With a beard and a strong opinion, there is something akin to the prophets in the days of the old covenant with Aubrey de Grey. But experts who study aging gerontology said that his belief that he might live to 1000 years of not getting the confidence / belief, but in science. De Grey studied computer science at Cambridge University, but became interested in the problem of aging more than ten years ago and is the co-founder of the Institute of SENS (Strategies for Engineered negligible senescence) which is a nonprofit organization based in the U.S. as quoted by The Guardian.
What’s wrong with being old?
Simply put, people get sick when get older. I often meet people who will suffer from cardiovascular disease or something, and we get those things as a result of a long accumulation of various types of molecular and cellular damage. It is not dangerous at low tingatan but ultimately it leads to disease and disability in the elderly who most people thought was not pleasant.
Whether this is the biggest health crisis facing the world?
There is absolutely yes. If we look at the industry, basically 90% of all deaths are caused by aging. Those things are death from causes that affect the elderly and has no effect on young adults. If we look around the world, the number of deaths that occur every day around 150,000 and about two-thirds of that number due to aging.
Why the world does not recognize it?
People have tried to claim that we can conquer aging for a long time, and they do not achieve success. There is a tendency to think that there is anything inevitable about aging. It is somehow beyond our technological capabilities in principle utter nonsense.
So when people come to terms with the terrible things that will happen to them in the future, they tend to be a bit reluctant to ask for it back when someone comes up with a new idea.
Are our bodies cease to be proactive with your life?
Basically, the body does have a natural anti-aging equipment but not 100% widely, so it allows a small number of different types of molecular and cellular damage occurs and accumulates. The body is trying as hard as possible to fight these things but it can not survive. So we will not be able to do anything significant about aging without the interference of high technology that will I do.
Aging involves a metabolic process, and then decline, and then the pathology, is it true?
Basically, it’s true. Metabolism involves a complex network of biochemical and cell processes are connected and managed to keep us alive during that process, but there are side effects.
Adverse events began even before we were born, the effect is still there in all corners of life and manifests as an example, the accumulation of various types of waste molecules inside and outside the cell, or simply as cells die and are not automatically replaced by another cell division. Gradual changes in the level of molecules and cells accumulate and eventually block the metabolism, and there appears pathology.
You have identified seven specific parts of cells that may decay can be overcome. Can you give an example?
I just mentioned cells die and are not automatically replaced, that one. Others that cells do not die when they should have died, some specific cell types should be changed, and often these cells lose the ability to respond to signals that say that they should die.
The third which cells divide too much, they may die when they should but split too much, and it’s called cancer.
We know the cause of cancer for some time but the time to find the cure, right?
I certainly do not claim that none of this is easy. Some of these are easier but I always see cancer as the single most difficult aspect of aging that should be corrected.
You talk about enriching the lives of people, but it was not death that make our lives worth?
That is nonsense. The fact is people do not want to get sick. I am a practical man. I do not want to get sick and I do not want you sick and that’s what I mean. I do not discuss longevity, I discussed keeping people healthy. The only difference between my work and the entire medical profession is that I think we are in the discovery of keeping people healthy so that at age 90 they are still built in the same physical condition when he was 30, and they probably will not wake up one morning not steeper than ever at the age of 30 years.
You say you think the first person who lived until 1000 years may be alive. Could that person is you?
It’s possible that people my age 40s young enough to benefit from this therapy. I give it 30 or 40% chance. But that’s not what motivates me to do this, I do it because I’m interested in saving 100,000 lives a day.
Can the earth cope with the people who lived so long?
It depends on the balance of births and deaths. We do not need a long time to limit the number of births as we more or less eliminate infant mortality 100 or 150 years ago. I do not see that it is common sense to assume the risk of cessation of the population as an excuse for not giving people the best health care we can give.