Another great presentation Bruce. I also lament the underwhelming rate of progress, especially in age-related diseases like cancer (3% gain in 5-year survival after 20 years of research and hundreds of billions spent -- hopefully 'new' paradigms I/O will steepen the slope). Most biopharma resources go into oncology and yet we can barely move the needle for solid tumors -- maybe we need fresh ideas. The major risk factor for cancer, CVD, and dementia is biological age. So what if we could target the molecular damage that causes aging, and thereby all of these diseases? We can already extend healthy lifespan in mice by up to 30% with no negative side effects -- for example, by senescent cell ablation, autophagy enhancement, and various types of gene and cell therapy that address the primary, causal 'Hallmarks of Aging.' This 'geroscience' approach is led by groups like Apollo Ventures and Cambrian Biopharma (in stealth mode, stay tuned) -- target the biology of aging and develop a 'pipeline-in-a-pill' for multiple age-related diseases and, one day, as a prophylactic against aging itself. Keep up the great work. "From discoveries in ageing research to therapeutics for healthy ageing" www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1365-2 "The Hallmarks of Aging" www.cell.com/fulltext/S0092-8674(13)00645-4
Completely agreed. Anyone in biotech who isn't watching the aging space has no understanding of pathophysiology of age-related disease - i.e. as related to the Hallmarks of Aging. Even last week seeing that BS about CRISPR having a chance at 'curing' CVD by targeting cholesterol is revealing. Imagine thinking cholesterol matters in heart disease when it is a mere 3x risk factor as compared to aging, a 5000x risk factor: imgur.com/gallery/i2mYKze The aging biology field WILL revolutionise medicine; at least inform yourself if you don't know what I'm talking about; the number of papers published in CNS journals on aging in the last decade has exploded and the geroscience hypothesis will see its light of day.
Another great presentation Bruce.
I also lament the underwhelming rate of progress, especially in age-related diseases like cancer (3% gain in 5-year survival after 20 years of research and hundreds of billions spent -- hopefully 'new' paradigms I/O will steepen the slope). Most biopharma resources go into oncology and yet we can barely move the needle for solid tumors -- maybe we need fresh ideas.
The major risk factor for cancer, CVD, and dementia is biological age. So what if we could target the molecular damage that causes aging, and thereby all of these diseases? We can already extend healthy lifespan in mice by up to 30% with no negative side effects -- for example, by senescent cell ablation, autophagy enhancement, and various types of gene and cell therapy that address the primary, causal 'Hallmarks of Aging.' This 'geroscience' approach is led by groups like Apollo Ventures and Cambrian Biopharma (in stealth mode, stay tuned) -- target the biology of aging and develop a 'pipeline-in-a-pill' for multiple age-related diseases and, one day, as a prophylactic against aging itself. Keep up the great work.
"From discoveries in ageing research to therapeutics for healthy ageing"
www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1365-2
"The Hallmarks of Aging"
www.cell.com/fulltext/S0092-8674(13)00645-4
Completely agreed. Anyone in biotech who isn't watching the aging space has no understanding of pathophysiology of age-related disease - i.e. as related to the Hallmarks of Aging.
Even last week seeing that BS about CRISPR having a chance at 'curing' CVD by targeting cholesterol is revealing.
Imagine thinking cholesterol matters in heart disease when it is a mere 3x risk factor as compared to aging, a 5000x risk factor: imgur.com/gallery/i2mYKze
The aging biology field WILL revolutionise medicine; at least inform yourself if you don't know what I'm talking about; the number of papers published in CNS journals on aging in the last decade has exploded and the geroscience hypothesis will see its light of day.