Another interview with de Grey

To prolong the fleeting youth, to postpone the inexorable old age, to defeat the diseases that poison the last years of any person's life – these dreams have been exciting the imagination of people for hundreds of years. But the imagination of scientists has never extended beyond 100-150 years of vigorous and healthy life.

And then Aubrey de Grey came and immediately changed people's ideas about the possibilities of science. Who is he, a troublemaker of scientific tranquility?

Professor from HogwartsI strongly advise anyone who wants to know something about this person to look through the British press.

At the same time, get a complete picture of what we enviously call freedom of speech.

What kind of obvious barbs and hidden nastiness you won't read about this "Norman with a hippie appearance", "bearded man in jeans from the garbage dump", "professor from Hogwarts" (who doesn't remember, this is a school of wizards from "Harry Potter") and "a boy raised by a mom – artist and poet in greenhouse conditions".

And about the fact that he does not remember his father, and about the fact that he does not know which end of the pipette is taken (the main tool of an experimental biologist), and about the fact that he drinks beer immoderately and loves sweets... Well, just a hero of the tabloid press – a superstar, a showman and a sex symbol in one person.

And all because Aubrey de Grey was the first to dare to say that old age can and should be defeated and that modern science is quite capable of it. And that in 30 years people will be able to live for 150 years, and during this time new methods will be created to push back old age by 1000 years, and then by 5000 – in general, to make a person practically immortal.

And he doesn't just talk, as is typical of some of the scientific celebrities. No, a professor from Cambridge has created a large-scale international anti-aging plan "Strategies for Engineered Senescence (SENS)". In Russian, it will sound something like this: "The strategy of aging management by engineering methods." It brought together scientists conducting research in this field. Together they created the Methuselah Foundation, which sponsors part of the work, and also established the Methuselah Mouse Prize – for scientists who can prolong the life of a laboratory mouse and improve its quality for as long as possible. While the absolute record belongs to the endocrinologist from the University of Southern Illinois Andrzej Bartke. His mouse lived without 6 days for five years – twice as long as a normal laboratory sufferer. And that's something!

But how "crazy" (also a quote from British newspapers) a mathematician, a certified programmer turned into a gerontologist with world fame?

Cherche la femmeIt is known that all great discoveries are made either for the sake of a woman or for a woman.

After graduating from university, Aubrey wrote dibuggers – programs that helped catch "bugs", that is, errors in computer programs.

But in 1990, at a friendly party, he met an American Adelaide Carpenter, a geneticist, a specialist in fruit flies. He was 27, she was 46. He was a young bachelor, she was a lady who had gone through two marriages. First there was love, and then he, with his mouth open, listened to her stories or listened at first, and then love was born, it doesn't matter.

The important thing is that the young programmer is immersed in biology. His biological education took place at the dinner table, the newspapers snide. They lie, he graduated from university again, studied tons of literature. And already in 1995 he wrote a paper on mutations in mitochondria (these are the main energy substations of our cells), which stirred up professionals. Aubrey, who really did not experiment himself, only by the power of his own intellect gave an explanation of the processes that geneticists saw, but could not grasp the meaning. In fact, this is how he has remained to this day – a powerful theorist who knows how to generalize and interpret the scattered findings of other scientists. Such brains are always worth their weight in gold in science.

And they are still together with Adelaide. And if Aubrey created his bold theories for the sake of his beloved ("he took up aging because his wife no longer has any of her teeth," the free press is sophisticated), then personally in my eyes this makes him a great romantic hero of our time. You'll see, immortal novels will be written about them.

What does he offerActually, the essence of de Grey's theory is that today seven main causes of aging are already known – seven "breakdowns" of natural mechanisms.

Methods of overcoming them are also known (some of them have already been created). At public lectures, he demonstrates two tables – this and that. We have brought them into one for convenience.

Aubrey de Grey believes that in 25-30 years most of the methods of preventing "breakdowns" will be available in the clinic. And this will extend the life of 60-year-olds to 150 years. And over the years, the methods of preventing "breakdowns" will be improved to such an extent that every person will be able to undergo "maintenance" regularly, each time pushing aging back another 30, 50, 100 years – and so on indefinitely.

The technical terms are understandable here – mathematician de Gray likes to compare a person with a car. And it proves that if you take care of your car, regularly go through maintenance, replace worn parts, etc., you can drive it for at least a hundred years, at least two hundred. And shows pictures of antique cars on the go.

To all the objections of opponents that man is still not a machine, but somewhat more complicated, that new techniques will be very expensive and not accessible to everyone, that they will generate new social tension, that the Earth will face overpopulation if everyone lives for a thousand years, he has quite reasonable, although not always convincing, refutations.

The most important obstacle on the way of mankind to achieve a long, healthy and happy life, says the magician from Cambridge, is our skepticism and inability to dream. The devil knows, maybe he's right?

Table
Seven is a lucky number (by Aubrey de Grey) №

Source: lecture by Aubrey de Grey, materials of the Russian Foundation "Science for Life Extension".Aubrey de Grey: "We need enthusiasts"

The famous scientist answered the questions of the columnist Tatiana Bateneva.



Question: Even if you promised people 200-300 years of life, it would still be a shock. So where did this number come from – 1000 years?

answer: I don't like to talk about life expectancy at all, it was invented by journalists. My goal is to save people from suffering and diseases that old age inevitably brings with it. And a long life will be a "side effect" of achieving this goal.

Q: And why did you decide that people want to live so long? Most of us lead a very difficult life, actually struggling for existence. I interviewed 12 people – how many years would they like to live if they don't get sick and don't get old? Of the options 120, 200, 300, 500, 1000, the majority chose 120...

A: This is one of the reasons why I don't like to talk about specific life extension dates. I have no idea how long people will want to live. I can't even imagine how much I myself would like. But I know for sure that I would like to have a choice. I think if a person is healthy and cheerful, he never wants to die. And when such technologies are available and it will be possible to extend life for as long as you want, it is logical to assume that people will want to... It doesn't look like I've convinced you.

Q: Well, let's assume... You are very optimistic that scientific methods that can be used to postpone old age will be available to many people in 25-30 years...

A: Why do you think this is too optimistic?

Q: Because so far all the bold technologies – from human cloning to the use of embryonic stem cells – do not meet our expectations... Why do you think others will be more successful?

A: You are right, some technologies are not working as we expected yet. But some are quite successful and will be available quickly enough. In addition, scientists have an intuition that allows us to guess how technologies will develop. In addition, any goal can be achieved by a large number of alternative technologies. My intuition comes from the technologies and the knowledge that we already have.

Q: And my intuition tells me that nature protects its secrets much more than we previously assumed... Aren't you afraid of that?

A: No. Perhaps the problem will be much more complicated than we assume now. But all I'm saying is that we have a 50% chance that these technologies will be available in the next 25 years. Of course, there is a 10% chance that we won't get them in 100 years. But 50% is a very good chance to try to achieve a result. There are examples in medicine when she was able to save a huge number of lives, even without having a complete understanding of diseases. So, we won the battle against infections when we realized how important hygiene is when we started vaccinating people. And although they didn't know anything about the immune system at that time, they saved millions of people...

q: There is still a difference – the soap actually cost nothing. And the production of vaccines is not as expensive as the technologies you prophesy about... But I won't ask about the economic side, I know your arguments.

A: Why, I would just like to talk about it. I don't want you to leave with the conviction that this analogy doesn't fit. Why don't you agree with her?

Q: Because I've been writing about medicine for many years. Over the years, only things that can be produced industrially have become cheaper: medicines, vaccines. High-tech technologies are only becoming more expensive. And yours will also require an individual approach.

A: I have two answers. Firstly, it is not entirely correct to say that high technologies are not suitable for mass production. But some, of course, will be difficult for this. However, there are a huge number of technologies that are expensive, but we still don't ask people to pay for them. For example, general education, which is free in most countries. What is the difference between education and medicine? The fact that education works, but medicine works poorly. Therefore, education is a good investment for the state, and medicine, especially the treatment of the elderly, is an unprofitable investment. But the medicine of the future that we offer will be different. It will be economically profitable, even if it is expensive. And the same logic that justifies free education today will apply to it.

Q: The next question is philosophical, so I'm counting on a short answer. (De Grey laughs.) Do you think a scientist is responsible for the consequences of his discoveries?

a: Not responsible for the consequences, but certainly responsible for reliable information about possible consequences. In my case, there is a great danger that politicians, sociologists, philosophers will talk about the possibility of prolonging life, meaning prolonging old age. It is my duty to convey to society that we are talking about prolonging youth and preserving health, so that the discussion is correct.

Q: You are often asked about the economic and social consequences of extending your life span. And I'm worried about something else – a possible change in the morality of society. Now the brevity of life makes a person hurry – to get an education, have children, achieve something... And an infinitely long life will change everything: there is no need to rush with anything, you can live for your own pleasure. In part, you yourself confirm this when you say that you will not need to follow a healthy lifestyle – if anything, everything will be "fixed" for you...

A: I can imagine such a development. But I can also imagine why this won't happen... For example, I think that now many young people are not trying to achieve something just because they have too little time. But maybe I'm wrong? The best way to check is to ask sociologists to investigate this problem. But it will be bad if you and I offer only pessimistic options for the development of events.

Q: Art and literature always try to comprehend such problems before science. Do you remember the fate of your namesake Dorian Gray, who got the gift of eternal youth and beauty?

A: When people write books or put on plays about the future, the main thing is to sell them. Therefore, they offer what people want to hear or see. Then people feel calmer: if the victory over aging brings a negative result, you can not think about this problem in real life. Until recently, we had no real prerequisites to think about defeating aging. But now it's very bad, we need enthusiasts to work on this problem to bring the result closer.

Q: I think there will be no shortage of enthusiasts.

A: It already exists, that's the point. Here you are a pessimist.

Q: Maybe because I'm not going to live to see your victory?

A: Do you have children? Is it important to you that they get access to these features?

Q: Of course.

A: Well, you need to become an enthusiast of this idea, because otherwise they may not live either.

Q: I know you don't like to answer personal questions. But I'll take a chance. Is it true that you drink a lot of beer?

A: Probably more than you. But I don't drink too much, mostly I drink beer when I travel.

Q: And in which country is the best beer?

A: In England.

Q: So you are a patriot?

A: No, just because I'm from England. If I were from France, I would probably drink wine.

Q: You have an original appearance, unusual for a scientist. Is this the result of beliefs or are you just too lazy to shave?

A: The only reason is that my wife likes this image...

Q: This is the best explanation I could have hoped for!

A: And my mother hates him. But I see her much less often than I see my wife.

q: It is easy and pleasant to make forecasts for 20-30 years. There is an oriental parable about a wise man who promised the sultan to teach a donkey to speak for 20 years in the hope that during this period either the sultan will die or the donkey will die. Can you make a forecast for the next five years? What successes can we expect in the fight against aging?

A: I think there will be progress in cell therapy – it can already be used to treat several diseases. There are hopes for a breakthrough in gene therapy. But this progress will be "patchy", incomplete. Therefore, you should not relax, you need to do more serious things.

Q: I suggest we meet in 5 years and talk about whether your predictions have come true.

A: And it will depend on what you write in your article.

Q: Will you read everything that Russian journalists will write about you?

a: No, of course not, but I will certainly ask Alex (de Gray's assistant for the Alex Zhavoronkov Foundation. – T.B.) to translate for me.

Portal "Eternal youth" www.vechnayamolodost.ru12.03.2009