Why scientists care about intervening in the aging process | Dr. Morgan Levine

Dr. Morgan Levine is a distinguished scientist and researcher specializing in the field of biogerontology, the study of the biological processes of aging. She is renowned for her pioneering work in developing innovative methods to measure biological aging, with a keen focus on understanding how aging occurs at a molecular level and identifying potential interventions to slow down or reverse this process.

Levine's work integrates various disciplines, including epidemiology, molecular biology, and bioinformatics, to explore the complex mechanisms that drive aging. She has contributed significantly to the development of biomarkers of aging, which are critical in assessing the effectiveness of anti-aging interventions and in predicting age-related diseases before they manifest clinically.

One of her notable contributions is the development of the "epigenetic clock," a tool that uses DNA methylation patterns to measure biological age, which can differ from chronological age. This groundbreaking research has opened new avenues for the early detection of age-related diseases and for evaluating the impact of lifestyle, environmental factors, and therapeutic interventions on the aging process.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Go Deeper with Big Think:

►Become a Big Think Member

►Get Big Think+ for Business

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[greyeyed]

If I live to 200, do I still get my retirement after 30 years?

[vnoljnl]

B.s. the day they find a viable age reversing technique... is the day there will be an true 2nd class of people. The likes the world has never known.

[kayskreed]

Slowing or "reversing" ageing wouldn't change the fact that we are mortal, though it would have ramifications such as the people who have access to that technology (i.e. the wealthy) versus those who don't. It would also affect social dynamics, economics, environment and so on. It would bring about a major shift in society.

[mtn]

If they could just figure out the arthritis, worn out backs, senility, etc it would be worth putting an expiration age down, say 100 or so. A quality life to 100.

[ThePapawhisky]

It is exciting! Of course a quick way to improve longevity in the US is to abandon medical insurance and go to national healthcare. Our life expectancy is actually getting shorter.

[ceejayone]

Have they solved the problem of cell replication causing uncontrolled cell mutation over time as telemeter degraded? As she has said a lot of words without explaining what she talking about. All she says is the possible benefit.

[The_WarriorsWay]

Scientist care about ageing because there are many rich clients who want to be immortal and they have crazy amount of money

[nodozhit]

I think the solution lies within stimulating the complete elasticity of the neurological network.
In other words, supplement or enhance the nervous system, in order to rejuvenate the entire body. Teach the brain to send the right message throughout the body.

[massimookissed]

That would just *_delay_* the onset of those diseases.
You'll still get age-related diseases, just later.

[Wanderlauch]

Remember what a cell does if it doesn't want to die.

[nub-cake]

Lol just adding a comment that's nice - If you're reading this you're amazing!

[groovetube]

There is a simple way to do this. It’s called exercise.

[ArcherDiesel]

Exactly, there’s no point in living to 150 if you’re still in a wheel chair suffering from other things and not living to the fullest.

[videoslogmos]

If we will live much longer, we're just going to have more empty days.
Because: "Oh, I'll do that later. I still have 200 years more".
Activity of humankind will slow down dramatically.

[solm]

Is this flip coin to the debates around Crispr? 🤔
Also, aren’t age-related syndromes diseases, and conditions too complex (even if, in cases, they can coincide or be causal to one another) for the kind of simplified solution this clip suggests? Could we end up using the discovery of intervention to improve one condition but exacerbate or trigger another? And are we prepared to assume those risks?.

I am not necessarily against this approach: if it promotes a more integrated/holistic manner of diagnosis and treatment or management, then it may be much better than the piecemeal jigsaw puzzle (fwhich exists for better and for worse, and as a matter I’d practical reality) that we currently utilize.

However, how can we be careful as this approach moves forward in testing and rolling out? How can we account for social and other factors that can impact interpretation of results? And then of course, the cost and accessibly issues—scaling up doesn’t guarantee widespread access. It’s also a matter of public policy and cross-sectional and multi-stakeholder partnerships.

[L.I.T.H.I.U.M]

So, I still have 180 years to ask her out.

[pariskittrell]

I don’t think it should be about aging. We aren’t even getting old to be dying. People under 30 are getting colon cancer.

[petervandenengel]

One cannot assume a pain killer makes disappear a broken leg.

[howardlanus]

Who will get it first? Those that need it most? Or those that will pay the most?

[MV]

As someone with dissociative identity disorder age is overrated.