Combination Gene Therapy Progressing Against Aging

George Church indicates Rejuvenate Bio is working toward combination gene therapy against 300+ human genes that effect aging.

There is also progress in super-resolution imaging of chromosomes and hyper-detailed tissue analysis.

They will be able to analyze the DNA in the chromosome without breaking it up and knowing the exact position of the DNA.

Microscopic imaging beyond the diffraction limit to 12 nanometers.

The exponential biotechnology is scaling to the tissue and organ scale. It will then reach the full organism level.

37 thoughts on “Combination Gene Therapy Progressing Against Aging”

  1. We are seeing the first effects of life extension. People with decades in
    front of them are starting to speak like terminally ill patients.
    What you fear is probable but not certain. Clench your teeth.

    Reply
  2. It was actually a surprise. I had not done the statistics since Nov 2017, so I did not know how bad 2018 was or how good 2019 was until Dec 1, when I ran the statistics.
    Bought more fisetin. Going to be doing another round of fasting soon.

    Reply
  3. I play about 11,000 games of bullet chess a year at ICC. Have done so since Nov 2006. In 2010, I stagnated, and my rating has fluctuated very little year to year. Got my high score in 2010. And the last 3-4 years I have declined slightly just a few Elo. Then, in 2019 it went up! (my games are automatically saved, 170,000 or so of them, which I can process with ratings programs like EloStat). I am about 40 Elo stronger. And that 2010 high score was beaten by 58 Elo just a few days ago. My Age Related Cognitive Decline is going in reverse!
    I see only 2 possible sources of this: 1), Senescent cell clearance. I went on fasts once a month for 3 months and took fisetin and quercetin at the same time. 2) I have also switched to a low AGE diet: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3704564/
    I am also taking Metformin, but I have been taking that since the beginning of 2018, and 2018 was one of my worst years. Maybe it is helping something, but it is not cognition.
    If you wait for all the human tests to conclude, you aught to be about 90 before you start.
    The fasts I did were not true fasts they were super low protein 500-700 calorie a day fasts and 4-10 days. I think the first was 4 days the second was 7 and the third was 10. It seemed to clear less each time. I suppose, the more you get rid of, the less senescent cells there are that remain.
    I am not under any less stress. I haven’t been exercising more.
    http://cognitivefun.net/stat/1
    http://cognitivefun.net/stat/16

    Reply
  4. Apparently, over the world as a whole, the last decade saw lifespans increase by 1:3.

    That is, lifespans went up 3.3 years over 10 years 2010-2020. 8 hours per day. Which sounds even more impressive to me, though it’s obviously the same thing.

    Reply
  5. OK, I found the bill.

    $243.83 for 3 months.

    I was wrong, that’s about exactly equal to my internet.

    But I was right that this is trivial in terms of my overall living expenses. That’s like one dinner party at a restaurant.

    Reply
  6. 57 here. not confident at all, I’m going to get older, frailer, riddled with disease and die like everyone else before me and it sucks…

    Reply
  7. I am still confident that by 2040 lifespan “escape velocity” will be reached for the US/Western Europe levels of wealth, at least to the point 120 will eventually be the new 80. Same prediction I made in 1999; it is unchanged.

    Reply
  8. Where I live, the electricity bill is still around 10-15% of middle-class monthly expenses (at least based on my own bills).

    Reply
  9. Cheap enough that I don’t even know what the exact price is.

    It’s less than I spend on beer each week. Less than I spend on bikes. Less than my unmetered internet. Small enough that the expense has no bearing whatsoever on my lifestyle.

    Compare that to historical numbers. People using wood fires would spend hours per day gathering firewood. More and more as populations grew and they had to go further to get any fuel.

    I remember a claim that in the 19th century it was something like 10% of a normal household budget for lighting (candles, lamp oil, firewood, and the cleaning and maintenance required to sustain those techs).

    Reply
  10. Well yeah, because every time someone invents it, they go back and screw with the past, which results in it not being invented!

    Reply
  11. Not everything needs to meet negligible metrics and today we see that for instance with data storage. Today you can store and compute enough to make 50 and 100 years ago look like they lived in micro aquariums VS an ocean of storage and computational volume.

    Even today, never mind then, we still aren’t able to completely imagine all of the possible uses for that much information potential. Technology is that way. Culture is less so. Huxley and Orwell would not be surprised.

    Reply
  12. And more to the point. I would bet with you that 50 years from now we are yet another very different world away from today in 2020. Fusion or not!

    Reply
  13. Sure, but if that were true in that particular meaning, none of the things due “soon” in 1919 would be true today. And more pertinently, many things were not even expected and others turned out to be very different.

    Reply
  14. By cheap I mean too cheap to be metered. Like unlimited broadband. BTW I seriously doubt your energy is cheap. How much you pay for gas and electricity?

    Reply
  15. Only a part of aging is determined by genetics, and we don’t understand the full implication of messing with our genes. We are already inching to the understanding that staying healthy is about the state of the multiple layers of our being and that we have an innate ability to keep ourselves healthy and get ourselves healed.

    https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/primer/traits/longevity

    http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/memory-loss-associated-with-alzheimers-reversed-for-first-time

    http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/memory-loss-associated-with-alzheimers-reversed-for-first-time

    Reply
  16. We already have cheap energy. Have had it for my entire life.

    If you mean cheap, pollution free, sustainable energy which nobody has any ideological or religious issues with… well that’s a different matter.

    Reply
  17. Maybe that’s what Aubrey de Grey is going for? He’s building up the image of looking like a Middle Earth Wizard in everyone’s head so that when he finally shaves and walks in looking like a teenager it has the most dramatic effect.

    Reply
  18. Remember when we all thought these wonderful discoveries and inventions would be made within our lifetimes? As another year passes how confident are you we’ll see anti-aging, cheap energy etc, before you die?

    Reply
  19. In 2018, $72.56 billion was spent on our pets in the U.S.
    For 2019, it estimated that $75.38 billion will be spent on our pets in the U.S.

    Reply
  20. When George shows up for a press conference looking about forty years younger, I’ll be waving my credit card in the air at him.

    Reply
  21. 83,000 US households with over 50 million USD.

    An awful lot of them pay way more than that (with scarcely a thought) for a lot of things a lot less important than extending a beloved family member’s life, even if the family member in question is a canine.

    Reply
  22. People will pay thousands of dollars for their pets, who are like beloved family members. I know someone who paid thousands of dollars to treat their cat which came down with cancer. Church isn’t wrong to target that segment.

    Reply
  23. I would expect the opposite.
    And I would expect the numbers to not nearly be negligible enough to be a show stopper, at this point in R&D, from expensive loss-leader sales to rich yuppies etc

    Reply
  24. People certainly love their dogs but there are plenty of them needing a home.

    If you need to spend as much as you would with your own grandma/grandpa to keep the dog alive, most people would pick to let their pet go and get another one.

    In general, a sound but new technology not necessarily results in a sound business proposition, specially where there is so much to prove.

    Reply
  25. I wish him luck, of course, but his business model is suspect. He was hoping to do these interventions in dogs first, and to use revenue from that company to extend the technology to humans. Not sure if there’s enough demand to extend lives of dogs, especially if it’s going to cost many thousands of dollars. Also, Church’s other company (he founded many) just shut down – it was supposed to do genome sequencing and provide genomics info to paying customers. Not sounding good, from business perspective. I hope he can attract large venture fund investments instead, even if that costs him equity share.

    Reply

Leave a Comment