The "Cure" for Human Aging

“Aubrey David Nicholas Jasper de Grey, Ph.D., (born April 20, 1963 in London, England) is a researcher at CIRCA, the Cambridge Interdisciplinary Research Centre on Ageing. He is working to expedite the development of a “cure” for human aging, a medical goal he refers to as engineered negligible senescence. To this end, he has identified what he concludes are the seven areas of the aging process that need to be addressed medically before this can be done. He has been interviewed in recent years in many news sources, including CBS 60 Minutes, BBC, the New York Times, Fortune Magazine, and Popular Science.”

“The De Grey Technology Review controversy is a debate over the validity of the ideas of Aubrey de Grey, published in MIT’s Technology Review. Aubrey de Grey believes that human aging is like any disorder with a homeostatically low entropy system, and that it can, in principle, be eliminated. He has identified what he says are the seven causes of human aging, and has proposed remedies for each cause. He calls his proposals Strategies for Engineered Negligible Senescence (SENS).” … ontroversy

See also

"SENS is a detailed plan for curing human aging. SENS is an engineering project, recognising that aging is a medical condition and that medicine is a branch of engineering. Aging is a set of progressive changes in body composition, at the molecular and cellular level, which are side-effects of essential metabolic processes. Many of these changes are eventually bad for us – they are an accumulation of damage, which becomes pathogenic above a certain threshold of abundance.

The traditional gerontological approach to life extension is to try to slow down this accumulation of damage. This is a misguided strategy, firstly because it requires us to improve biological processes that we do not adequately understand, and secondly because it can even in principle only retard aging rather than reverse it. An even more short-termist alternative is the geriatric approach, which is to try to stave off pathology in the face of accumulating damage; this is a losing battle because the continuing accumulation of damage makes pathology more and more inescapable.

Instead, the engineering (SENS) strategy is not to interfere with metabolism per se, but to repair or obviate the accumulating damage and thereby indefinitely postpone the age at which it reaches pathogenic levels. This is practical because it avoids both of the problems with the other approaches: it sidesteps our ignorance of metabolism (because it does not attempt to interfere with metabolic processes and their production of side-effects) but also it pre-empts the chaos of pathology (because it repairs the precursors of pathology, rather than addressing the pathology head-on)"

  • Should we cure human aging?
  • Is it possible to cure human aging?
  • Do you think that you will be able to get the “cure” in time?
  • What about the social, political, economic, moral consequences?
  • Would you like to live “forever”?

Post your comments here.

Another rip-off…millions will be made…

The only to ‘cure’ aging is to rotate into the fourth dimension. Whatever ‘cure’ we make will age itself. We may extend our lives, possibly by 100 years, but nothing can escape the tick of time.

What makes you believe such a thing? Are you familiar with Audrey De Grey’s work? I included key links in my post for further information.


I heard a gene biologist once say “age is determined by the amount of junk in a cell.”

That low rate of entropy might be related to the accumulation of cellular junk in individual cells, resulting in the disintegration of tissue in general; the “aging” process.

You!! :smiley:

Yes, among other things. Audrey De Grey identifies 7 specific causes of aging. You’ll find all the information you need here:

If you’re not convinced that he’s legitimite, read this:



I should say nothing escapes in the same form. We all dissipate. Our parts will change and be absorbed elsewhere.
The only thing that does not age is the photon in the fourth dimension. I have witnessed plate tests to prove this. We know where the photon goes and how the electron buzz about it when the photon is in rotating in the fourth dimension.
We know that time is a real thing. We know this doesn’t fit into the big bang theory. We know it fits into a Universe of perpetualty. We know this does not fit in with religion. We know people need religion. We know it would cause alot of problems to disprove religion. We know physics that allows for a creator will always get funding. We know this type of physics will always be taught. We know the general public does and always will live in the dark. We know to ignore the general public. We know to talk to people who are seeking the truth. So that’s where we are.

a cure for aging, perhaps, but not from death, even if you are genetically perfect you will still die at some point.

It would also make sense that if you knew that you wouldn’t age then you would be in no hurry to live so it would likely make little diffrince in the long run.

All the same the concept itself seems intreaging.


Of course if the sun explodes, if you get sucked in a black hole or if you slip off a cliff, you will die, but if not, you will literally live forever (if you accept De Grey’s hypothesis, which no one has suceeded in disproving)!!!

I encourage you to check out his site. You can even make a donation to help fund anti-aging research.

Take care,


Here’s what a donor says here ( on this subject:

"One day a cure for aging will likely be found. At that point, the questions will be asked; “Could we not have made this happen sooner?” and “Why did hundreds of millions of people have to die prematurely and unnecessarily?”

Personally, I do not want to be among those who did nothing. I want to be among those who shared the vision and who cared enough to contribute to its realization. And if it happens in our lifetime, how wonderful that would be!

The Methuselah Prize is a great idea. Science prizes have proved an effective funding method in the past. Starting with the mouse makes sense. If we can capture the public imagination, a vast multiplier effect will result. Hopefully, there will eventually be a large international project specifically targeted at finding ways to extend the human health span. Which is more exciting: the international space station or a cure for aging?

-Nick Bostrom"

I disagree. Everything is subject to change. Nobody and nothing is immune to this great law. And one cannot defy, modify or change God’s laws.

And why does one wants to live forever???
To do the same thing over and over, or try different things every day, to me that is very tiring.

So no, I do not believe we can live forever. We just cannot escape the law of change.

Now, if by literally live forever, you meant, continuity of the germ life, then I believe there is continuity of life, that is if you procreate.

De Grey’s hypothesis is simple to disprove. He has no understanding of time. Until humans can become non-spatial they will age. De Grey has no clue on the nature of reality. Anything spatial will age because of the motion that makes it spatial.

Key word in this topic- donation. Save your money people.

he has to overcome the hayflick number for the thousands of different cells in the human body first. what a small little task?

The hayflick number is the amount of times a cell divides itself before it can no longer divide. he would have to figure out how to do break the hayflick number for each cell. That seems like a ways away in the future, and who knows what else he would be up against.

Also, free radicals are everywhere in the body, how do you eliminate ALL of those, seems like an enourmous task, though easier than breaking the hayflick number.

I don’t think escape from mortality is any time soon in our lifetimes, maybe what Aubrey will stumble accross is some findings to give us a nother 10-100 years in the next little while. And that would be pretty groovy. I would like a nother few years to keep playing guitar, skateboarding and cooking hot dogs on the fire.

Aging is not all so bad either for a variety of reasons. For example most sucides happen to people in their 20’s, when they are really extreme, and many report being less neurotic later in their years as they learn to handle life. Life can get better by age if you want it too. I think, at least to an extent.

read and understand . . .

de gray has a lot of work a head of him . . . a lot of work . . . need I say . . . a lot of work!!!

but if it works, hey, I’ll be the first one to get in line. I’d like a few more years.

On his site, Audrey De Grey says this about cell depletion and how to fix it:

"Cell depletion (cell loss without equivalent replacement) happens in some of our most important tissues – particularly the heart and some parts of the brain. It also happens in our muscles. Sometimes the gaps where the cells were are filled up by nearby cells getting bigger (as in the heart), sometimes by replacement by other types of cell or by fibrous acellular material (this happens in the brain and the heart) and sometimes not at all – the tissue just shrinks (this happens in muscle).

Cell depletion can be fixed in three main ways. One is by “natural” stimulation of cell division; this is how exercise increases the size of muscles, though some muscles are much harder to stimulate in this way than others. The second way is by the artificial introduction (e.g., by injection) of growth factors that stimulate cell division; this works well in muscle and may also work in the thymus, an important part of the immune system.

"Both natural and artificial stimulation of cell division have their limitations, however, partly because as a defence against cancer cells have a variety of blocks against dividing excessively. So, for example, there is evidence that stem cells in continuously renewing tissues like the blood tend to get depleted late in life in some mouse strains. This is the main reason why we’ll almost certainly need the third way to fix cell depletion, which is to introduce new whole cells that have been engineered into a state where they will divide to fix the tissue even though cells already present within the body were not doing so. This is what stem cell therapy is. I guess I don’t need to write any more about stem cell therapy: if you’re reading this website, you’re probably interested enough in medical progress that you know plenty about it already.

We need more work in all these three areas, even though they are all progressing very encouragingly."

Audrey De Grey is pretty controversial, and even amongst his peers many consider him a lunatic. I’ve followed his research for years, and I have to give him credit for persistance and thinking outside the box.

David Copperfield claims to have found the fountain of youth…

google that shit.

We shouldn’t be critiquing the person based on hearsay. We should be examining the validity of his proposals. In that regard, nobody has succeeded in disproving his hypothesis that aging can be stopped: … ch=biotech

Hrmm…that also sounds like it makes sense.

Then we shouldn’t be critiquing him at all, since all we have is hearsay. I’ve followed his career for many years and to say his theories are controversial is a mere statement of fact. No one has “disproved” his ideas, but nor has he demonstrated anything that he can prove works, either.

I suspect he’s onto something (as opposed to just being on something) but I’m leery of his rosey estimated timetable.

Cure for aging? All you have to do is eat healthy, follow good eating habits, eat according to your metabolic type, fast once in a while, be sure to clean your body and your organs out once in a while, get enough exercise, get sunlight, etc. You won’t need medications, you won’t get diseases, you won’t even get sick actually, and you’ll rarely have to see a doctor.

Check out a guy named Paul Bragg: died at 95 in a surfing accident (surfing at 95 years old?), and when they checked him out his organs were all as clean as a healthy 18 year old’s organs. It doesn’t mean you won’t die, but you’ll age very well…