Category Archives: Funding

Longevity Cookbook Indiegogo Campaign Is the Most Effective Step You Can Take towards Your Longevity

longevity cookbook, health, rejuvenation, aging, cookbook, healthy eating

Something amazing has happened! We have launched our Longevity Cookbook Indiegogo Campaign.

Aging steals away your most valuable resource: time. The Longevity Cookbook is a strategy guide to help you get more time to experience the joy from everything that you like in life. Take yourself on a journey starting with nutrients and exercise regimes that goes on to exploring the usage of genetically modified symbiotic organisms and using gene therapy to boost your own longevity.

Contributing to ‪#LongevityCookbook‬ is the best way you can spend your money, because we are fighting for your life. Please, contribute and share the Longevity Cookbook campaign. Let’s defeat aging together!

9 Comments

Filed under Funding

Let’s Bet on Money?

labcures1

Let’s make a bet? I will propose something incredibly effective in the area of life extension and no one will be able to suggest a better strategy. Deal?

First of all, let’s think about what KPI (Key Performance Indicators) can be applied to longevity? What will tell us that we are on the right way to immortality, but not moving in the opposite direction towards the grave.

The answer here lies on the surface.

The first thing is money. The more money is invested in projects on life extesnion, the better chances we have to stay alive.

The second thing is people. There’s a nuance here. How can we count the increase in number of people? I think we need to count the most devoted supporters in the first place. There are millions of people who don’t mind living longer. Many of them run in parks or read biotechnology news, but does their activity lead to radical life extension? In my opinion, no. Moreover, having found a simple recipe like a diet, yoga or Kurzweil’s promises that everything is going to happen on its own by 2030, this kind of longevity supporters don’t do anything, because subconsciously they have already found the solution to the problem.

I propose to take only those people into account, who are involved in projects on radical human life extension. How can we identify such a person? Oh, it’s very easy. He or she talks about it explicitly and their actions are adequate, meaning they are established socially.

The third KPI is the number of events. Conferences, books, round tables, articles, social actions, 40 people going to have a beer because of the approaching singularity, youtube videos, scientific projects, movies – all of that is needed in extra large quantities.

The forth thing is the effectiveness of collaboration. This one is complicated. Perhaps the number of people involved in the same transhumanist project needs to be taken in account.

So, what strategy will be most oriented towards increasing all of the 4 indices? What can yield more money, more people, more events and more collaboration?

It is crowdfunding of scientific projects in the area of longevity. First dozens and then hundreds of crowdfunding campaigns have to be created that would raize funding for longevity gene therapy, regenerative medicine, studying molecular mechanisms of aging and their relationship to pathologies.

Yes, perhaps, we will raize not a lot of moeny in the beginning, but the projects that describe the work of the scientists, they will stay and they will continuosly owrk towards educating, promoting and attracting supporters. Moreover, they will help the universities and research institutes get government grants and venture capital.

Joint donations for longevity research will draw people closer together and will allow to constantly increase the loyal audience. There will be a chain reaction – successful crowdfunding peojects will motivate to create more projects in our field.

A set of projects on life extension will give a clear signal to the society that great things can be done to secure the main human right – the eright to live.

This is the reason why I participated in creating LabCures, because I concider this project the best strategy for the initial kick off of novel research projects including longevity.

7 Comments

Filed under Funding

There Can Be No Healthy Aging

craig-venter3

This is Craig Venter. His institute has received 1.25 million dollars from the Ruggles Family Foundation to study the biomarkers of healthy aging.

The study, conducted by a team of scientists and clinicians from JCVI and WCHN, will focus on two groups of elderly individuals aged 65 to 85 years by correlating genetics with a variety of human genomic, gut microbiome and other “omics” profiles and integrating these data with the individuals’ health record. One group will consist of healthy individuals, and the other will have individuals with a variety of diagnosed health conditions.

This study makes no sense to me, because they want to look at the differences in health between sick people and even sicker people and call the results of the study markers of healthy aging. They propose to measure the right things, but what the study planners are missing here is the fact that aging itself is a disease. Aging can’t be healthy, because the underlying biological mechanisms that are causing age-related pathologies are active also in those aged individuals, who don’t have those diseases. To give you an example – manifestation of type 2 diabetes means that the cells lost their sensitivity to insulin, however really a lot of older people, who don’t have type 2 diabetes, have impaired insulin sensitivity. These people are considered to be just old, but not sick. That’s exactly what’s wrong with perception of aging. Everyone who reached a certain age is considered to be simply old, but not ill. However this person is 100% not healthy in a biological sense, because a lot of detrimental processes have already started their poisonous actions and altered the youthful state of the organism.

In order to find the biomarkers of aging the study design should be different. The control for an individual should be the very same individual. Let me explain. We are very different in the biological sense from each other. So, to draw conclusions about a person’s aging processes, based on a given set of parameters, we have to measure those parameters several times in the beginning of the experiment to identify the baseline for the person. Then by measuring those parameters in the long run we will be able to see the changes in levels and make conclusions regarding the underlying mechanisms of aging. Also that would be the way to judge the efficacy of interventions like caloric restriction and melatonin, or rapamycin, or other drugs. Of course, the exact study design description would be more complicated, I am just pointing out the main things here. But again, the idea is not to distinguish sick people from sick people with diagnosed diseases, the idea is to identify how the sickness, i.e. aging, can be characterized.

Here’s what important – we need to change the perception of aging, so there would be no confusing terms like “healthy aging”, which is an oxymoron. It’s like “dignified poverty”, or “merciful tyrant”. Aging is not and can not be healthy. Aging is itself a disease. It is also the cause of many other maladies like Alzheimer’s and stroke, and many others. We have to stop using the term healthy aging, because it is already making us conduct poorly designed research experiments.

 

5 Comments

Filed under Funding, Mechanisms of aging

We Should All Follow Michelle’s Example

My friend Michelle has done something very important and very useful to all of us – she donated money to aging research. I believe this is how we can change the situation – by following Michelle’s example.  Here’s her explanation why she thinks this was a necessary action, which she posted to the Longevity Party Facebook group.

“My name is Michelle and I’m from Wausau, WI (USA). I’m not a scientist, and I’m not very wealthy, but I’m in this group because I care about the future and curing aging. I want to be useful instead of just sitting at my computer chair reading articles on researchers trying to make us live longer and healthier lives. So I tried to talk to my family and friends, you know, to help raise awareness, but I was surprised that most of them didn’t agree with me, and said they wanted to die. My entire extended family is Catholic (with me being the only Athiest in the family), and they all think they are going to go to heaven so there is no point in extending life. This made me quite sad, but then I realized there are other things I can do that will make a difference right now. There are a lot of researchers out there working hard on projects but lack funding. There are 4,661 members in this group. If each of us donated even just $10 a person, that would be over $46,000 we could give to help speed the research along, and achieve our common goal faster. I donated $20 to the Buck Institute. Will you join me and do the same? What do you think?”

Even if you are not particularly wealthy, that’s alright, because every dollar counts in aging research. Michelle chose Buck Institute for Research on Aging, and there are other places where one can donate and make a huge difference for themselves and for the rest of the society, for example SENS Research FoundationInstitute for Aging Research at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine and other particular labs (which I can provide info upon request). There are also a couple of aging research-related crowd funding projects like the I am a little mouse and I want to live longer! campaign. So, be the change you wish to see in the world – donate to aging research.

4 Comments

Filed under Funding

Robert Shmookler Reis on Fighting Aging Approaches and Role of Basic Science

Dr. Reis talks about the main trends in longevity research, potential for creation life extension therapies in the nearest future, his favorite genes, preferable ratio of basic to applied research funding and the overall hurdles of aging research field.

2 Comments

Filed under Funding, Genetics

Google Wants to Fund Radical Life Extension Startups

I think you’ve all read the news that Google is to fund radical life extension, cryogenics and nanotechnology. My thoughts about it:

1. I love the sound of it, obviously “We look for entrepreneurs with a healthy disregard for the impossible.” Ah, it’s it beautiful? However, I don’t want to be too happy too prematurely. Even though Google Ventures invests in 23andme and Foundation Medicine, which is not a bad start in the right direction, but we’ll see how it goes and what companies they will choose to support in the future.

2. How do they make sure they won’t invest in the swindlers that crowded the anti-aging field? I wonder how the choosing and verification process is organized and who the experts in radical life extension field are.

3. Why cryogenics, but not cryonics or cryopreservation? Or do they seriously mean freezing metals and other materials? How is that going to save billions of lives?

4. And my major concern – what about basic science? I do realize I writing about a venture fund. However, I believe without investing in the fundamental science behind radical life extension, there will be no radical life extension, but only the frauds who offer snaik oil and claim that it heals all diseases including aging. Investors love simple solutions. There can be no simple solution in radical life extension. We know quite a few examples when investors got severely disappointed when they fell under the spell of simplicity and gave money for a pill to stop aging. Obviously, there can be no single pill, so the investors fell like fools and shut the door of opportunity for good projects. I am very concerned that something similar might happen to Google Ventures. In order to prevent this situation Google Ventures should pay a lot of attention to basic research into the mechanisms of aging and have a well educated and experienced team of experts who can distinguish bad projects from the good ones.

5. Google Ventures has a great potential to improve the attitude to radical life extension and cryonics. By choosing these fields Google sets a terrific example for other companies and agencies, as well as for the public, to pay attention to these topics. This can very quite helpful in creating the positive image of life extension, because everyone knows that Google is no fool and won’t invest in useless things.

1 Comment

Filed under Funding

Money Chart

I love charts. And money. If you do too, then you should take a look at this money chart right here.

5 different things I learned from it:

1. It’s very likely the problem of aging can be solved using just the money to be spent on hosting the World Cup 2022 by the City Qatar. Just think about it – 1 World Cup = Everlasting Youth

2. US annual charitable giving to religious organizations is roughly 3 times larger than government annual medical and health-related research funding. I believe these numbers maybe somewhat useful in a discussion about the religion being the major hurdle on the way of technological progress.

3. US spending on lung cancer treatment is 2 billion dollars less than US spending on cigarette marketing

4. Diddy + Jay-Z + Dr. Dre =  J.K. Rolling

5. Kate Middleton’s dress cost roughly 6 years of income of a ‘bottom 50%’ household (and for Russia that would be a middle class household)

I’d love to learn about the most exciting facts that you are are able to get from the chart.

9 Comments

Filed under Funding