Future of Anti-Aging Research: New Interventions to Extend Healthspan and Lifespan

Jump To Section

• Current Anti-Aging Interventions
• Breaking Maximum Lifespan Barrier
• Societal Implications of Longevity
• Funding Challenges in Aging Research
• Taking Charge of Personal Aging
• Full Transcript

Current Anti-Aging Interventions

Dr. Brian Kennedy, MD, discusses the current landscape of anti-aging research. He expresses optimism for interventions like rapamycin and Metformin. Periodic fasting and time-restricted feeding also show promise for health benefits.

Dr. Kennedy is less optimistic about traditional calorie restriction. He notes it is not very easy for most people to maintain. These current interventions may offer moderate effects on aging, potentially adding up to 10 years of extra health.

Breaking the Maximum Lifespan Barrier

A fundamental question in longevity research is breaking the maximum human lifespan barrier. Dr. Brian Kennedy, MD, explains that average lifespan has increased but maximum lifespan has not risen at the same rate. Current interventions may help people live healthier for longer, which is a huge win.

Dr. Kennedy suggests that more radical strategies may be needed to significantly extend maximum lifespan. He mentions possibilities like cellular reprogramming and gene therapy. These futuristic approaches are still in early stages of development for human application.

Societal Implications of Longevity

Significant life extension would have profound societal implications. Dr. Brian Kennedy, MD, addresses common concerns about overpopulation. He argues that population grows geometrically through birth rates, not linearly through extended lifespans.

Changes from life extension would occur gradually over time. Dr. Kennedy believes most implications would probably be good, though some are unpredictable. These changes would happen alongside other global transformations, making precise predictions difficult.

Funding Challenges in Aging Research

Dr. Brian Kennedy, MD, highlights significant funding challenges in aging research. The National Institute on Aging receives less than 1% of the NIH budget. This is despite aging being the primary risk factor for most diseases that affect everyone.

The interview with Dr. Anton Titov, MD, reveals entrenched systems focused on disease treatment rather than prevention. Dr. Kennedy has advocated for 15 years for governments to rethink research funding priorities. He emphasizes the growing urgency as the percentage of older people in the population continues to increase dramatically.

Taking Charge of Personal Aging

Dr. Brian Kennedy, MD, offers practical advice for individuals interested in longevity. He recommends focusing on lifestyle factors that influence aging. While challenging, these interventions can provide significant health value.

Dr. Kennedy also discusses emerging natural products and interventions for measuring aging. He acknowledges most are not fully validated yet, making users early adopters. The most important message from Dr. Brian Kennedy, MD, is that the rate of aging is not inevitable and can be changed through conscious effort.

Full Transcript

Dr. Anton Titov, MD: What is the future in longevity research? Will we still be talking about rapamycin, Metformin, and caloric restrictions 10 years from now?

Dr. Brian Kennedy, MD: Let's put it this way. I hope we're talking about a range of new things that have bigger effects than these interventions. I think that's very possible. I am very optimistic about rapamycin to some extent, Metformin, and periodic fasting.

I don't think calorie restriction is very useful. It is not very easy for most people. But using time-restricted feeding or something like that may be beneficial.

I think these are going to have moderate effects on aging. If we're lucky, maybe that's 10 years of extra health. That's a big effect. What would you pay for that?

However, I think the bigger question is, can we really break the barrier down? You talk to the more futuristic thinkers in the field—Aubrey de Grey comes to mind—and they're talking about living to 1,000.

On the other hand, it's not clear how easy it's going to be to break down the maximum lifespan in humans. That has certainly not gone up at the same rate that the average lifespan has gone up.

So if these interventions we have right now get everybody living healthy longer, that's great. That's a huge win—bigger than any disease drug.

But I think the fundamental question right now is, how do we break down that barrier to maximum aging? That's still a very, very open question.

It's been possible to do it in animal models, but the data is lacking in humans. We may need to think about different kinds of interventions to achieve that goal, like reprogramming, gene therapy, or other things that go beyond the current level of intervention.

I think the personal approaches we're testing are going to be great. I'm very optimistic, but I'm hoping that there is more.

There are radical strategies that are at least being tested in a decade to go beyond that level. But the societal implications of a technology that can really break through that barrier are going to be huge.

Somebody said about the progress of science: the proponents of new theories almost never win. It is the proponents of old theories who eventually die.

I think the other way of saying it is that scientific progress goes one funeral at a time. I hope we can get beyond that. We need to be more open-minded and put our own egos aside a little bit for the betterment of healthcare.

But you're partly right—there's certainly a lot of entrenchment. That's part of the reason it's been hard to get aging funding.

The NIH was set up in the '60s with the idea of funding disease research. At that time, that made sense. All the research is around disease; most therapies treat diseases as if they're individual entities, even though we know they're connected.

The National Institute on Aging gets less than 1% of the budget, even though aging is the only thing that affects everybody in the United States.

It's so entrenched that if you go to other institutes and say, "We need more money in aging because aging is causing your disease," you can imagine the response you get.

Governments need to rethink where they're putting their research dollars and how they're doing their medical care. They should focus more on prevention and a little less on building nursing homes.

Those kinds of changes have to happen. I've been talking about this for 15 years, and my own brain shuts off when I talk about it anymore.

But it's getting more and more urgent that something happens because the percentage of older people in the population has continued to skyrocket.

There are huge societal implications if we stop aging. Even if you stop aging completely, changes would be relatively slow.

The year after you've got the magic pill, people would be one year older. The next year, they would be two years older. It's not like we're suddenly going to have 200-year-old people.

So those changes and the rate of technology advances are relatively gradual. In the long term, certainly, there are big implications if people live a lot longer.

I think most of those are probably good, and some are unpredictable. But those changes are not happening in a vacuum—they're happening in a world that's changing in many other ways simultaneously.

It's a little hard to predict. People have this doom about overpopulation—I don't think that's an issue.

Population grows by birthing and geometric expansion, not so much by making people live a few years longer. That's a linear expansion.

So I don't think that's the concern. But there are other changes that will be really interesting and impactful.

Dr. Anton Titov, MD: Professor Kennedy, is there anything in your interest, your experience, or your wisdom that you'd like to share with our viewers?

Dr. Brian Kennedy, MD: Yeah, I think we're at this stage now. Ten years ago, I would say, "We're working on aging; it's gonna be great—just hang in there."

But I think we're at this stage now where it's possible to think about your own aging process and do something. Again, come back to lifestyle—I know it's hard to do, but it's valuable.

Then also, looking at these natural products and other interventions that are out there, measuring your aging—all of these things are potentially very helpful.

Most of them are not fully validated yet, so you'd be an early adopter. If you want to wait until they're fully validated, I understand that.

But I think it's possible to really take charge of your aging. The rate of aging is not inevitable—I think it can be changed.

It's probably the most important thing you can do for your health, so it's worth giving some thought.

Dr. Anton Titov, MD: Well, this is an optimistic note, Professor Kennedy. Thank you very much for this very informative conversation. We certainly will follow your research and come back to you in the future to learn more about how the longevity field progresses to human practice.

Dr. Brian Kennedy, MD: Happy to chat anytime! Thanks a lot!