supportive of
sense who might know personally this
money in the past but they've stopped
and where I know for a fact that the
reason why they don't give us money is
because their wives are opposed to it
right so
this is not what we were and and a sock
you know it doesn't really matter who
you're talking to if you can get them
just one notch up the upper scale from
opposition to support that's still
valuable that's really important to
understand mm-hmm I like what you said
about not necessarily kind of attack or
oppose of opposition but just coax them
into becoming more reticent in a sense
as opposed to something then they'll
good reasons but it doesn't matter how
many times you knock down their reasons
they always come up with another Ridge
you just want to make em feel more
embarrassed about being opposed oh I
found Paul that's been fantastic so far
and I really appreciate your time
to do another interview with me Aubrey
it's always a great pleasure and it's an
honor and you're doing such great work
and I can't emphasize that enough really
I mean I've been watching you from you
know if quite some time now and it's
been really amazing and and and I'm so
happy that there's been solid progress
so that's amazing
yes Cheers thank you very much for
engaging me and also a lot of everybody
else with the community you've had so
much energy to do all this and other
where you get it from well thank you and
I mean as we all know you two have been
ideal in terms of energy especially in
the southern hemisphere you know we need
more people like you all around the
world so I want to express my gratitude
to you for interviewing me periodically
but also for everything else that you do
yeah thank you very much and look I'll
be watching with great enthusiasm over
the next year's to see how things go and
I hope you get more donations from all
sorts of basements crypto including I
was quite surprised actually when that
happens and yes the great wind falling
in in all of our favor and thank you
thank you Cheers