Aubrey de Grey - SENS
Aubrey de Grey - SENS
Aubrey de Grey - SENS
healthy life a lot
Aubrey D.N.J. de Grey, Ph.D.
Chairman and CSO, Methuselah Foundation
Lorton, VA, USA and Cambridge, UK
Email: aubrey@sens.org
MF site: http://www.methuselahfoundation.org/
Science site: http://www.sens.org/
Prize site: http://www.mprize.org/
Shameless plug
Out now:
$17.79 at
Amazon
Why I am doing this
Why I am doing this
Fun
Not fun
Structure of this talk
Repair versus retardation
Specifics: the seven types of damage
Intracellular junk/medical bioremediation
Longevity escape velocity: concept
Some evidence that LEV is realistic
The Methuselah Foundation
Structure of this talk
Repair versus retardation
Specifics: the seven types of damage
Intracellular junk/medical bioremediation
Longevity escape velocity: concept
Some evidence that LEV is realistic
The Methuselah Foundation
Aging in a nutshell
Product of evolutionary neglect, not intent
Metabolism ongoingly causes “damage”
Damage eventually causes pathology
Pathology causes more pathology
Strategies for intervention
Gerontology Geriatrics
Metabolism Damage Pathology
How to make a car last 50 years
plan A
How to make a car last 50 years
plan B
Strategies for intervention
Gerontology Engineering Geriatrics
Metabolism Damage Pathology
Claim: unlike the others, the engineering
approach may achieve a large extension of
human healthy lifespan quite soon
Structure of this talk
Repair versus retardation
Specifics: the seven types of damage
Intracellular junk/medical bioremediation
Longevity escape velocity: concept
Some evidence that LEV is realistic
The Methuselah Foundation
Reasons for the
engineering approach
it targets initially inert intermediates (“damage”)
Reasons for the
engineering approach
it targets initially inert intermediates (“damage”)
damage is simpler than metabolism or pathology
Problem 1: this is metabolism
Problem 2:
this is the pathology
• Cancer • Alzheimer’s
• Heart Disease • Stroke
• Diabetes • Sarcopenia • Parkinson’s
• Osteoarthritis •
• Incontinence Pneumonia
• Hormonal
• Osteoporosis Imbalance
• Emphysema
• Macular • Kidney Failure • Sex Drive
Degeneration
… and
LOTS
more
This is the damage
Seven Deadly Things
• Junk - Inside Cells
• Junk - Outside Cells
• Cells - Too Few
• Cells - Too Many
• Mutations - Chromosomes
• Mutations - Mitochondria
• Protein Crosslinks
Proteins in neurodegeneration
Oxysterols in atherosclerosis
Autophagy in Alzheimer’s Disease
Dystrophic Neurites IEM
Calnexin
Cat D
Endothelial
Cells
Lipid-engorged
Lysosome
Foam
Cell
Bioremediation: the concept
Microbes, like all life, need an ecological niche
Some get it by brawn (growing very fast)
Some by brain (living off material than others can't)
Any abundant, energyrich organic material that is
hard to degrade thus provides selective pressure
to evolve the machinery to degrade it
That selective pressure works. Even TNT, PCBs…
Xenocatabolism: the concept
Graveyards:
are abundant in human remains…
accumulate bones (which are not energyrich)…
do not accumulate oxysterols, tau etc...
so, should harbour microbes that degrade them
whose catabolic enzymes could be therapeutic
Environmental decontamination
in vivo
7ketocholesterol degradation a good start
7KC over time in enrichment cultures
500
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
HPLC
0 area [arbitrary units]
0 2 4 6 8 10
day
7KC degradation presented at meetings
First MFfunded paper submitted
Steps to biomedical application
3) Isolate competent strains; select by starvation
4) Identify the enzymes (mutagenesis, chemistry, genomics)
5) Make lysosometargeted transgenes, assay cell toxicity
6) Assay competence in vitro (more mutagenesis/selection)
7) Construct transgenic mice, assay toxicity in vivo
8) Assay competence in disease mouse models
9) Test in humans as for lysosomal storage diseases
Structure of this talk
Repair versus retardation
Specifics: the seven types of damage
Intracellular junk/medical bioremediation
Longevity escape velocity: concept
Some evidence that LEV is realistic
The Methuselah Foundation
Reasons for the
engineering approach
it targets initially inert intermediates (“damage”)
damage is simpler than metabolism or pathology
repairing damage buys time
Retarding aging: benefits modest
max
Reserve
frail
0
0
Age
Halving rate of damage starting in middle age
doubles remaining healthspan
raises total healthspan by maybe 20%
Comparable repair: far better
max
hard
Reserve
easy
frail
0
0
Age
Fixing half the damage starting in middle age
doubles total healthspan
raises remaining healthspan maybe 5fold
Robust human rejuvenation
(RHR)
Addition of 30 extra years of
healthy life (and total life) to
people who are already in middle
age when treatment is begun
Everimproving repair: better yet
max
very hard
Reserve
hard
easy
frail
0
0
Age
Fixing half the damage, then 3/4
not as good as doing 3/4 first time…
but better than doing 1/2 first time…
Infinitely better, in fact
max
Reserve
frail
0
0
Age
Fixing half the damage, then 3/4, then 7/8….
outpaces the sofarunfixable damage…
maintains healthspan indefinitely
Longevity escape velocity
(LEV)
The rate at which rejuvenation
therapies must improve (following
the achievement of RHR) in order
to outpace the accumulation of
sofarirreparable damage
Structure of this talk
Repair versus retardation
Specifics: the seven types of damage
Intracellular junk/medical bioremediation
Longevity escape velocity: concept
Some evidence that LEV is realistic
The Methuselah Foundation
Simulating aging
(Phoenix & de Grey, AGE 2007; 29:133)
Metabolism ongoingly causes “damage”
and
Damage eventually causes pathology
So….
Simulations of aging (and intervention)
should simulate damage accumulation
Simulating damage: basis
damage of many types accumulates
any can kill us (i.e. they are not additive)
within each type, subtypes are additive
damage feeds back to hasten more damage
people differ in damage accumulation rates
death is from damage X challenge (e.g. flu)
Simulating damage: model
Structural parameters
N_CAT: The number of damage categories each person has N_MECH: The number of mechanisms in each category
MECH_WEIGHTm: The contribution of a mechanism to a category
Fitting parameters
BASAL_M: The mean basal damage rate BASAL_SD: The standard deviation of the basal damage rate
BASAL_H: The homogeneity of basal damage rate in a single person EXP_M: The mean exponential damage rate
EXP_SD: The standard deviation of the exponential damage rate
EXP_H: The homogeneity of exponential damage rate in a single person
FATAL_M: The mean yearly challenge FATAL_SD: The standard deviation of the yearly challenge
Values set for each person at initialisation:
PB: Basal rate for the person: lognorm(BASAL_M, BASAL_SD)
PE: Exponential rate for the person: lognorm(EXP_M, EXP_SD)
MBc,m:Basal rate for each mechanism: lognorm(BASAL_M, BASAL_SD)*(1BASAL_H) + PB*BASAL_H
MEc,m: Exponential rate for each mechanism: lognorm(EXP_M, EXP_SD)*(1EXP_H) + PE*EXP_H
D_Mc,m : Cumulative damage for each mechanism: 0 D_Cc : Cumulative damage for each category: 0
Variables updated for each person at each time step (year):
Total damage: PD(t) = [SUM c=1..N_CAT] D_Cc(t) Damage increment: DI_Mc,m(t) = MBc,m + MEc,m*PD(t1)
Cumulative damage: D_Mc,m(t) = DI_Mc,m(t) + D_Mc,m(t1)
Cumulative category damage: D_Cc(t) = [SUM m=1..N_MECH] DI_Mc,m(t)
Fatality challenge: FATAL(t) = |norm(FATAL_M, FATAL_SD)|
If D_C (t) > FATAL(t) for any c, the person dies at age t
Validation: age at death
Results: how damage evolves
Results: defeat of damage
Therapies doubling in efficacy every 42 y
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Results: LEV in practice
Therapies doubling in efficacy every 42 y
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
LEV decreases with time
max
Reserve
frail
0
0
Age
Fixing half the damage, then 2/3, then 3/4….
still good enough…
just like gravitational escape velocity
Data
Structure of this talk
Repair versus retardation
Longevity escape velocity: concept
Some evidence that LEV is realistic
Specifics: the seven types of damage
Intracellular junk/medical bioremediation
The Methuselah Foundation
Funds: current status
$4.5M in Mprize pot
Research pot being spent as fast as we fill it
“LysoSENS” being funded (~$100k/yr) by
20052006 donations to the MF
“MitoSENS” being funded (~$150k/yr) by
Peter Thiel’s donation of $500k
Thiel’s challenge pledge ($3M) is 1:2; our
next goal is to match it in full (i.e. raise $6M)
Eventual organisational structure
Mediumterm goal: proof of concept in mice
Strategy: solve/combine subgoals (SENS)
Procedure:
implement subgoals: ~350 people
scientifically interesting and respected
best done extramurally by academics
combine in same mice: ~150 people
scientifically tedious and unrewarded
best done inhouse by paid technicians
Ramping up….
Level 1: funding of up to $300k per year
guaranteed for at least 3 years. (This is where
we are now.) Selected SENS strands supported
at entry level (1 project/strand, 12 FTEs/project)
Level 2: funding of $300k$3m per year, three
years. (This is where we will be when the Thiel
pledge is fully matched.) Six SENS strands
supported at minimal level (13 projects/strand,
13 FTE/project)
Ramping up….
Level 3: funding of $3M$20M per year
guaranteed for at least five years. Grant
applications solicited; 30100 FTEs funded,
across up to 30 projects
Level 4: funding of $20M$100M per year, ten
years. Physical facility (“Institute for Biomedical
Gerontology”) set up (50150 FTEs); extramural
research support as in Level 3 (100350 FTEs)
Why I am doing this
Why I am doing this
Why I am doing this
I offer no apology for using media
interest in life extension to make
the biology of ageing an exception
to Planck’s observation that science
advances funeral by funeral: lives,
lots of them, are at stake.
de Grey 2005, EMBO Reports 6(11):1000
Shameless plug
Out now:
$17.79 at
Amazon