aub3.png 35.55KB
40 downloadsAubrey de Grey
http://en.wikipedia..../Aubrey_de_Grey
Logs: click. Good chat.
- Bryan
LongeCityAdvocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans
Chat/Interview with Aubrey de Grey, PhD
Started by
kanzure
, Nov 12 2007 01:51 AM
13 replies to this topic
#2
-
- Guest
- 2,616 posts
- 163 ₮
- Location:Texas
Posted 12 November 2007 - 02:18 AM
Here you go Struct:
1. Do the AGEs (Advanced Glycation Endproducts) of the food products that we consume get obsorbed by our body or do they become as harmless as sugar, fat, or protein/aminoacid molecules during digestion (as they break down or get eliminated)? In other words, what?s the downfall of ingesting AGEs?
A: There's still a lot unknown about the absorbance of AGEs. It's very unlikely thaty they get broken down after being absorbed, but they may be eliminated. However, I think we can be fairly confident that the main problem with AGEs is the crosslinks they form in long-lived extracellular proteinaceous structures, and that can't be affected by dietary AGEs.
2. Why didn't Aubrey mentioned anything about the skeleton (bones) in his book "Ending Aging"? Is it because the application of SENS would take care of the bones similarly as it does with other body tissues or is it that bones are not vital for living indefinitely?
A: basic reason is bones don't age autonomously, they are constantly recycled by osteoblasts and osteoclasts. BMD changes are secondary to hormonal changes.
1. Do the AGEs (Advanced Glycation Endproducts) of the food products that we consume get obsorbed by our body or do they become as harmless as sugar, fat, or protein/aminoacid molecules during digestion (as they break down or get eliminated)? In other words, what?s the downfall of ingesting AGEs?
A: There's still a lot unknown about the absorbance of AGEs. It's very unlikely thaty they get broken down after being absorbed, but they may be eliminated. However, I think we can be fairly confident that the main problem with AGEs is the crosslinks they form in long-lived extracellular proteinaceous structures, and that can't be affected by dietary AGEs.
2. Why didn't Aubrey mentioned anything about the skeleton (bones) in his book "Ending Aging"? Is it because the application of SENS would take care of the bones similarly as it does with other body tissues or is it that bones are not vital for living indefinitely?
A: basic reason is bones don't age autonomously, they are constantly recycled by osteoblasts and osteoclasts. BMD changes are secondary to hormonal changes.
#7
-
- Guest Recorder
- 7,475 posts
- 9 ₮
- Location:Atlanta, GA USA
Posted 12 November 2007 - 05:24 AM
Sorry I missed it (I ended up having a prior engagement unfortunately), but I took a look at the log and it looks like an interesting conversation.
I have cleaned up the conversation to just the questions and answers being answered by Aubrey. I haven't done anything besides fix a couple spelling mistakes that I initially noticed, and move some of the questions up or down in the order as they related to previous questions asked. Other than that, the post directly after this one is the whole question/answer period that Aubrey conducted.
I have cleaned up the conversation to just the questions and answers being answered by Aubrey. I haven't done anything besides fix a couple spelling mistakes that I initially noticed, and move some of the questions up or down in the order as they related to previous questions asked. Other than that, the post directly after this one is the whole question/answer period that Aubrey conducted.
#8
-
- Guest Recorder
- 7,475 posts
- 9 ₮
- Location:Atlanta, GA USA
Posted 12 November 2007 - 05:24 AM
Questioner (elrond): This one is from kanzure
:In one of your papers you mention Alteon (http://alteon.com/) and "phenacyldimethylthiazolium chloride" as a commercial method of destroying alpha-dicarbonyl linkages. Importantly, what can we do about the potential threat of the commercialization of immortality?
Aubrey: I don't think it'll be a threat. I think the pace of development of this technology will be slow enough that biotech will mould itself to make the most of it in the short term. In the longer term, there will be a realignment of thinking about the importance of medical treatment such that the current ultra-cautious policy of the FDA and others will be abandoned -
:there will be a better sense of proportion about the risk/benefit ratio, and this will translate into the patent law and its context.
:er, "over" as they say on CB
Questioner (elrond): kanzure follows up with " I would just like to mention that I am worried that immortality will not be "open source""
:our next question is from imminst member "struct"
:Do the AGEs (Advanced Glycation Endproducts) of the food products that we consume get obsorbed by our body or do they become as harmless as sugar, fat, or protein/aminoacid molecules during digestion (as they break down or get eliminated)? In other words, what?s the downfall of ingesting AGEs?
Aubrey: I've written a bit about this. I think it will be seen to be (a) a fundamental human right and (b) in the enlightened self-interest of the wealthy to make truly effective anti-aging therapies universally available.
:There's still a lot unknown about the absorbance of AGEs. It's very unlikely thaty they get broken down after being absorbed, but they may be eliminated. However, I think we can be fairly confident that the main problem with AGEs is the crosslinks they form in long-lived extracellular proteinaceous structures, and that can't be affected by dietary AGEs.
Questioner (elrond): many members at imminst are interested in supplements
:our next question deals with that
:this is from dubbyah
:I'd like to know what you (and I think it's valuable information to have, what someone so involved in the "upper echelons" of biogerontology would deem 'worthy' to enter into his own body) take daily in terms of *specific* supplements/vitamins, and if you plan to continue taking these in the long term (perhaps for the rest of your life).
Aubrey: I know ... ut it's very much not my area of expertise :-(
:OK - my take is that this is a really really hard question that I am extremely lucky not to need to answer for myself. Because -
:I am clearly very lucky genetically: I can eat/drink what I like and I still weigh the same at 44 as at 17 - and I am a strong believer in the principple that if it ain't broke don't fix it.
Questioner (elrond): heh, indeed.
:Next question is from ganesh.
:My question is: which is one influences aging more in animal models: Mitochondrial mutation vs. Lipofuscin..?
Aubrey: So, I always stress that my status as a leading biogerontologist should NOT be viewed as a reason to consult me on supplement matters, and my status as a natural slow ager makes that even more so
:Heh - one of the founding principles of SENS is that gerontology has spun its wheels for many years fixating on establishing a pecking order of which mechanisms matter more in aging and which less, and that -
:this must be abandoned in favour of just fixing everything that MIGHT matter, since if we fix one or two things that turn out not to matter there's no harm done.
Questioner (elrond): You describe large-scale animal experimentation on a handful of species numbering in the tens of thousands to test next generation anti-aging drugs, to dwarf the Human Genome Project, to dwarf the Apollo mission, and to dwarf the ongoing international effort to attain controlled nuclear fusion in the lab; are there any plans to get this going, such as seeding small research groups to come up with new drugs or breeding animals from various gene lines?
Aubrey: Well, at present the way I see it is very much two-stage. First, we wil get proof of concept in the lab - "robust mouse rejuvenation". Then there will be coomplete pandemonium when the Millers and Kirkwoods of this world start to tell the Olshanskys and Winfreys that yes, I was right all along. Then -
:there will be a, shall we say, realignment of spending priorities, which wil mobilise existing expertise in animal husbandry (especially primates) to test these things. But see my earlier comment re the FDA - we wil be experimenting on humns arather more assertively than at present too.
Questioner (Mind): What were your favorite presentations at SENS 3? The ones that piqued your interest the most? At Imminst members seemed most excited about Zheng Cui's ideas on cancer but Michael Rose?s SENS 3 lecture drew the most discussion.
Aubrey: Cui's presentation drew massive attention at the meeting too. I saw only a minority of the talks myself - I have them on video now though, so I'm working my way through them! Rose's presentation has led to a lengthy discussion between us, but not much of any utility has arisen yet. But I'll see him again next week - maybe progress will be made.
Questioner (Techno): hi aubrey, I'm just curious what your opinions on menopause are? Are there any implications for creating SENS treatments for women?
Aubrey: Menopause's days are numbered. We will definitely be able to restore ovarian function in due course, either by stimulating oogeness in the adult ovary (see Tilly's recent work) or by creating whole new ovaries ex vivo, or something in between. This will have rejuvenating effects on bone mineral density of course, but also (very important) it will allow women to delay childbirth a lot, deferring any overpopulation problem.
**Questioning opened up at this point**
Questioner (cnoorwood): I wanted to ask how the book is doing? Is it meeting your expectations? What positives do you think will come of it?
Aubrey: sales - no info, no idea. reviews - fantastic. The recent Wash Post profile wasn't a review but was motivated by the book and has driven sales up, as well as causing more consternation than ever among my critics.
Questioner (kanzure): Hi Aubrey. We were having some discussion before you entered. If you had all the funds that you required, would you be able to singlehandedly implement SENS? It looks like you've met enough resistance before in the journals anyway. (- says the guy who spent the last day reading all of your papers)
Aubrey: singlehanded - basically yes. I have close contact with most of the top scientists in all the SENS areas, and they are hot to trot, they just need money.
Questioner (Guest3): Hello Aubery - I have heard about your plan to sequence microbes from all kinds of human remainings or something like this - could you please elaborate on this?
(answered first by kanzure): Guest3: Xenoenzymology is the idea of using bacterial sequences and import them into our eukaryotes via viral gene therapy.
Aubrey: guest3 - well, this is not a goot forum for elaboration - the basic idea is that microbes probably have genes that we don't have that can augment our natural machinery for breaking down adventitious side-products of metabolism. See sens.org/lyso.htm for more.
Questioner (MAK): Hi Aubrey, just wanted to say that if you ever come to Paris(france) I'll pay you a beer!
Aubrey: I may be in Paris quite often nextyear - we're funding a group there
Questioner (MAK): Well, that's some relly good news (about Paris) , How can I have/get some more info about this group?
Aubrey: The group in Paris is that of Marisol Corral-Debrinski - check her work on PubMed
Questioner (EmilKend): Hi Aubrey, how do you think funding in amounts that really make a difference (public and private) can be secured (until the mouse rejuvenation will be proven)?
(Commented on by Ross): that's the most frustrating not having enough money, when we spend it on stupid wars and useless space stations
Aubrey: funding - it'll be all about wealthy individuals for a few years yet. I'm spending a few days each month in California drumming that up...
Questioner (kanzure): Are you funding many various groups? How does that work? University teams?
Aubrey: The MF is currently funding students in four universities, some on lysosomal enhancement, some on mitochondrial allotopic expression
Questioner (dubbyah): Could you (generally) go into some of your own religious (or lack thereof), spiritual, wonderous/mysterious, or "larger picture" beliefs? Thank you!
Aubrey: I don't really have a big picture - I just want to save lives, and I feel that no further justification is needed
Questioner (Techno): haha, no bigger picture Aubrey? I guess some things can remain private..hehe
Aubrey: seriously no bigger picture. what's bigger than saving lives?
:I'm really not a philosopher. I got used pretty early to the idea that there is a natural end to "why?" chains
Questioner (Techno): well aubrey, i can imagine that, as a public figure, you'd prefer keeping your more tentative speculations to yourself. I know I would if I were in your position...
Aubrey: I actually find it easier not to keep things to myself. As I said at the recent Alcor meeting, an extreme but logically coherent position is actuallyeasier to sell than a mealy-mouthed one. And I do regardmy own views as logically coherent....
Questioner (reedspacer): What hair care products do you recommend?
Aubrey: hair care - a wife who likes brushing it! - no kidding
Questioner (Bram): Aubrey, what's your reason to believe that you've got all major causes of aging covered (apart from 'weve not found any others yet')?
Aubrey: no others for 25 years is a pretty stong argument - but there is more - the biological argument is just that we know what we're made of and that damage can only accumulate in long-lived structures, not in molecules/cells that are destroyed and expelled when damaged.
Questioner (s123): Hi Aubrey, by eating less sugars (carbohydrates) and by eating carbohydrates with a low glycemic load it's possible to diminish the rate in which AGE's are created. Is this right?
Aubrey: Not clear whether diet makes much difference to rate of AGE crosslink formation -0 but it might
Questioner (ZT): How closely affiliated is your journal to your organization? Has that raised concerns in the scienfitic community about bias (not that every other journal isn't biased anyway :D )?
Aubrey: journal - heh, everyone sees it as my baby, which it is, but they like the impact factor so they submit anyway :-)
Questioner (Matt): Aubrey, are you not concerned that many wealthy people have still not stepepd forward to donate to SENS and/or the Mprize? We have plenty of million/ billionaires, are they shy, worried about their reputation for funding this kind of resarch? Or are they simply not being reached?
Aubrey: Wealthy people - fear not. It's a process, of them getting comfortable with supporting this. There are many conflicts - giving money to anything at all (charity vs investment), egotism fear, ridicule fear, etc. I'm on it :-)
Questioner (EmilKend): Another question: is there any effort to make the websites (SENS and maybe MF) look more "professional", less "antique"? Is help needed?
Aubrey: SENS website is about to disappear in favour of a version that's part of the MF site - bits of this are already apparent at methuselahfoundation.org
Questioner (dubbyah): Would you "consider" yourself an atheist, or agnostic, or not labelable, or what?
Aubrey: agnostic. my main take is that I know I'm doing what scripture would recommend, so it doesn't matter whether I believe in God, it wouldn't affect my behaviour
Questioner (cnoorwood): It seems like LysoSENS gets quite a bit of attention. How much of the success of SENS as a whole depends on success with LysoSENS, do you think?
Aubrey: Lysosens is high profile, but it won't convince skeptics until we do it in humans - long way off. mitosens will blow people away when it works even in vitro. That's why Thiel funded it
Questioner (kanzure): Aubrey, how do you do it? How much time do you spend reading journals versus playing in the lab, etc.?
Aubrey: how do I do it? - well I have two research assistants now... (Rae, Zealley) - the book would certainly not have happened without Michae Rae.
Questioner (kanzure): What do you recommend to aspiring scientists?
Aubrey: aspiring scientists.... whew that's too hard for this medium and this time of night!
Questioner (s123): I want to do SENS research later. Now I'm studying chemistry. Do you think that chemistry is a good background for SENS research?
Aubrey: s123 - there are indeed SENS strands that lean on chemistry - email me
Questioner (ZT): How do you propose to sort out "junk" from quality material? A lot of substances are concentration dependant, lethal if aggregated but otherwise required for normal cellular processes. Many more are tissue/cell specific, toxic on one and fine in another
Aubrey: ZT - the main reason this is no problem is the compartmentation that the cell already does. Nothing that gets to the lysosome is supposed ever to get out again. Thus, your concern doesn't arise
Questioner (ZT): But a lot of the problems regarding "junk" in the cell is precisely that problem - they don't get to the lysosome correctly. If there is a defect in the endocytotic pathway or ubiquitination pathway, things end up laying around in the cell causing problems
Aubrey: there is great evidence that non-lyso junk is mainly a traffic jam problem - lyso is failing, so autophagosomes fail to fuse with lyso, so they accumulate, eventually aggresomes (not even in autophagosomes) accumulate. Best bet is that lyso rejuvenation will sequentially solve all that
Questioner (dubbyah): General thoughts on the staggering complexity of autopoietic biological systems? 'Fully explainable' by modern evolutionary theories and scientific method?
Aubrey: never heard the word "autopoietic"! - but the whole philosophy of SENS is to sidestep our ignorance by addressing the initially inert side-products of metabolism, rather than twaking metabolism itself
Questioner (Ross): Aubrey, why not say to over-population concerns, look - Europe is dying out..
Aubrey: overpopulation - the problem is people say yes, 2 children vs 1 is OK but everyone wants 1, the trend won't scale. So I need to give stronger answers
Questioner (Andrew): Do you have or know of any post doct position opening in the next 2 years?
Aubrey: these are coming up all the time - email me
Questioner (dubbyah): Do you think that ignorance as to "complete understanding" is necessarily inherent, though (which would be a fairly 'scientifically agnostic' viewpoint, I guess)?
Aubrey: Not inherent, but we're at a very early stage - we know very little about our biology - question is do we know enough? - I think we may
Questioner (A941): How long do you think it will take to rejuvenate Mice?
Aubrey: mice - 10 years I think, subject to good funding soon
Questioner (dubbyah): these questions are fairly segregated from the SENS issues and actually more fundamentally relative to biology in general... would it be okay if I emailed you? i'm in part a biology student
Aubrey: you can certainly email me - anyone can
Questioner (EmilKend): Do you think Med. School is all wrong if you want to work in research? mainly life extension actually!
Aubrey: med school - depends on the course - and also on what you've done previously - email me
Questioner (Ross): Aubrey, r u in touch with Cynthia Kenyon from UCSF?
Aubrey: I know Cynthia well, yes
Questioner (v3nge4nce): Regarding mitigating the "Cell loss" problem; what avenues do you forsee for doing so? Are we talking using cultures of cells grown outside the body and later intorducing them into the body?
Aubrey: cell loss - many avenues being tried - this is a mature field now, really - it's the reason why tissue engineering and stem cell research are virtually merged
Questioner (bioinfo): Dr. de-grey - I work on bioinformatics. What do you think is the best way in which i can help SENS?
Aubrey: well there's less in this area than one might hope, but there are one or two things - email me
Questioner (kanzure): Aubrey, do you have a backup plan if you happen to die, say, now?
Aubrey: well, as is well known I'm signed with Alcor (cryonics provider)
Questioner (kanzure): but nobody that you'd like to take your place?
Aubrey: ah I see - well I think my outreach work is my main plan - I think if I died now then there are quite a lot of you out there whom I have helped inspire with the confidence that this can be done fairly soon maybe
Questioner (reedspacer): I.e. are you presently a single point of failure for this effort?
Aubrey: the MF is working to make me less of a SPF, but it's slow - really it needs more scientists to have the luck to be as invulnerable as me
Questioner (biologic): would you be more interested in a person holding a phd or, say, a person who has spent 4 years in the lab for a respected company? (sorry)
Aubrey: I see - no difference - it all depends on the specialist experience (and the references :-))
Questioner (cnorwood): from struct: Why didn't Aubrey mentioned anything about the skeleton (bones) in his book "Ending Aging"? Is it because the application of SENS would take care of the bones similarly as it does with other body tissues or is it that bones are not vital for living indefinitely?
Aubrey: basic reason is bones don't age autonomously, they are constantly recycled by osteoblasts and osteoclasts. BMD changes are secondary to hormonal changes.
Questioner (Ross): May be a stupid Qtn, but why not target Hollywood for funding, they are obcessed with eternally youthful looks
Aubrey: I'll be in LA this week...
:there are pros and cons with linking up with cosmetics etc. Pro: cosmetics work; con: cosmetics are cosmetic
Questioner (ganesh): can a healthy lifespan of extra 50 or 100 years is obtained by targetting genes such as daf or SIRT (Cynthia kenyon/Sinclair's work)?
Aubrey: SIRT - my view is max 2-3 years - see my paper in Gerontology 2 years ago ("The unfortunaet influence of the weather")
:In one of your papers you mention Alteon (http://alteon.com/) and "phenacyldimethylthiazolium chloride" as a commercial method of destroying alpha-dicarbonyl linkages. Importantly, what can we do about the potential threat of the commercialization of immortality?
Aubrey: I don't think it'll be a threat. I think the pace of development of this technology will be slow enough that biotech will mould itself to make the most of it in the short term. In the longer term, there will be a realignment of thinking about the importance of medical treatment such that the current ultra-cautious policy of the FDA and others will be abandoned -
:there will be a better sense of proportion about the risk/benefit ratio, and this will translate into the patent law and its context.
:er, "over" as they say on CB
Questioner (elrond): kanzure follows up with " I would just like to mention that I am worried that immortality will not be "open source""
:our next question is from imminst member "struct"
:Do the AGEs (Advanced Glycation Endproducts) of the food products that we consume get obsorbed by our body or do they become as harmless as sugar, fat, or protein/aminoacid molecules during digestion (as they break down or get eliminated)? In other words, what?s the downfall of ingesting AGEs?
Aubrey: I've written a bit about this. I think it will be seen to be (a) a fundamental human right and (b) in the enlightened self-interest of the wealthy to make truly effective anti-aging therapies universally available.
:There's still a lot unknown about the absorbance of AGEs. It's very unlikely thaty they get broken down after being absorbed, but they may be eliminated. However, I think we can be fairly confident that the main problem with AGEs is the crosslinks they form in long-lived extracellular proteinaceous structures, and that can't be affected by dietary AGEs.
Questioner (elrond): many members at imminst are interested in supplements
:our next question deals with that
:this is from dubbyah
:I'd like to know what you (and I think it's valuable information to have, what someone so involved in the "upper echelons" of biogerontology would deem 'worthy' to enter into his own body) take daily in terms of *specific* supplements/vitamins, and if you plan to continue taking these in the long term (perhaps for the rest of your life).
Aubrey: I know ... ut it's very much not my area of expertise :-(
:OK - my take is that this is a really really hard question that I am extremely lucky not to need to answer for myself. Because -
:I am clearly very lucky genetically: I can eat/drink what I like and I still weigh the same at 44 as at 17 - and I am a strong believer in the principple that if it ain't broke don't fix it.
Questioner (elrond): heh, indeed.
:Next question is from ganesh.
:My question is: which is one influences aging more in animal models: Mitochondrial mutation vs. Lipofuscin..?
Aubrey: So, I always stress that my status as a leading biogerontologist should NOT be viewed as a reason to consult me on supplement matters, and my status as a natural slow ager makes that even more so
:Heh - one of the founding principles of SENS is that gerontology has spun its wheels for many years fixating on establishing a pecking order of which mechanisms matter more in aging and which less, and that -
:this must be abandoned in favour of just fixing everything that MIGHT matter, since if we fix one or two things that turn out not to matter there's no harm done.
Questioner (elrond): You describe large-scale animal experimentation on a handful of species numbering in the tens of thousands to test next generation anti-aging drugs, to dwarf the Human Genome Project, to dwarf the Apollo mission, and to dwarf the ongoing international effort to attain controlled nuclear fusion in the lab; are there any plans to get this going, such as seeding small research groups to come up with new drugs or breeding animals from various gene lines?
Aubrey: Well, at present the way I see it is very much two-stage. First, we wil get proof of concept in the lab - "robust mouse rejuvenation". Then there will be coomplete pandemonium when the Millers and Kirkwoods of this world start to tell the Olshanskys and Winfreys that yes, I was right all along. Then -
:there will be a, shall we say, realignment of spending priorities, which wil mobilise existing expertise in animal husbandry (especially primates) to test these things. But see my earlier comment re the FDA - we wil be experimenting on humns arather more assertively than at present too.
Questioner (Mind): What were your favorite presentations at SENS 3? The ones that piqued your interest the most? At Imminst members seemed most excited about Zheng Cui's ideas on cancer but Michael Rose?s SENS 3 lecture drew the most discussion.
Aubrey: Cui's presentation drew massive attention at the meeting too. I saw only a minority of the talks myself - I have them on video now though, so I'm working my way through them! Rose's presentation has led to a lengthy discussion between us, but not much of any utility has arisen yet. But I'll see him again next week - maybe progress will be made.
Questioner (Techno): hi aubrey, I'm just curious what your opinions on menopause are? Are there any implications for creating SENS treatments for women?
Aubrey: Menopause's days are numbered. We will definitely be able to restore ovarian function in due course, either by stimulating oogeness in the adult ovary (see Tilly's recent work) or by creating whole new ovaries ex vivo, or something in between. This will have rejuvenating effects on bone mineral density of course, but also (very important) it will allow women to delay childbirth a lot, deferring any overpopulation problem.
**Questioning opened up at this point**
Questioner (cnoorwood): I wanted to ask how the book is doing? Is it meeting your expectations? What positives do you think will come of it?
Aubrey: sales - no info, no idea. reviews - fantastic. The recent Wash Post profile wasn't a review but was motivated by the book and has driven sales up, as well as causing more consternation than ever among my critics.
Questioner (kanzure): Hi Aubrey. We were having some discussion before you entered. If you had all the funds that you required, would you be able to singlehandedly implement SENS? It looks like you've met enough resistance before in the journals anyway. (- says the guy who spent the last day reading all of your papers)
Aubrey: singlehanded - basically yes. I have close contact with most of the top scientists in all the SENS areas, and they are hot to trot, they just need money.
Questioner (Guest3): Hello Aubery - I have heard about your plan to sequence microbes from all kinds of human remainings or something like this - could you please elaborate on this?
(answered first by kanzure): Guest3: Xenoenzymology is the idea of using bacterial sequences and import them into our eukaryotes via viral gene therapy.
Aubrey: guest3 - well, this is not a goot forum for elaboration - the basic idea is that microbes probably have genes that we don't have that can augment our natural machinery for breaking down adventitious side-products of metabolism. See sens.org/lyso.htm for more.
Questioner (MAK): Hi Aubrey, just wanted to say that if you ever come to Paris(france) I'll pay you a beer!
Aubrey: I may be in Paris quite often nextyear - we're funding a group there
Questioner (MAK): Well, that's some relly good news (about Paris) , How can I have/get some more info about this group?
Aubrey: The group in Paris is that of Marisol Corral-Debrinski - check her work on PubMed
Questioner (EmilKend): Hi Aubrey, how do you think funding in amounts that really make a difference (public and private) can be secured (until the mouse rejuvenation will be proven)?
(Commented on by Ross): that's the most frustrating not having enough money, when we spend it on stupid wars and useless space stations
Aubrey: funding - it'll be all about wealthy individuals for a few years yet. I'm spending a few days each month in California drumming that up...
Questioner (kanzure): Are you funding many various groups? How does that work? University teams?
Aubrey: The MF is currently funding students in four universities, some on lysosomal enhancement, some on mitochondrial allotopic expression
Questioner (dubbyah): Could you (generally) go into some of your own religious (or lack thereof), spiritual, wonderous/mysterious, or "larger picture" beliefs? Thank you!
Aubrey: I don't really have a big picture - I just want to save lives, and I feel that no further justification is needed
Questioner (Techno): haha, no bigger picture Aubrey? I guess some things can remain private..hehe
Aubrey: seriously no bigger picture. what's bigger than saving lives?
:I'm really not a philosopher. I got used pretty early to the idea that there is a natural end to "why?" chains
Questioner (Techno): well aubrey, i can imagine that, as a public figure, you'd prefer keeping your more tentative speculations to yourself. I know I would if I were in your position...
Aubrey: I actually find it easier not to keep things to myself. As I said at the recent Alcor meeting, an extreme but logically coherent position is actuallyeasier to sell than a mealy-mouthed one. And I do regardmy own views as logically coherent....
Questioner (reedspacer): What hair care products do you recommend?
Aubrey: hair care - a wife who likes brushing it! - no kidding
Questioner (Bram): Aubrey, what's your reason to believe that you've got all major causes of aging covered (apart from 'weve not found any others yet')?
Aubrey: no others for 25 years is a pretty stong argument - but there is more - the biological argument is just that we know what we're made of and that damage can only accumulate in long-lived structures, not in molecules/cells that are destroyed and expelled when damaged.
Questioner (s123): Hi Aubrey, by eating less sugars (carbohydrates) and by eating carbohydrates with a low glycemic load it's possible to diminish the rate in which AGE's are created. Is this right?
Aubrey: Not clear whether diet makes much difference to rate of AGE crosslink formation -0 but it might
Questioner (ZT): How closely affiliated is your journal to your organization? Has that raised concerns in the scienfitic community about bias (not that every other journal isn't biased anyway :D )?
Aubrey: journal - heh, everyone sees it as my baby, which it is, but they like the impact factor so they submit anyway :-)
Questioner (Matt): Aubrey, are you not concerned that many wealthy people have still not stepepd forward to donate to SENS and/or the Mprize? We have plenty of million/ billionaires, are they shy, worried about their reputation for funding this kind of resarch? Or are they simply not being reached?
Aubrey: Wealthy people - fear not. It's a process, of them getting comfortable with supporting this. There are many conflicts - giving money to anything at all (charity vs investment), egotism fear, ridicule fear, etc. I'm on it :-)
Questioner (EmilKend): Another question: is there any effort to make the websites (SENS and maybe MF) look more "professional", less "antique"? Is help needed?
Aubrey: SENS website is about to disappear in favour of a version that's part of the MF site - bits of this are already apparent at methuselahfoundation.org
Questioner (dubbyah): Would you "consider" yourself an atheist, or agnostic, or not labelable, or what?
Aubrey: agnostic. my main take is that I know I'm doing what scripture would recommend, so it doesn't matter whether I believe in God, it wouldn't affect my behaviour
Questioner (cnoorwood): It seems like LysoSENS gets quite a bit of attention. How much of the success of SENS as a whole depends on success with LysoSENS, do you think?
Aubrey: Lysosens is high profile, but it won't convince skeptics until we do it in humans - long way off. mitosens will blow people away when it works even in vitro. That's why Thiel funded it
Questioner (kanzure): Aubrey, how do you do it? How much time do you spend reading journals versus playing in the lab, etc.?
Aubrey: how do I do it? - well I have two research assistants now... (Rae, Zealley) - the book would certainly not have happened without Michae Rae.
Questioner (kanzure): What do you recommend to aspiring scientists?
Aubrey: aspiring scientists.... whew that's too hard for this medium and this time of night!
Questioner (s123): I want to do SENS research later. Now I'm studying chemistry. Do you think that chemistry is a good background for SENS research?
Aubrey: s123 - there are indeed SENS strands that lean on chemistry - email me
Questioner (ZT): How do you propose to sort out "junk" from quality material? A lot of substances are concentration dependant, lethal if aggregated but otherwise required for normal cellular processes. Many more are tissue/cell specific, toxic on one and fine in another
Aubrey: ZT - the main reason this is no problem is the compartmentation that the cell already does. Nothing that gets to the lysosome is supposed ever to get out again. Thus, your concern doesn't arise
Questioner (ZT): But a lot of the problems regarding "junk" in the cell is precisely that problem - they don't get to the lysosome correctly. If there is a defect in the endocytotic pathway or ubiquitination pathway, things end up laying around in the cell causing problems
Aubrey: there is great evidence that non-lyso junk is mainly a traffic jam problem - lyso is failing, so autophagosomes fail to fuse with lyso, so they accumulate, eventually aggresomes (not even in autophagosomes) accumulate. Best bet is that lyso rejuvenation will sequentially solve all that
Questioner (dubbyah): General thoughts on the staggering complexity of autopoietic biological systems? 'Fully explainable' by modern evolutionary theories and scientific method?
Aubrey: never heard the word "autopoietic"! - but the whole philosophy of SENS is to sidestep our ignorance by addressing the initially inert side-products of metabolism, rather than twaking metabolism itself
Questioner (Ross): Aubrey, why not say to over-population concerns, look - Europe is dying out..
Aubrey: overpopulation - the problem is people say yes, 2 children vs 1 is OK but everyone wants 1, the trend won't scale. So I need to give stronger answers
Questioner (Andrew): Do you have or know of any post doct position opening in the next 2 years?
Aubrey: these are coming up all the time - email me
Questioner (dubbyah): Do you think that ignorance as to "complete understanding" is necessarily inherent, though (which would be a fairly 'scientifically agnostic' viewpoint, I guess)?
Aubrey: Not inherent, but we're at a very early stage - we know very little about our biology - question is do we know enough? - I think we may
Questioner (A941): How long do you think it will take to rejuvenate Mice?
Aubrey: mice - 10 years I think, subject to good funding soon
Questioner (dubbyah): these questions are fairly segregated from the SENS issues and actually more fundamentally relative to biology in general... would it be okay if I emailed you? i'm in part a biology student
Aubrey: you can certainly email me - anyone can
Questioner (EmilKend): Do you think Med. School is all wrong if you want to work in research? mainly life extension actually!
Aubrey: med school - depends on the course - and also on what you've done previously - email me
Questioner (Ross): Aubrey, r u in touch with Cynthia Kenyon from UCSF?
Aubrey: I know Cynthia well, yes
Questioner (v3nge4nce): Regarding mitigating the "Cell loss" problem; what avenues do you forsee for doing so? Are we talking using cultures of cells grown outside the body and later intorducing them into the body?
Aubrey: cell loss - many avenues being tried - this is a mature field now, really - it's the reason why tissue engineering and stem cell research are virtually merged
Questioner (bioinfo): Dr. de-grey - I work on bioinformatics. What do you think is the best way in which i can help SENS?
Aubrey: well there's less in this area than one might hope, but there are one or two things - email me
Questioner (kanzure): Aubrey, do you have a backup plan if you happen to die, say, now?
Aubrey: well, as is well known I'm signed with Alcor (cryonics provider)
Questioner (kanzure): but nobody that you'd like to take your place?
Aubrey: ah I see - well I think my outreach work is my main plan - I think if I died now then there are quite a lot of you out there whom I have helped inspire with the confidence that this can be done fairly soon maybe
Questioner (reedspacer): I.e. are you presently a single point of failure for this effort?
Aubrey: the MF is working to make me less of a SPF, but it's slow - really it needs more scientists to have the luck to be as invulnerable as me
Questioner (biologic): would you be more interested in a person holding a phd or, say, a person who has spent 4 years in the lab for a respected company? (sorry)
Aubrey: I see - no difference - it all depends on the specialist experience (and the references :-))
Questioner (cnorwood): from struct: Why didn't Aubrey mentioned anything about the skeleton (bones) in his book "Ending Aging"? Is it because the application of SENS would take care of the bones similarly as it does with other body tissues or is it that bones are not vital for living indefinitely?
Aubrey: basic reason is bones don't age autonomously, they are constantly recycled by osteoblasts and osteoclasts. BMD changes are secondary to hormonal changes.
Questioner (Ross): May be a stupid Qtn, but why not target Hollywood for funding, they are obcessed with eternally youthful looks
Aubrey: I'll be in LA this week...
:there are pros and cons with linking up with cosmetics etc. Pro: cosmetics work; con: cosmetics are cosmetic
Questioner (ganesh): can a healthy lifespan of extra 50 or 100 years is obtained by targetting genes such as daf or SIRT (Cynthia kenyon/Sinclair's work)?
Aubrey: SIRT - my view is max 2-3 years - see my paper in Gerontology 2 years ago ("The unfortunaet influence of the weather")
Attached Files
-
aubreychatcleaned.txt 18.15KB
13 downloads
#11
-
- Guest Recorder
- 7,475 posts
- 9 ₮
- Location:Atlanta, GA USA
Posted 12 November 2007 - 08:00 PM
Full log of chat (I realize kanzure posted it above, but since it was hosted on a different site than imminst, I am putting it as a file here just for backup sake)
I resaved it as a rich text format file, so that word processors and things could open it, and not just web browsers.
Note: Not as clean as the above filtered, you will have to wade through everything.
I resaved it as a rich text format file, so that word processors and things could open it, and not just web browsers.
Note: Not as clean as the above filtered, you will have to wade through everything.
Attached Files
-
imminstchat_2007_11_11.rtf 295.72KB
193 downloads
#13
-
- Guest, F@H
- 252 posts
- 12 ₮
- Location:Australia
Posted 12 November 2007 - 10:33 PM
I liked the concurrent #Immortal-Chat channel. Some questions were nutted out there and then asked to Aubrey, and also some very interesting discussions took place.
Props to the leadership for revivng the chats, it went pretty flawlessly I thought. Even when Mind dropped out, Elrond was ready to take over. Great!
Props to the leadership for revivng the chats, it went pretty flawlessly I thought. Even when Mind dropped out, Elrond was ready to take over. Great!
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
