I, Maria Konovalenko, leader of Longevity Party, call to fight aging on a global scale. Aging is a disease that needs to be cured. Eliminating aging will lead to much longer and healthier lives, to fulfilling your goals and desires, to self improvement, wealth and will give you much more happy days with your family and loved ones. Fighting aging is the first step to radical life extension. Everyone who believes aging has to be defeated, upload your pictures with posters like this one in front of memorable places in your city. It will be nice to have a gallery of places where people are vocally advocating longevity.
The pdf of the poster is here – Poster-Aging is a Curable Disease
Maria Konovalenko 
http://www.maxlife.org/
In my opinion, the best way to change the paradigm of “the natural life cycle of birth, senescence, and death in humans” is to get angel investors to fund a scientific effort. Do you know how much effort the United Nations had to put forth to eradicate smallpox (arguably much worse than slowly growing old)? People felt smallpox was dharma, and fought the World Health Organization tooth and nail.
At our current level of only developmental science it’s not really a massive amount of money that’s needed (in comparison to smallpox) because it is just preliminary research and goal orientated research. In fact it would cheaper than what we spend on those diseases today because the treatments we have for those diseases are not curative. Basically if you developed effective therapies for diseases of aging the cost would go down per person because the care would no longer be required until that disease occured again. A bit like comparing fatal pneumonia with the annual flu. That’s also forgetting that costs are not only measured in dollars but in opportunity. I would say in dollars it would only need to be around 40 million. It doesn’t matter how much it costs in future because if the fundamental science is found then it’s invested in heavily by Governments and private research, look at stem cell therapy for example or trials to remove amyloid plaques and tau proteins.
Anyway Maria that’s a very picturesque scene and it’s very admirable that you have stated your opinion so publicly. I do think that the movement is gaining momentum but I think the word “cure” might confuse the issue a little bit. For example you will no doubt get into the argument that aging is a natural and permanent part of life.
And as they state at Max Life, as the scientific quest proceeds, the cost can be defrayed with commercial exploitation of any new technology that emerges. I want me some TA-65 (the only longevity supplement, because it is proven to extend the telomere strand of human DNA, which seems to be the main barrier to breaking the Hayflick limit), which is now being sold for about 200 $/month.
That’s not going to help you out very much.
“That’s not going to help you out very much.” I assume you mean TA-65. I don’t want to be a troll, but are you aware of the thing called the “Hayflick Limit?” Human cells only reproduce a set number of times, very likely that limit is the length of the telomere strand (the end cap of our DNA). ONLY TA-65 has been scientifically proven to extend that telomere strand, so that will eventually help me out very much. Also, there is future stem cell treatments:
“Stem cell treatment that will rejuvenate every tissue in your body.”
‘Turning the aged person into a biologically younger version of themselves.’
Note: this is scientific progress today, not several decades into the future (although the stem-cell treatment isn’t either mature or offered on the market yet).
“January 15th, 2012
Full Rejuvenation in Near Future?
Dear Future Centenarian,
Did you see the February issue of Life Extension Magazine?
The cover article was about a stem cell technology that Life Extension has been supporting… to the tune of $2 million so far! The company has raised more funding as well.
The ultimate goal is to develop a progenitor cell treatment that will rejuvenate every tissue in your body. That’s right. The implications are… turning the aged into biologically younger versions of their former selves. Individual diseased or aged organs can be targeted as well.
Pie in the sky? Maybe, if they were the only one working on this approach. But others are pursuing it too, including one company I’ll tell you about in a moment which may get there first.”
I suppose you are equally pessimistic about this, huh?
I believe more research in TA-65 action is needed. I also think that your expectations from just one potential geroprotectior are a bit too high. How do you know it’s working?
In order to find out if TA-65 (or any other drug) is slowing down aging or not, you have to test many many parameters, molecular, cellular, morphologic and functional. Only after we know the baseline of your health, can we judge whether an intervention is effective or not. We can only then see what exactly is changing inside the cells, in tissue functionality, etc. and how this relates to aging.
I don’t recommend taking any drugs without the biomarker testing system.
First of all, thank you for your considered reply, I admire you very much. Second, I agree, and that is why TA-65 (please don’t take my citing it as advertisement – I am not a salesman for the company or even a happy user) has been objectively tested and proven to increase the telomere strand (there is such a test and it has consistently shown that result, which is amazing since many scientists claimed it was impossible: http://www.my-wellness-coach.com/2010/07/the-man-who-would-be-immortal-.html ). And finally, as to the effect of telomere lengthening in humans on senescence, there are animal models (like lobster for instance) where telomere length doesn’t shorten dramatically, but those crustaceans still die. Never the less, I think you if you studied this particular supplement, it’s proven effect upon human telomere length, and the probable effect of telomere length on extending the Hayflict Limit in human cells, you would be more optimistic about it’s results. Besides, technology is increasing at an exponential rate, so in about two decades it is predictable that extreme longevity treatments will available, so every little bit helps if we can live long enough to seize that brass ring.
There are many theories of aging: free radical theory, telomere shortening, mitochondrial death, and others. Treating just one aspect of aging–such as consuming anti-oxidants to neutralize free radicals–does not confer anti-aging. All cellular processes are inter-related. slowing oxidation helps preserve cells and probably slows telomere shortening, for just one example. In other words, it is probably necessary to approach aging from many directions.
The difference between TA-65 and antioxidants is that the latter may slow telomere shortening but the former actually lengthens them. The tail tells the tale: the longer the telomere, the longer the lifespan. And not only the longer the lifespan, the younger the longer lifespan.
TA-65 has been tested on animals and humans, unlike many products aimed at aging or health generally. The outcome in the human experiment was longer telomeres AND thicker, younger skin, muscle mass gain without exercise, hair restored, more energy and stamina, less wrinkles. In other words, many visible signs of youthfulness correlated with telomere lengthening as seen in blood tests. TA-65 works.
You will see copy-cat competitors who quote the original research performed by TA-Sciences and then bait and switch to their own product, giving the impression that the research applies to their product when it actually doesn’t.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHCkjXxRXSI < Answer on Telomeres
Alex Jones’ website, huh? You can’t do better than that? I’ll listen to it tonight, but I am VERY WELL AWARE of Alex Jones and his Inforwar website, and it doesn’t bode well.
It’s Aubrey de Grey speaking briefly on the subject for about a minute. I agree with your sentiment on Alex Jones however I do not really know who he is. The interview is several years old.
Sorry to take so long to get back to you – I was wrong, in the sense that Aubrey de Grey is a legion in the longevity field, and it ought not be held against him interacting with Mr Jones. OTH, I believe what de Grey meant by saying extending telomere was an “urban myth” is that it was the silver bullet to longevity – which I agree with wholeheartedly. If you think extending your telomere won’t make any difference, then save 200 $ (per month). Obviously, the length of the telomere has a significant effect upon the longevity of the cell, and we know that cell senescence has a significant (arguably major) effect upon human senescence in general (i.e. the eventual catastrophic failure of body from accumulated DNA errors and zombie cells).
I am definitely not afraid of these arguments, because I know how to answer to them. It’s just that the majority of people don’t respond very well to rational arguments, they need emotional ones)
Maria, that is a curious response (yours). What do you mean by that?
influencing parliaments n politicians is extremely important, by all means- personal, friendly n by all communication ways possible. that they too need a superior life biochemically, genetically n nanotechnically.
they MUST generate n sanction funds for such an important work. earlier possible by generous funds by them.
countries making funds too will enjoy new community of employers, employment n QUALITY OF THEIR COUNTRYMEN.