• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
- - - - -

Interview with Aubrey de Grey

aubrey de grey podcast

  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 jroseland

  • Guest
  • 1,117 posts
  • 162
  • Location:Europe

Posted 06 November 2015 - 07:46 PM


Next week on the LongeCity Now Podcast one of the most iconic life extension personalities will be interviewed. We'll be talking to author, researcher, TED speaker, and Chief Science Officer of the SENS Research Foundation Aubrey de Grey,maxresdefault.jpg

 

Below leave any questions you would like to hear posed to this salient (and bearded) thinker.


Edited by Mind, 08 November 2015 - 03:39 PM.


#2 Danail Bulgaria

  • Guest
  • 2,212 posts
  • 421
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 06 November 2015 - 08:24 PM

Many questions are possible. 

 

Here is mine: 

 

What is the progress with the anti-cholesterol enzymes, that they were trying to implement as a drug? 

 

 



#3 Mind

  • Life Member, Director, Moderator, Treasurer
  • 18,997 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Wausau, WI

Posted 08 November 2015 - 11:13 PM

Don't miss this opportunity to submit a question for Aubrey De Grey!



#4 Alvin

  • Guest
  • 104 posts
  • 17
  • Location:New York City

Posted 09 November 2015 - 06:10 PM

About 25% of the National Institutes of Health budget was cut over the last few years, when inflation is considered. Much of it supporting aging biology. The news media and the presidential candidates don't mention the cuts or their plans to increase medical research. What should be done to encourage the news media and the presidential candidates to discuss the need for more medical research? It is necessary to save lives and cut down on the cost of health care. More Americans die every two days of illnesses that doctors can't cure than died in combat during the Afghanistan and Iraqi wars combined over the last 14 years. We have a security problem.


  • Agree x 1

#5 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 10 November 2015 - 03:07 AM

Ask Aubrey which of the seven types of damage will be the first one we have a working therapy for.  What is his estimate of when we'll see it?


  • Good Point x 1

#6 sthira

  • Guest
  • 2,008 posts
  • 406

Posted 10 November 2015 - 03:19 AM

Ask Aubrey if he has plans to knot up that awesome beard into some sweet dreads. Maybe twist up a few wooden beads into them immortal locks? Jah, mon. Hey: Ask Aubrey if he smells like nag champa -- he looks like he might have some incense burning peacefully nearby. He seems so fucking cool, like he likes to laugh and not take this stuff too way out overboard seriously. Yet he is so very serious. And he's serious in the best possible way imaginable: he wants everyone to live healthier, longer, happier lives. But do please ask him y'all got any outrageous fun SENS jokes, or what? Ask him why he's so popular in Vietnam... I've got a million questions for him.

Edited by sthira, 10 November 2015 - 03:52 AM.

  • like x 1

#7 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 11 November 2015 - 12:41 AM

Ask him to comment on SRF's strategy of leveraging philanthropy to get more bang for the buck.  For example, they've been running regmed conferences for several years now in order to build relationships and a regmed community, and they have funded in a targeted way various outside labs.  The recent glucosepane paper was a spectacular example of this approach.



#8 Lothar

  • Guest
  • 221 posts
  • 23
  • Location:Berlin/Germany

Posted 11 November 2015 - 03:11 PM

Last time in 2012 I had 3 questions, now I have 5. I hope I'm not to late with it, but I've read about this possibility just recently:
 
1. Time frame
Last April I read an interiew with Aubrey de Grey, that the first central step of the SENS project, the robust rejuvenation of a mouse (RMR), shall not longer last ten years - as it was proclaimed for so long - but only „six to eight years from now":
 
 
a) Especially six years would be fantastic good news, but what are the deeper reasons for this improvement? 
b) Does this affect the funding area too? Doesn't he need one billion dollars, 100 millions a year for ten years, any longer but „only" 600-800 millions? Or is it the same sum which has to be spend only in a shorter time frame?
 
2. Research plan
Was the constantly demanded original sum of one billion dollars for the robust mouse rejuvenation really the result of a worked out research plan, in analogy to a business plan, with detailed expenses, budgets, milestones and the like for an upcoming „Institute of Biomedical Gerontology" (IBG) how it was discussed for instance here already more than ten years ago, with his participation?:
 
 
How many researchers and other staff should be hired, what about the costs for a building, the equipment for the laboratories, the administration and so on? Or was the one billion just a metaphor for „very very much money" for a „very very challenging goal"? I don't think that one can expect to get so much money at least from wealthy business people or super rich investors and the like without being able to offer a concrete and systematic and written down conception of how exactly(!) all this money should finance and structure the research work to reach the intended goal. Millions of small donations by every day people may be different. Now, does there exist such a research plan?
 
3. Numbers of (potential) SENS researchers
According to two big mayor institutions of biogerontology here in Germany, the Max Planck Institute for Biology of Ageing in Cologne and the Leibniz Institute on Aging in Jena, which both expanded in the last years and therefore got some publicity in the german media, I now have a good impression what one could afford with one billion (or 600-800 million) dollars. In these two institutes there are working about 500 age researchers and together the have an annual budget of about 50 million dollars. So with one billion dollars one could hire at least also 500-1000 age researchers or even more which could work on the seven causes of aging for a lot of years.
 
Question now: is he confident that he will get very quick, within one or two years or so, so many researchers, that have the right scientific qualifications - and are willing! - to do an effective work within the SENS agenda, if he would got the sufficient funding? Has he ever thought about the practical challenges on an organizational level in general and how they affect the timelines of his predictions? Google Calico for example was founded already more than two years ago, got their money - 1.5 billion dollars - already more than one year ago and I'm not sure that they really have already begun with the scientific work!??
 
4. Ray Kurzweil
Is there really still no cooperation at all between Google Calico and the SENS foundation? And what about Ray Kurzweil himself, who works at Google in a leading science position? Does he - another „one of the most iconic life extension personalities" - not support the SENS project, in which way ever?? Is there a philosophical or even a personal conflict between the two??? Are they at least in contact????
 
5. Health focus
Does he really think that the collective motivations for the overcoming of aging could derive from the normal area, the normal definitions and the normal medical self-conceptions of health and disease? 
 
a) I cannot identify any relevant target group within this perspective for his donation campaigns. The overwhelming majority of all people below 60 years are not suffering of age related diseases. On the other hand most people beyond 70 are too old for the hopefully coming breakthroughs which need at least 20 years from this point where sufficient funding come in, as he himself has explained so often in the past. And the real young ones below 30 could even just trust in the normal scientific and medical progress instead of getting active or donating in substantial numbers. So the health focus aims at no one on a motivational level, in my opinion, it aims at the old people the day after the day after tomorrow - or the younger ones of today which should imagine that they are becoming old but only in ten, in 25, or even only in 40 years!?
 
b) On a more philosophical level or in a perspective of biological anthropology regarding the nature of man the health focus implies, that an ageless condition would be the normal healthy state of the human nature what obviously would be an absurd claim. It's just the other way around that aging is a fundamental part of all higher life forms and so of man too which has evolved within millions of years! So, if aging is a central part of our biological nature or inheritage we have to transcendend this part of the human nature, what is a much bigger task than just „to heal a disease". For me the health focus therefore trivializes the problem because it is not approriate at all to the fundamental challenge we are confronted with - and normal people, normal media, normal critics and so on are much more in resonance with this challenge when they are repeating again and again and again all the objections some of the important ones I've listed already in my post to the last Podcast with Aubrey de Grey in 2012. On the other hand the terms „longevity" and „immortality" respond much better to all the dramatic implications and consequences in an existential perspective, they respond to the natural programm and dark verdict that is still engraved in every single cell of our bodies which is called death. Sure, an ageless human being would not be immortal in an absolute way of indestructible but it would not die any longer by an instrinsic and determinstic and early cause like aging - and it would so really represent a totally new state of human evolution.

  • Good Point x 1

#9 Lothar

  • Guest
  • 221 posts
  • 23
  • Location:Berlin/Germany

Posted 11 November 2015 - 08:24 PM

Correction: "indestructibility" (instead of "indestructible"), at the end of the last paragraph.


Edited by Lothar, 11 November 2015 - 08:26 PM.


#10 Mind

  • Life Member, Director, Moderator, Treasurer
  • 18,997 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Wausau, WI

Posted 11 November 2015 - 11:14 PM

Thanks for all the questions. I was able to ask most of them. The raw podcast is now in the can. It is usually about 1 week before the final edited version is available.



#11 Antonio2014

  • Guest
  • 634 posts
  • 52
  • Location:Spain
  • NO

Posted 12 November 2015 - 11:03 PM

Tsk, I arrived too late. I wanted to ask some questions... Best luck next time :sad:


  • Pointless, Timewasting x 2

#12 Antonio2014

  • Guest
  • 634 posts
  • 52
  • Location:Spain
  • NO

Posted 25 November 2015 - 10:12 AM

Almost 2 weeks have passed. When will be available this interview?



#13 Mind

  • Life Member, Director, Moderator, Treasurer
  • 18,997 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Wausau, WI

Posted 25 November 2015 - 06:10 PM

I will talk to my editor.



#14 Mind

  • Life Member, Director, Moderator, Treasurer
  • 18,997 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Wausau, WI

Posted 30 November 2015 - 01:37 PM

File Name: LongeCityNow_Aubrey_DeGrey2015.mp3

File Submitter: Mind

File Submitted: 30 Nov 2015

File Category: Podcasts

Guest: Aubrey DeGrey


Aubrey Degrey talks some specifics about how the various strands of SENS are progressing, specifically about research into accumulated cellular waste product and extra-cellular crosslinks.


Click here to download this file


  • like x 1

#15 Mind

  • Life Member, Director, Moderator, Treasurer
  • 18,997 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Wausau, WI

Posted 30 November 2015 - 01:43 PM

The podcast starts out with some very good detail about how 3 different SENS research strands have progressed over the past decade (2 types of cellular waste and extra cellular crosslinks). The last 10 minutes deal with funding and "politics" of aging research. Some good commentary about Calico and the NIA/NIH.


  • like x 1

#16 corb

  • Guest
  • 507 posts
  • 213
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 08 December 2015 - 10:46 PM

Great interview.

 



#17 sthira

  • Guest
  • 2,008 posts
  • 406

Posted 09 December 2015 - 04:02 AM

I agree! Thank you for your good work and serious, technical questions. I've listened to a lot of de Gray interviews, and most talks cover about the same territory already explored repeatedly. Yours was refreshing and different. And oh my questions above were silly and irreverent and would have been completely inappropriate. .-(
  • Good Point x 1





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: aubrey de grey, podcast

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users