$36,000
$10,332

The Society for the Rescue of our Elders

The Society for the Rescue of our Elders initiative arises from the same circle of people who run the Life Extension Foundation and the RAAD festival, and is one of the more promising items I've seen emerge from that group. If they put their minds to it, they should be well able to run useful human trials of senolytic drug candidates and a range of other nascent rejuvenation therapies as these treatments emerge - trying all of the more reliable and useful treatments from mouse studies in human volunteers in order to accelerate progress.

My complaint in the past has been that their efforts get corrupted by their supplement business, and other forms of useless nonsense, but so far that isn't visible here. It is certainly possible to argue the utility of some of the proposed trials, my usual complaints about SENS damage repair to reverse aging on the one side versus tinkering with metabolism to slightly slow aging on the other, but they're all backed by research groups in one way or another. While this particular initiative isn't quite ready for widespread attention yet, there is a signup form, and there is a contact email address if you have thoughts or offers of support to convey. For my part, I am certainly willing to participate in a sensibly designed senolytics trial, should the opportunity arise at a reasonable cost, and I'm sure many of the folk in the audience here are of much the same opinion.

The Society for the Rescue of our Elders has no bylaws, incorporating documents, or other legal structure. Its sole purpose is to unite people in ways that will accelerate the availability of rejuvenation technologies to benefit all of humanity, including members of the group. The Society for the Rescue of our Elders consists of about 1,000 individuals who have demonstrated their desire to donate, invest, and/or actively participate in advancing human age reversal studies.

The Society for the Rescue of our Elders is similar to groups formed in the past to advance a science when the medical profession showed little interest. In 1767 a few wealthy and civic-minded citizens in Amsterdam gathered to form the Society for Recovery of Drowned Persons. Amsterdam is a city of canals and hence people fell in and drowned. It thus became the birthplace for the teaching and promotion of the resuscitation of dead persons. The Society for Recovery of Drowned Persons introduced scientific principles and techniques. Following successes of the Amsterdam society, rescue societies sprang up in most European capitals in the 18th century, all with the goal of finding a way of successfully resuscitating victims of sudden death. Many of these techniques (or variations of them) are used in modern emergency medical practice."

Our mission is to demonstrate statistically-significant human age reversal so that an eruption of charitable and capitalistic forces will compete to induce even longer, healthier lifespans. We live in an era whereby limitations on maximum lifespans are likely to be soon vanquished. Each day our research is delayed, we grow older and frail. There is tremendous urgency to move human rejuvenation projects forward. Funding has been secured for some clinical studies. The costs of certain projects, however, will require them to be self-funded. In these cases, each study subject will have to pay their portion of expenses of being part of the study.

The dasatinib/quercetin study of senolytics therapy will commence shortly and funding was provided by a long-time Life Extension Foundation supporter. It is divided into three phases to test different dose timing. Phase One is now fully enrolled, but other phases are still enrolling subjects. Participants can travel to Los Angeles or Idaho and must be available for two weekends in a row.

The NAD+ infusion study has commenced and funding has been secured to cover 100% of this study's cost. This study is fully enrolled. Future studies that will test NAD+ infusions for Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, and stroke patients, are being planned. Let us know if you'd like to participate. The rapamycin study site has been moved to Southern California. Funding has been secured to cover 100% of this study's cost. The primary cost of this and some other studies are the extensive clinical and biomarker measures that must be done to assess if biological age reversal is occurring. Enrollment for this study is currently open.

The GDF11 trial is planned to initiate in Nassau, Bahamas around October of this year and will require each study participant to self-fund $7,800 for one year's treatment, which includes costs of extensive clinical and biomarker measurements. A clinical trial studying the immunomodulatory properties and cost-effectiveness of mesenchymal stem cells as an alternative treatment for chronic autoimmune conditions is commencing.

The thymus regeneration study will be based in California but is available nationwide. The cost to participate in a one-year trial will be a maximum of $28,000, which includes medications, MRI scans of the thymus (optional), and high-tech monitoring of immune status. The expected re-growth of the thymus gland (based on preliminary results from a 10-patient pilot study) may provide immune restoration benefits.

Young plasma transfer studies (also called Therapeutic Plasma Exchange) will initially be conducted at several sites in Florida, North Carolina, Colorado and Southern California. We anticipate more sites in the U.S. later this year. Two treatment protocols will be offered, one using 5% albumin and immune senescence markers will be offered in both protocols. The expected cost for six infusions including comprehensive measurements of possible efficacy is estimated at $50,000.

Link: http://www.rescueelders.org/

Comments

The immediate problem that I see with all these paid for trials is that they won't produce any double blind placebo controlled data. Who would pay $28,000 for a thymus regeneration treatment without being sure that they are actually getting treated?

Off the top of my head, I think they should run a "Bring an old dog" policy. You pay for the treatment for yourself, and some of the money goes towards paying for the same treatment in one dog out of a pair of pet dogs in a private residence that are regularly observed.

Posted by: Jim at August 30th, 2017 6:55 AM

@Jim: They do state that these trials have no placebo somewhere near the bottom of their research page. I've argued in the past that patient paid trials of that structure can be useful to identify large effects worth chasing more rigorously. They're not going to be helpful for marginal or unreliable effects, but on the other hand we're really not interested in those. So these serve a dual purpose: expanding access to potential treatments to those interested, and using that interest to identify signs of sizable, reliable outcomes.

Posted by: Reason at August 30th, 2017 7:53 AM

Good points on the size of the treating effect affecting the need for a double blind placebo controlled group.

Still, I think any groups/companies serious about conducting clinical trials at some point in the future would have to give this paid for treatment a wide berth, as it could attract a lot of lasting negative PR. Oisin for example, would probably only be able to support work using their technology somewhat secretly.

Posted by: Jim at August 30th, 2017 8:20 AM

Reason, thanks for bringing this to your readership's attention. After being president of the CR Society for ages, and realizing that the message about CR has been spread as much as it can be, I'd been looking for new life-extension work to get involved in. When I met Bill Faloon and found out about the Society for the Rescue of Our Elders, I decided to join him full time in moving the project forward.

"So these serve a dual purpose: expanding access to potential treatments to those interested, and using that interest to identify signs of sizable, reliable outcomes." Yes, that's exactly how we view this. We'd all like the sort of solidity of data one would have with large, double-blind, controlled trials. But there's immense utility to a small trial showing safety and (to the extent that it can be shown without controls) and some efficacy. For example, if our current dasatinib + quercetin trial shows safety and reasonable efficacy, I'll try it immediately. (And offer it to my beloved Elders!)

Thanks again,
Brian

Posted by: Brian M Delaney at August 30th, 2017 3:32 PM

Why are'nt they doing a trial with foxo4-dri instead of dasatinib/quercetin, if it has proved to be much more effective with less side-effects?

Posted by: Mane at September 4th, 2017 5:47 AM

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

Note that there is a comment feed for those who like to keep up with conversations.