The scientists must prove that their therapies can meet a high standard. To turn back the biological clock by 10 years. The prize is open for 7 years. This is a real offer, and the X-Prize has a track record. Over the years the X-Prize Foundation have awarded multiple prizes to aid humanity.

The Longevity meeting of the UK Research and Innovation (See Newsletter #137) asked where healthy years can come from. Can science solve the problem, or do we need a shift in the habits of Society? Should the change be driven by Government or Business? This question was posed during the Challenge meeting I described last week. Participants in groups of 8 were given a two-by-two chart. One dimension was the science versus behaviour change split. The second Government versus Business. We were asked to sign up to a square.

The X Prize clearly knows in which square it fits. It believes in the power of science. It is biased towards commercial organizations. Looking back over the whole Longevity Week there were protagonists in each corner.

A Problem Definition.

Across the week there was a consensus on the nature of the problem. Current medical systems around the world are designed to treat sick people. In fact, to treat people who are already showing signs of disease. They are highly specialized and siloed. At least according to Sir John Bell, Regus Professor of Medicine at Oxford University. They have achieved much over the last thirty years and have extended life expectancy dramatically. They have been extremely innovative.

The challenges they face have now changed. They are dealing with an ageing population and a set of chronic diseases. According to him, those diseases are very much inter-related and “hunt in packs”. Solving this problem means focusing much earlier in the life of an individual. The target needs to be prevention. Something that most health systems are not designed for.

The Case for Science

Sir John gave an upbeat lecture at the Royal Society of Arts. He believes that science can come to the rescue. He argues for a system that can do three things. It must be able to identify people who are at risk early in their lives. It must be able to diagnose diseases before the symptoms appear. It must then be able to treat diseases at their earliest stages when they are most susceptible. His argument is that there is an emerging renaissance in healthcare that can do all this. For example, there is already a blood test that can measure the DNA produced by different types of cancer tumours. It does not currently diagnose some diseases such as prostate cancer, but it does for many others.

The “Our Future Heath” Initiative in the UK has already recruited over one million people. Sir John is the Chairman. Participants provide a blood sample and a DNA sample. They allow access to their medical records. The purpose is to provide individual risk assessment. In Abu Dhabi these ideas are already in operation on a country wide level. The M42 Group has genomic data on the whole population. It has integrated the data into the health care system. Its precision medicine approach has moved medicine early in a patient’s life. Last week the UK Biobank released 300,000 cases. Each represents a (disguised) individual with their DNA profile and full medical history. Researchers can access this and develop risk models for different diseases.

Obesity is part of the chronic disease problem. There are strong relationships between obesity and all chronic diseases. It increases your chances of: diabetes; chronic heart diseases of all kinds; many cancers etc. The new obesity drug is demonstrating the potential impact in trials going on now. As expected, it can reduce weight by 20%. Sir John showed that it has also reduced the incidence of heart attacks, strokes, and heart failure by 20%. It has reduced chronic renal failure and even showing improvements in mental health. Of course you do not need a drug just to lose weight. Other new drugs are now helping with the treatment of chronic diseases. As we heard in other newsletters most patients on statins will stop taking them within the first year (Newsletter #123 People Do Not Take Their Pills Anyway.) ORION-11 is under clinical trial. This is a genomic drug that provides a 54% reduction in cholesterol. It is administered with an annual injection.

The Longevity Week included a whole day on scientific breakthroughs held at Oriel College Oxford. It included a presentation on epigenic clocks. These would enable the X-Prize to be measured. Dietary strategies and the gut microbiome were covered. There was a session on ovarian ageing, preservation and restoration. This is the case for a “scientific” solution. In many places provided by a government.

The Case for Behaviour Change

There are many successes in this field. Smoking is a contagious “disease”. However, the public health campaigns have been successful against it (see Newlsetter # 136). Social proscribing is growing. UK doctors are prescribing everything from gardening and exercise to food. The “needle is being moved”. There is a growing focus on creating "healthy” cities. Sir Muir Gray is Director of the Optimal Ageing Programme. He argued for individuals to take ownership of their own health. His case was that if they did not help themselves no one else would. To achieve this we needed both transparency of medical records and an eco-system of support.

Bryan Johnson who opened the Longevity Week is a prime example of Sir Muir’s case. As a very successful entrepreneur he is now dedicating himself to reversing his own ageing. He is spending $2m of his own money every year to do it. He has adopted all known recommendations. He restricts his diet in amount and content. He regulates his sleep and exercises every day. He monitors the atmosphere around him and will not go out in pollution or sunshine. If you want to follow his example there are plenty of Websites

The advocate for a science based solution argue that the pattern is the problem. The impact of behaviour change programmes is greater in affluent areas. Education and lifestyle both help adoption. This is the major cause of the increase in the health disparity between high and low deprivation areas. My group of eight argued that the reality is that we need to deploy everything. We need science and behaviour change. We need government and commerce.