"We are on the verge of a revolution in medicine: understanding, treating, and ultimately preventing the causes of degenerative aging. But medical revolutions only happen if we all stand up in support of funding and research. We did it for cancer. We're doing it for Alzheimer's. We can do it for aging - and create an era of longer, healthier lives!"

Required Reading
Activism and Advocacy
Calorie Restriction
The Community, Visualized
Cryonics
Healthy Life Extension Explained
Introductory Articles
Longevity Meme Newsletter
Methuselah Foundation
Mprize for Longevity Research
Stem Cells, Regenerative Medicine
SENS, Negligible Senescence
What is Anti-Aging?

On the Causes of Aging
Accumulating AGEs
The Failing Immune System
Junk in the Lysosome
Mitochondrial Free Radicals
Senescent Cells
Other Causes of Aging

Objections Answered
Boredom
Inequality and Economics
Overpopulation
Stagnation
The Tithonus Error
What About Retirement?

Recent Entries

  • Graying Hair and Fading Stem Cells
  • Calorie Restriction and DNA Damage
  • The Methuselah Gene, Examined
  • Calorie Restriction Protects Against Age-Related Muscle Loss
  • The Things You Can Change
  • Reminder: Aging 2008 on June 27th at UCLA
  • Ageless Animals, the Sea Urchin Edition
  • Aging
  • 500 Scientists
  • Horizons For Immunotherapy
  • Revisiting Sirtuins
  • Complicating WILT
  • Aging as a Challenge For Regenerative Medicine
  • More On Telomere Shortening and Mitochondrial Dysfunction
  • Signs of Rose-Type Immortality in Humans?
  • Next Steps For Longevity Science at the Methuselah Foundation
  • Updates at Ouroboros
  • Why Do We Accumulate Senescent Cells Anyway?
  • The Immune Response Connection to Alzheimer's Disease
  • The Million Year Lifespan

    Weblogs of Interest
    Accelerating Future
    Ageing Research
    Alcor News
    Al Fin Longevity
    April's CR Diary
    Andart
    Anti-Aging Medicine & Science
    Biosingularity
    CRON Diary
    Cryonics Society
    Depressed Metabolism
    Digital Crusader
    Distributed Republic
    Ethical Technology Blog
    Existence is Wonderful
    Frontier Channel
    Future Current
    FuturePundit
    grailsearch.org
    Longevity Science
    Marginal Revolution
    Metamagician and the Hellfire Club
    Methuselah Foundation Blog
    Mises Economics Blog
    Nanodot
    Ouroboros
    Overcoming Bias
    Pimm - Partial immortalization
    Responsible Nanotechnology
    ScienceBlogs
    Sentient Developments
    Singularity Institute Blog
    The Loom
    The Speculist
    Tangled Bank
    Transumanar

      
    Search

    Archives (Monthly)

    June 2008
    May 2008
    April 2008
    March 2008
    February 2008
    January 2008
    December 2007
    November 2007
    October 2007
    September 2007
    August 2007
    July 2007
    June 2007
    May 2007
    April 2007
    March 2007
    February 2007
    January 2007
    December 2006
    November 2006
    October 2006
    September 2006
    August 2006
    July 2006
    June 2006
    May 2006
    April 2006
    March 2006
    February 2006
    January 2006
    December 2005
    November 2005
    October 2005
    September 2005
    August 2005
    July 2005
    June 2005
    May 2005
    April 2005
    March 2005
    February 2005
    January 2005
    December 2004
    November 2004
    October 2004
    September 2004
    August 2004
    July 2004
    June 2004
    May 2004
    April 2004
    March 2004
    February 2004
    January 2004

    Creative Commons License
    Attribution, noncommercial, no derivative works. Play nice.

  • « A Little More Stem Cell Politics | Main | How Big a Research Prize to Fund SENS? »

    Friday, October 1, 2004

    The Cost of SENS

    I misstated the projected research cost of Aubrey de Grey's Strategies for Engineered Negligible Senescence (SENS) in a recent post. If we take a look at a breakdown of the proposed "Manhattan Project" to prototype all the technologies needed for radical life extension in mice and an interview at the Longevity Meme:

    The type of work I hope the prize will encourage is late-onset interventions to repair or obviate accumulated molecular and cellular changes in already aged mice. This is the sort of research that is most relevant for human use. The seven treatments I mentioned earlier should, in combination, allow us to take two-year-old mice with a normal life expectancy of three years and make them live at least three more healthy years. This would certainly be something!

    This goal should be possible within about 10 years with adequate funding, which I estimate at no more than US$100 million per year. Unlike the numbers for humans, I'm confident of this 10-year prediction because there are no arbitrarily hard problems to solve. In the case of human healthy life extension, safety matters mean that there are unknown levels of difficulty associated with research, particularly where it relates to gene therapy.

    To translate work in mice to work in humans might require as much as ten times this level of funding - an educated guess at best, however. Regulatory hurdles for medical technology are onerous, and things always turn out to be more complicated than first anticipated. Still, $10 billion is a great deal of money if used wisely, and there is every reason to think that the scientific community could achieve radical life extension in humans when funded to this level.

    Posted by Reason at October 1, 2004 9:29 PM | TrackBack (2)

    Posted by: Kurt at October 3, 2004 12:15 PM

    Once SENS is accomplished in mice, there will be plenty of money that will flow into converting the SENS therapies into human therapies. Yes, safety is an issue and will take time, but most of the basic scientific work will be done. Also, effective gene therpy will probably be available for other medical conditions within 10 years, so this should not be as difficult issue as it is now.

    Some of the seven deadly things may already be treatable by the time SENS is accomplished in mice. There is a new vaccine for alzhiemer's that works by eliminating the extracular junk that is responsible for the desease, which should be available in 10 years time. Also, ALT-711 and derivative treatments should be available by this time as well. That would cut the list down to five deadly things, which stem cell regeneration would take care of an additional one. Others may be curable by this time.

    I agree with Aubry that curing cancer (at least by his proposed method) is going to be the most expensive, time-consumming aspect of SENS. Once it begins to sink into the minds of the cancer community that Aubry's approach is the only workable one, I think the cancer research organizations will begin to finance this research.

    The key for FDA approval is to find a specific disease associated with each of the seven deadly things (for gycation its diabedes, for extracellular junk its alzheimers, etc.) and get these therapies approved for treating these diseases. That is, if by this time, the FDA persists in refusing to classify aging as a medical condition.

    I think lobbying the FDA to classify aging as a disease state would be the more direct approach, or to lobby for the abolition of the FDA.

    There are work-related, age discrimination lawsuits that can be used as the legal basis to get the FDA and medical establishment to classify aging as a disease.

    [Posted by: Kurt at October 3, 2004 12:15 PM]

    Posted by: Whitney at October 29, 2006 4:50 PM

    I think we can fight aging but we need a cure. I think aging is contagous. I think people are dieing from aging. I think aids, cancer, and the desease of aging and any other deaseas are all related. I think once we find the cure for one we have the cure for all. I think something is attacking our our body and our cells. This is seen in all deseases, colds, cancer, aids. I think we need the cures in less than ten years. I think building our immune system and recuperation will help. I think we also need to help young people. I think if we find the cure young people could stay young. I think aging can be the cause of other illnesses.

    [Posted by: Whitney at October 29, 2006 4:50 PM]

    Post a comment; thoughtful, considered opinions are valued. Please note that comments incorporating ad hominem attacks, advertising and other forms of inappropriate behavior are likely to be deleted.










    Remember personal info?