Longevity Advances

DanS · August 24, 2003, 22:24

Over the last 5 years or so, the US government has been putting hundreds of millions of dollars into aging research and longevity--i.e., making us all live longer. Some of you may have heard about the fruit flies that have been made to live 3x normal. Well, a similar thing has now been accomplished at the cellular level on humans.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2003Aug24.html

Nobody has put much money into this area before and it looks promising that we might pick some low hanging scientific fruit. A couple of years ago, I heard about other methods that were thought to be more promising to extend life 20-40 years (it was sort of hush-hush back then), but maybe they didn't pan out. Anyway, even if these kinds of drugs were to make us live a couple of years longer healthily, then it would be one of the most important medical advances in the last couple of hundred years.

Of course, there are lots of societal problems associated with any extension of life that are fun to ponder. Like 60 year old French pensioners being told they have to get off their duffs and work 10 or 20 years more.

Or that Eurocoms will have to pay billions of dollars to American companies for these drugs until the patents come off.

So is anybody here willing to be in a trial to test one of these drugs, if you were to get a life-long supply for free?

geeslaka · August 24, 2003, 22:34

I'd be willing to test, but not under the delusion it would make me live longer.

Verto · August 24, 2003, 22:36

So, I'm living in a world that has devoted billions in an attempt to give us longer lives, while depriving fetus' the right to live?

PLATO · August 24, 2003, 22:38

Quote:

Originally posted by Verto
So, I'm living in a world that has devoted billions in an attempt to give us longer lives, while depriving fetus' the right to live?

Yep. Make it past the birth canal and your in the club!

geeslaka · August 24, 2003, 22:46

Quote:

Originally posted by Verto
So, I'm living in a world that has devoted billions in an attempt to give us longer lives, while depriving fetus' the right to live?

Oh, that's only the beginning. Just wait until we have real population problems.

DanS · August 25, 2003, 00:02

Quote:

So, I'm living in a world that has devoted billions in an attempt to give us longer lives, while depriving fetus' the right to live?

Well, duh!

The Mad Monk · August 25, 2003, 00:44

Dan, please post the article -- my computer is getting hung up just after that stupid registration screen.

Odin · August 25, 2003, 00:58

3 times longer lives? I'll live to be 240, just like the characteris in Kim Stanley Robinson's Red Mars, Green Mars, and Blue Mars Sci-Fi novels.

Chromosomal Telomerase, right?

Geronimo · August 25, 2003, 02:08

If it happens it will probably be a very expensive solution for some time. This will mean that most of the usage will be in wealthy countires all of which have a negative or almost negative rate of natural increase in their populations. I think the overall effect of an extension of human lifespan will be miniscule compared to the effects of lack of access to or lack of willingness to use contraception in those parts of the world that are actually causing the overall increase in globabl population. My worry would be if the effects fail to increase our 'youth span' while increasing our lifespan. This would mean that the wealthy slow population growth nations problems with aging populations would only get that much worse.

Proteus_MST · August 25, 2003, 04:13

Who wants to live forever?

Snotty · August 25, 2003, 04:40

I remember seeing a study into extending the lifespan in earthworms, in the hop they might be able to bring it over to humans. They had quite a degree of success. Firstly they found they could double the worms lifespan by messing with one of its sex chromosomes. After that they discovered they could quadruple the worms lifespan by burning its genitals off with a laser......

As proteus said, who wants to live forever

Ecthy · August 25, 2003, 04:43

my skin is already getting rough. others have soft, perfect facial skin at my age and even above, yet I seem to be sort of scarred from pimples and blessed with big pores, too. not as bad as some others, but still.

longevity might be in food, but youth is in chemistry that you put into your face. I almost never used any anti-acne creme or anything, never felt too bad about occasional pimples. now I see the result.

and it isn't a long life that people want. it's longer lasting youth. as wise men say, the only fate worse than death is immortality.

DanS · August 25, 2003, 10:12

Not forever. Just longer.

Also, these drugs would go off patent just like any other drugs.

Quote:

Enzymes Found to Delay Aging Process
Discovery Could Lead to Drugs to Extend Life Span

By Rick Weiss
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, August 25, 2003; Page A02

Scientists have found for the first time a way to rev up a potent "anti-aging" enzyme in living cells, an advance they said could speed the development of drugs to extend human life span and prevent a wide range of geriatric diseases.

The novel approach has significantly increased the life spans of yeast and human cells in laboratory dishes and extended the lives of flies and worms -- organisms that, on the level of molecular biology, age much as humans do. Indeed, the researchers said, the compounds seem to have the same anti-aging effect as a drastic reduction in calories, the only strategy ever proven to extend life in mammals but one that most people find difficult to stick to.

It is too soon to say whether the latest findings will ever make the leap from the lab bench to the geriatrics clinic -- though some may choose not to wait: Of all the compounds the researchers tested, the one that boosted the anti-aging enzyme the most was resveratrol, an ingredient in red wine that has been credited with that beverage's ability to lower the risk of heart disease.

But the findings strengthen an increasingly popular notion among many scientists that the cellular enzymes at the core of the experiments -- called sirtuins -- are universal regulators of aging in virtually all living organisms and represent a prime target for new anti-aging drugs.

"It's looking like these sirtuins serve as guardians of the cell," said Harvard Medical School researcher David Sinclair, who led the new work published in yesterday's online edition of the journal Nature. "These enzymes allow cells to survive damage and delay cell death."

Now the race is on, Sinclair said, to find the most potent sirtuin stimulators -- or create synthetic ones -- and test their ability to extend the lives not only of cells, flies and worms but also of mice, monkeys and humans.

Other researchers were more cautious, warning that aging is a complex and poorly understood process that is unlikely to be slowed by any single drug. As promising as the research may appear today, they said, sirtuin would not be the first fountain of youth to prove a mirage.

"Let's face it, aging isn't the same in humans and yeast," said Jef Boeke, a yeast geneticist at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. Besides, he said, sirtuins are potent molecules, and in cranking them up, "one would have to be very careful about potential side effects." The new study caps a three-year string of discoveries involving sirtuins (pronounced sir-TOO-ins), a class of enzymes that are found in virtually every organism, including bacteria, plants and people. As with all enzymes, their job is to promote essential biochemical reactions inside cells.

At first scientists thought sirtuins spent most of their time pulling key molecules off the proteins that surround DNA -- part of the process by which cells turn their genes on and off.

But recently researchers learned that sirtuins are also involved in processes with much more medical -- and commercial -- potential: They are part of a feedback system that enhances cell survival during times of stress, especially if that stress is a lack of food.

For years researchers have known that life span can be extended by 50 percent or more in many kinds of creatures, including flies, worms and mice, if the animal is fed a diet that is nutritious but contains about 30 percent fewer calories than usual. Recently scientists found that the life-extending benefits of calorie restriction do not occur if the animal has been genetically altered to lack sirtuins, indicating these enzymes are crucial to this process.

Now scientists are coming to understand sirtuins' role in that life-extending response. In people, they seem to halt the normal cellular cycle that ends with old cells committing suicide and instead help rejuvenate them by beefing up their DNA repair processes and stimulating production of protective antioxidants.

"What we think is that if a cell is at a point of deciding whether to live or die, these sirtuins push toward the survival mode and let the cell try a little harder and longer to fix itself," said Sinclair, who has a financial stake in a new effort to develop sirtuin-related products with BIOMOL Research Laboratories of Plymouth Meeting, Pa.

Leonard Guarente, a researcher at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge, is also enthusiastic about the compounds' potential as anti-aging aids.

"We're very keen on the idea that this is it" -- that sirtuins are the central regulator of the aging process -- Guarente said. He is a founder of Elixir Pharmaceuticals of Cambridge, Mass., which, like Sinclair and BIOMOL, hopes to capitalize on chemicals that can boost sirtuin activity.

The goal is to make drugs or nutritional supplements that can fool the body into thinking it's living on a radically calorie-reduced diet, in effect allowing people to eat their cake and live longer, too.

The new report from Sinclair's team is the first to show that it is indeed possible to tweak the sirtuin pathway. The group screened a large number of biologically active chemicals -- simple compounds that can be made into drugs with relative ease. They found several that increase sirtuin activity at least two-fold, including resveratrol.

When they added some of these compounds to yeast cells growing in culture dishes, the cells produced 70 percent more daughter cells than normal -- a common measure of yeast youthfulness.

Human cells seemed to benefit, too. Those treated with sirtuin boosters enjoyed long lives in laboratory dishes even after being exposed to ionizing radiation, which damages DNA and usually shortens a cell's lifespan.

And in experiments not yet completed, Sinclair said, the compounds have shown evidence of being able to extend the life spans of two full-blown organisms: the soil-dwelling nematode worm known as C. elegans and the common fruit fly. Both are popular stand-ins with scientists trying to understand human biological processes.

Sinclair said his group plans to start feeding sirtuin boosters to mice in the next few months and then move up to testing in monkeys. The immediate goal in people would be to slow the progression of diseases of aging such as Alzheimer's, because a more generic slowing of the aging process could take decades to prove.

But others warned against exaggerated expectations. Richard Weindruch, a gerontologist and expert in calorie restriction at the University of Wisconsin in Madison, said the work was "very interesting and deserves to be carefully explored in mammals." But he questioned the relevance of the yeast experiments -- which, strictly speaking, measured not life span but the number of times a yeast cell could divide and produce daughter cells.

"Clearly, numbers of generations are related to time, but it's not the same in my mind as following a single animal over its lifetime," Weindruch said. Indeed, he noted, "What they are really looking at here is increased proliferative capacity," which he and others noted is akin to cancer.

David Finkelstein, an expert in metabolic regulation at the National Institute on Aging, which funded some of Sinclair's work, said the work was "very nice science" but also warned against leaping to conclusions. "We have results in a lower organism," he said, "and at this point, there's a lot of hand waving because of how little we know."

Finkelstein also advised against taking the resveratrol results too literally.

"Would the National Institute on Aging recommend you drink red wine every day? The answer is 'no,' " he said. "If you were to add a glass of red wine every day without changing your caloric intake, you're going to gain weight. And we know -- we know -- that if you gain weight, that's going to be harmful while this 'benefit' is a benefit that may or may not occur."

"People are always looking for a quick fix," Finkelstein said. "Tell people to eat a healthy diet."

Sava · August 25, 2003, 10:13

Does this mean we're going to be paying Social Security to these people for 180 years?

Sava · August 25, 2003, 10:14

Quote:

Originally posted by Verto
So, I'm living in a world that has devoted billions in an attempt to give us longer lives, while depriving fetus' the right to live?

nobody has a right to live...

C0ckney · August 25, 2003, 10:29

Quote:

Originally posted by Sava
nobody has a right to live...

am i the only one who sees something both very wrong, and very stupid in that statement?

the point about living longer is to make our active lives longer. who wants to live to 200 if you still go into your dotage at 70 odd, not me for a start.

Eli · August 25, 2003, 10:31

Quote:

Originally posted by Proteus_MST
Who wants to live forever?

I'll be terribly dissapointed if someone doesnt figure out a way to live until the age of, say, 500.

Sava · August 25, 2003, 10:44

Quote:

Originally posted by C0ckney
am i the only one who sees something both very wrong, and very stupid in that statement?

He is implying that a living organism (human or not) has a universal right to live. And that simply isn't true. Nature is anarchy... there are no rights. Rights are the creation of beings. Fetus's don't have the right to live because we have not given it to them.

Quote:

the point about living longer is to make our active lives longer. who wants to live to 200 if you still go into your dotage at 70 odd, not me for a start.

IMO people already live to be too old...

C0ckney · August 25, 2003, 10:52

well you said 'no one has a right to life' and of course that is wrong. of course you or i have a right to life.

as for your second point, i don't think people live too long, you can hardly say that people should be dying earlier! but i certainly think we should be more concerned with the number of years people can lead active, working lives, than just with the number of years people can live.

Sava · August 25, 2003, 10:55

Quote:

Originally posted by C0ckney
well you said 'no one has a right to life' and of course that is wrong. of course you or i have a right to life.

nah... any such rights are a condition of society... I should have elaborated to say such rights aren't universal. For instance... if you and I are alone on the planet... none of us has a "right" to live.

Quote:

as for your second point, i don't think people live too long, you can hardly say that people should be dying earlier!

I'm evil... remember that

Quote:

but i certainly think we should be more concerned with the number of years people can lead active, working lives, than just with the number of years people can live.

so we should only extend life if people can work? you filthy exploiting capitalist!!

Solly · August 25, 2003, 11:02

An unborn baby has a right to life as well Cockney.

C0ckney · August 25, 2003, 11:08

i agree up to a point, but this isn't the thread for this sort of argument is it.

DanS · August 25, 2003, 11:09

Quote:

Does this mean we're going to be paying Social Security to these people for 180 years?

Well, that's a good question, but it only of many. It will create a lot of havok in social security, investment markets, insurance companies, housing, medical care, etc.