Opinion
Face to Face with the Fountain of Youth
February 6, 2009 - 12:00amThe fountain of youth has captivated the imagination of humankind for ages. The Greeks wrote of it, Ponce De Leon searched for it and David Copperfield claims to have found it. No matter when, no matter where, we, as a species, have always dreamt about that magical elixir that can lengthen our lives.
Over the years, we’ve been getting closer. Just a century ago, the average lifespan of a human being was estimated to be around 31 years. Today, that average sits comfortably at a little above 66. Modern medicine has worked wonders and, as a result, the world’s population lives longer and expands daily. We’ve grown from around 2.5 billion in 1950 to a current number of 6.75 billion. If all continues as planned, the U.N. estimates that we’ll have around 9 billion people walking this planet by the time we hit mid-century. But the plan may be changing in a dramatic fashion, transforming on account of some amazing research coming out of Boston.
The modern day fountain of youth was introduced to me by the scraggly voice of Morley Safer, a veteran correspondent on 60 Minutes who seems as old as father time himself. Safer began the piece by staring into the camera and explaining what’s known as the “French Paradox,” an apparent contradiction between the high-fat lifestyle in France and a relatively low rate of heart disease. Most researchers agree that there has to be something in the red wine responsible for this scientific abnormality.
But what exactly? The piece goes on to detail some amazing discoveries made by Harvard biochemist David Sinclair concerning the Sirtuin gene. The gene is simple and normally it is inactive, but, when made active, it has the potential to extend life. Sinclair tested thousands of compounds to see if any of them would trigger Sirtuin into its active state and, eventually, he found one that did — a substance called Resveratrol. Where does Resveratrol come from? You guessed it, red wine.
This is no small discovery. Sinclair — after teaming up with life sciences entrepreneur Christoph Westphal — developed a drug that delivers a highly concentrated dose of Resveratrol aimed at triggering the Sirtuin gene. Results have been encouraging, with success seen in mice and humans. “We’re talking about making a 90-year-old as healthy as a 60-year-old,” Sinclair told Safer, at which point I’m sure most viewers began pinching themselves.
Unlike most dream medicines, this one isn’t predicted to take a few generations to produce; according to Sinclair it could be out in as little as five years. If he’s right, we could be in store for one of the great ethical battles of our time.
While the report does a fine job reporting that the drug that can revolutionize living, I wonder why it didn’t ask some harder questions to the folks who plan to bring it to us. Are they aware of the consequences? If they’re selling it, are they willing to sell it only to those who can afford it? This would leave us with longer-living rich people and shorter-living poor people. Let’s say then everyone can get it; what will be the effect of turning 90 into the new 60? Can our planet handle it? Do we have enough natural resources? How about the buildup of pollution, poverty and overcrowding that would occur as a result?
On the other side, we’d be able to keep our “best people” alive longer and hence become more productive in the workplace and more likely to innovate in the laboratory. This may be true, but perhaps the skyrocketing population would offset the gains.
In any event, I thought it would be a good idea to have the producers of the pill answer these questions and not drone on endlessly with my own ideas. So, I called Westphal’s office and sent Sinclair an e-mail. Sinclair never responded. Westphal’s assistant requested an e-mail with my questions. Of course, I shot one over.
“The questions I want to ask,” I wrote, “are ones having to do mainly with sustainability and ethics.” After detailing the concerns above, I waited for a reply.
The answer came this past Tuesday when I was told that there would be no interview and that “Frankly Alex, it’s just not a storyline that they’re interested in participating in so you’ll have to go on without them.”
I can understand why they’re hesitant to talk. While the pill has the ability to work wonders, it would bring with it some serious consequences if mass produced. “If the predictions are true,” said resource economics Prof. Jon Conrad, “the results would be incredibly profound.” Not only would we have to worry about the sustainability component, he told me, but there would also be fundamental issues regarding people’s savings, retirement, stress on the healthcare system, viability of social security, and the list goes on and on. “Should the FDA look to approve this drug,” he said, “They would have to look at broader social statistics and focus more on potential impacts than usual.”
This case brings up fundamental issues regarding the practice of medicine. It must be asked: To what point should medicine be focused on lengthening and bettering the life of its patients? Should it continue on that path even if the longer lives of today are lived at the expense markedly worse lives of tomorrow? Just for kicks I asked my parents. “If that’s the case I’m checking out,” said my mother. Almost instantaneously my father agreed as well.
Resveratrol
Great thought provoking piece. These are real issues that will face the world in the very near future. You should also consider that these benefits are closer than you think. You can currenlty purchsae powerful resveratrol supplements. These supplements can far outweigh the amount of resveratrol obtained in 1000 bottles of red wine (i.e. the standard alluded to by David Sinclair). In fact, there is a pill out there that equals the resveratrol in 3000 bottles of red wine. My point, the wave of longevity and health has already started and will expand exponentially.
Again, great article.
Buyer beware when it comes to resveratrol.
Since the Harvard resveratrol study on aging by Dr. Sinclair was published in the journal Nature a flood of dubious companies have sprung up selling resveratrol. Many have no scientists, no labs, no quality control and no experience. Both I and Dr. Mehmet Oz have recommended Biotivia Bioforte and Transmax. They are made by a company with 18 years of experience and Biotivia supplies many of the university medical schools and researchers.
Consumer Lab, an independent testing authority, evaluated the major brands and found many lacking in content and quality. The highest potency products that passed their evaluation were Biotivia, Transmax and Bioforte. A product by Life Extension Co. failed badly with only 26% of the claimed resveratrol. This is clearly a case of buyer beware. Look for a reputable company with the resources necessary to produce this compound.
Elixir Pharmaceuticals is
Elixir Pharmaceuticals is all over the sirtuins...
http://elixirpharm.com/product/index.html
Excellent piece, great questions!
Hello Alex,
As an anti-aging "hobbyist" I found your article enjoyable to read and your ethical questions very difficult to answer. To add some detail about the drugs mentioned in the piece you speak of you can go to Sirtris Pharmaceuticals website where they discuss the progress of SRT501 and SRT2104 under their pipeline tab. These drugs are actually in various stages of human trials, however, still many years from FDA approval if proven to be safe, useful drugs.
Personally, I only want to live longer if I am able to do so in good health with a high quality of life. That may be stating the obvious but it's important to note that just extending life span is not the goal here.
The questions you outlined could be answered in great detail but I've decided to shorten my answers by stating, "As we have in the past, we will adapt to what the future brings." Just as our population has nearly tripled in a short period of time we have created ways to make living with the increase possible. Plenty of things have been done wrong (such as our ignoring of environmental dangers) but it seems we are learning from our mistakes and progressing in a positive way.
Fiscally we will need to prepare ourselves better for living longer. There is no better time to get people into "reasonable" savings mode then after going through the tough economic times we are experiencing today. Some times great fear is a good thing, it puts us back into reality.
I am very curious to see how this Resveratrol phenomenon plays out. I've been taking it for a year and hope to be taking it 100 years from now!
Live Longer,
Markus
http://www.myresveratrolexperience.com
In fact, there is a pill out there that equals 3K resveratrol
Great article! BTW to the earlier poster, the present Resveratrol product you are referencing, is actually equivalent to 3000 glasses (not bottles) of Resveratol *PER MONTH* of consumption. Not quite 3000 bottles squeezed into one single pill as you suggest, and certainly nothing like the breakthru underway to deliver 1000 times the potency into one session, as is under Phase II trial now with a new chemical to activate SIRT1 :) Let's keep cheering these breakthrus on and cross your fingers for FDA approval soon!
How quickly we seek to
How quickly we seek to dismiss a new technology that may extend our lives.
How quickly we forget that we already depend on such technologies to keep us alive.
Throughout most of human history, you were lucky if you hit 20 -- let alone 30.
That's the age we have a "right" to -- the average age our bodies can manage without the intervention of technology. Old enough to reproduce and raise our children to an age where they might survive without us.
You want to help the social security problem by preventing "excessive aging"? Banish all artificial technologies. Get rid of antibiotics. Surgery for an inflamed appendix. Instead of a simple procedure, how about a life-threatening event? Instead of cleaning and stitching a would, let it get septic, turn gangrene and watch as your body is invaded by blackening flesh. Get rid of safe food. Introduce widespread famine while you're at it. Address obesity at the same time. Die in childbirth. Watch your children die in your arms for a lack of clean drinking water.
And what's this about the "rich" outliving the poor? One might conclude you haven't been paying attention to the last five thousand years. The rich always outlive the poor. Perhaps we should start executing the better off if they surpass the average age of a poor person. God forbid that we help the less fortunate to live longer. Nooooo ... couldn't do that!
If we created a life extension pill that sold for pennies a day -- and you can already get high doses of resveratrol for far less than a dollar a day -- that sounds like quite equalizer to me. A cheap pill, widely available to all -- the solution to improved health, vitality and lifespan.
You complain that a life extension pill would burden our medical system.
Better to retain the current system, where we spend more in this country than any other nation on health care. And what do we get for our money? Do we live the longest? Have the healthiest citizenry?
Actually -- we rank 37th. Well, at least we beat out Slovenia.
You argue that the result of such a life extension technology would be pollution, poverty and overcrowding. Hmm. Interesting argument based on -- what exactly? Sounds an awful lot like stepping back into, say, 1850 London.
As to poverty -- the human race has never known such riches as enjoys knows today. Thanks to the fruits of our minds -- learning, technology, advanced social and societal structures. As our lifespans increase, so to does our world-wide wealth. Our best minds continue to be productive and contribute, and our collective wealth increases.
Imagine a nation where, instead of scientists being able to contribute to the sum of human knowledge for perhaps 50% of their lives before dying off -- and needing to be replaced by individuals needing 30 years just to get intellectually caught up to their predecessors -- instead, our scientists could continue to contribute, pushing the edges of our knowledge well into their 90s and beyond. Instead of a quarter of life spent getting educated, and another quarter spent in ever-increasing sickness, decrepit health, weakness, ever-increasing health care costs, and eventual death ... instead of this, humans would spend an ever-increasing percentage of their lives being productive, growing intellectually, growing in global consciousness and awareness, growing spiritually, and contributingto the human race.
Imagine a world where the wisdom of decades -- even a century? -- of hard-fought experience is not lost to the grave. A world where our elders are venerated for their insight and continuing vital, energetic contributions.
See Ray Kurzweil and his prediction where we're headed -- a technological event he calls The Singularity.
Just as the solution to pollution is found by technology and our best minds at work, so too will the problems of today be solved by the minds of tomorrow. The more productive those minds can be, the faster those solutions will arrive, and the better they'll benefit us.
As to over-population -- the world isn't overpopulated by old people and never has been. The world experiences increasing population primarily via the poorest sectors of the world, by parents who seek to create a familial social security system, and so seeks to have a dozen or more children. The more children a couple has, the better chance they'll be taken care of when they're old. Again, OLD -- IE physically unable to care for themselves.
In the better-educated, wealthier nations of the world, where social structures exist to care for the aged, the birth rate matches the death rate. Equilibrium is attained. The more wealthy and educated a nation becomes, the less children it has. In Japan, for example, the birth rate is actually *less* than the death rate -- and so the population of Japan is shrinking. The government subsidizes parents to encourage them to have children.
As the human race lives longer, global problems like energy, pollution and over-population will continue to decrease thanks to increasing education, prosperity, and growing contributions from our ever-more-productive citizenry.
One of the reasons the elderly are condescendingly treated like children is a perceived lack of vitality, power of mind, power of body.
Perhaps you picture decrepit 90-year-old invalids, kept alive by a pill but living wretched quasi-lives. Perhaps you picture that because that's what you find today in our nursing homes.
It is precisely that which we seek to wipe free from the process of human aging.
Our bodies needn't slowly betray us, falling apart, withering daily before our eyes.
We can live out our long lifespans with reliable health, strength and vigor -- continuing to be productive, continuing to explore the vast riches of the experience of being human.
When our technologies finally defeat physical degeneration -- and that day will come -- growing older will no longer be a slow, writhing descent into the quicksand of our graves ... but an ongoing celebration of wisdom, experience, knowledge and life.