Senolytics lecture

speaker: Bill Faloon

video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfyite2rvqM

video description: "Age Reversal Network founder Bill Faloon delivered a compelling update lecture on Jan. 24, 2019, on breakthroughs in Age Reversal. He is also the co-founder of Life Extension, the world's largest anti-aging organziation. This special show for ABC TV-25 in Palm Beach and other networks nationwide, was produced by Bill faloon and directed by Richard Peritz."

Summary

In this presentation, the speaker emphasizes the necessity of establishing a foundational "level one" optimization of basic health metrics—such as blood pressure, lipids, glucose, insulin, and homocysteine—before pursuing advanced age-reversal interventions like ?senolytics, such as dasatinib plus quercetin, GDF11, NAD+ boosting, metformin, parabiosis-derived plasma or exosome therapies, and senescent cell clearance. Drawing on 42 years of advocacy since founding the first anti-aging charity in 1977, the speaker reviews surging media and scientific validation, including David Sinclair's NAD+ work, Nir Barzilai's metformin promotion, S. Jay Olshansky's healthspan extension advocacy, a January 2019 Lancet trial demonstrating dasatinib-quercetin safety and efficacy in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, preclinical rejuvenation in senescent cell-cleared mice (extending lifespan ~36% from midlife equivalents), osteoarthritis relief in RAADfest pilot data, and Unity Biotechnology's phase 1 results. The talk cautions against overreliance on single interventions amid prevalent chronic conditions, projects CRISPR/Cas9-driven biological immortality by 2030 if foundational health bridges the gap, and underscores accelerating biomedical returns mirroring historical longevity gains.

Introduction and Foundational Health Caution

Good evening, group. I want to convey some very important, critical data to you. Just so you know, I started the first charity to support anti-aging and immortality research in January 1977, 42 years ago, and I've attended a number of presentations. What Steve Perry put on, in many respects, is one of the most impressive.

But I want to caution everyone that we all are seeking an optimal state of health. We want to create a healthy house. And in order to do that, you have to have a foundation. Unfortunately, a lot of people get all fired up about the ability of something like GDF11 to perform miracles.

A healthy house has to have a foundation, and what a lot of people have been doing—I'm going all the way back to 1977—they would say, "I'm a vegetarian or I exercise a lot, and therefore I don't have to worry about my blood pressure or my lipids and glucose, insulin, homocysteine, etc." They felt that what they were doing was sufficient.

And what a number of people are doing right now, unfortunately, is they're engaging in some of the spectacular age-reversal technologies, but they're forgetting about the foundation. And that's level one in this house of optimal health. It's representative of what your body is seeking to do if you're seeking to live a real long time.

So before you consider engaging in some of these aggressive rejuvenation technologies—and there's a number of them—please do whatever you can to get level one in order so you have a foundation to benefit from the age-reversal interventions, because the harsh reality is that most of us here have at least one chronic condition. Many of us have several chronic medical conditions.

And when we expect a single intervention to reverse that aging process and correct all those problems, it is sometimes expecting too much. And we had some people over the decades—remember, I go back professionally to 1977—who failed to correct the basics, and as a result they had some serious issues. They wound up having strokes, heart attacks, developing malignancies that could have been prevented had they simply kept their house in order.

So if that's something that people don't understand, I hope I can make it clear during this presentation.

Surge in Media Attention on Biological Age Reversal

So what we're seeking to do: the great news is, since the last service here in mid-December, there has been an avalanche of media attention related to biological age reversal. New Year's Eve, leading researcher at Harvard, David Sinclair, talked about new ways of boosting NAD+ in our cells, a critical coenzyme that declines with aging.

Dr. Barzilai at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine continues to advocate for widespread metformin supplementation. The media is picking up on this in a very big way. And even some researchers who in the past were rather pessimistic about the potential of radical life extension occurring are coming around to the fact that at least we can improve our healthspan—meaning as we turn 70, 80, 90, we don't have to degenerate. There is technology out there right now that can keep us healthy as we age.

And he's getting a lot of publicity now because he's advocating people should do what we've been advocating for many decades: take care of yourself so that you can enjoy your older years. Now, Dr. Olshansky—he's not an immortalist, and that's fine. He, though, is disseminating very good information across a wide range of media sources.

Emerging Therapies: Parabiosis, Plasma, and Stem Cells

The prospect of rejuvenating ourselves with young plasma or exosomes from stem cells continues to garner media attention. The idea of taking plasma from a healthy young teenager, putting it into an older person—it is being tested around the world, by the way, all kinds of different stem cell techniques being used to emulate those parabiosis studies. And the media, they continue to pick up on it.

Media Coverage of the Church and Interventions

If you look at the dates of some of the slides I'm going to show you here, they reflect media articles, including this church, which is getting tremendous international attention. A couple months ago, a film crew from Germany was here. They represented a show called Galileo. It is purportedly the 60 Minutes of German-speaking Europe. And in December, they did a whole story about this church and what I and my wife are doing to slow down and reverse our aging process. It was rather positive. It revealed a number of different interventions that we are advocating to enable people to live longer, if not forever.

And the media, they're really neat. They see other media sources talking about living longer, staying healthy longer, and potentially living forever, and they mimic it.

Positive International Media on Immortality Potential

And this is a large publication in Australia. And they ran a headline about the potential of human beings to live forever—or at least another thousand years.

Now, we didn't used to get this kind of favorable publicity. Bear in mind, 42 years ago when I started this, people ridiculed it. The whole notion of reversing aging was considered impossible. And now we're seeing it happen right before our eyes, with those validated markers of aging going reverse. People are doing that right now, and you're learning about that tonight.

Detailed Media Interviews and Scientific Optimism

And this particular article was very positive, because it talked about a number of scientists who are telling the media people yes, we are reversing aging in the laboratory models, and we believe that's also going to occur in people. So the media is picking up on the fact that perpetual life, immortality, is no longer science fiction; it's rapidly transforming into a technology that will be as ubiquitous as the iPhones that you carry in your pocket right now—and those only came around, by the way, at the beginning of this century; they're not that old.

This was an article, by the way, that appeared in November—a very extensive interview. And if you want to spend some time reading the interview with me about what I'm doing, what I'm advocating people do to reverse aging, this article was very good. And that came about because of a popular science article that was again favorable. This article had scientists who were reversing aging in the animal model, and they believe it will work in people. And they called me the forever man because I was the one saying this age-reversal technology is going to eventually lead to physical immortality in people.

Now, the scientists weren't optimistic about immortality, but they were very positive about the fact that they are gonna make older people grow biologically younger.

Prestigious Review on Regenerative Therapies

And we got a really nice gift this month. Bear in mind, this is January 24th. This came out just a couple weeks ago in a prestigious medical journal. They wrapped up the parabiosis research, the senescent cell removal, they brought together all types of regenerative therapies, and they did a massive review. It's a very well-researched article.

These are some of the quotes from this article, again, in a scientific publication, that when it appears in a journal like this, people start paying attention, including medical people who may have been pessimistic until they read a conclusion that aging may be a reversible phenomenon—something that will be reversing our organs, our tissues, our cells, in a way that will make us live much, much longer.

First Human Senolytic Trial: Pulmonary Fibrosis

And what happened in early January was the release of the first human clinical trial in which a senolytic drug combination was used to treat a lethal disease called idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. The average person survives about four years, and then they simply suffocate. They can no longer breathe because their lungs have accumulated so many senescent cells.

They did a small human trial at the Mayo Clinic and some other universities, and they used dasatinib, quercetin—what we've been advocating here for a long time to reverse aging. They used it on these people, and they got some benefits, and they didn't see side effects except for one case. And if someone's dying of pulmonary fibrosis, by the way, and they're given an experimental treatment, well, there's gonna be some person who's gonna have a side effect.

So this is the first published study, published this January 2019 in The Lancet, prestigious medical publication. This is gonna open the eyes of a lot of clinicians out there who are treating people who are suffocating to death, and they realize now that they can treat these people with dasatinib and quercetin and potentially save their lives.

Senolytics: Mechanism and Preclinical Evidence

For some of the new people here, we've been talking about senolytics for a long time. These are compounds that selectively remove these damaged senescent cells from our body so that we don't suffer the consequences of them. Because when your body accumulates senescent cells, well, they create systemic inflammation, they emit protein-destroying enzymes—they're going to kill you. And they're going to make those remaining years miserable with all types of chronic conditions.

In 2015, a study came out showing that senescent cells, when removed from older rodents, induce systemic rejuvenation. These findings were so exciting, it resulted in a tremendous amount of research.

In JAMA, September 2018, just about five months ago, a study came out—a review, more than a study—of all the evidence indicating that using senolytic compounds to remove our senescent cells—something, as Steve just told you, GDF11 can potentially do—that is going to enable biological age reversal, and it's going to alleviate a number of our chronic conditions.

Senolytic Mouse Studies

Now, this is a stark example of some mice. One, to the left, that was a normal, aged mouse. It's in terrible shape, normal aging. And then the mouse given the senolytic compound, starting in midlife—wow, it's not aging. It is not aging the way the normal aged mouse is.

And the group of mice given the senolytic compounds—dasatinib, quercetin—they lived longer. Equivalent is, let's say, a person who's scheduled to die at 80, which is typically when healthy people even die nowadays; you could potentially live to be close to 100. Fantastic data.

And people with chronic kidney failure, heart failure—well, the dasatinib-quercetin-treated mice, those organ functions were improved.

Investment and Media on Senolytics

So we've got Jeff Bezos, founder of Amazon, a number of other billionaires putting big money into senolytic research, and they're seeing results. This is absolutely spectacular. The media picked up on it in July—Time Magazine, Los Angeles Times—talking about dasatinib-quercetin enabling animals to live 36% longer. And what was interesting is they didn't have to start this when those animals were young. They took animals the equivalent of 75 to 90 human years, and they were able to enable them to survive 36% longer and reverse some of the physical decline.

So we're seeing a consensus among scientists that senescent cells are toxic. They contribute to degenerative illnesses, and they kill us soon.

JAMA Caution vs. Ongoing Trials

Now, here's a really interesting quote from JAMA, again, five months ago. The experts say, "Don't do this yet." They say, "Well, we're making old animals young again. You shouldn't try it yourself." Now, we don't agree with that, but neither do the experts. Well, guess what? While they were telling you not to do it, they were already engaged in a clinical study—that clinical study on patients with pulmonary fibrosis. They got the results; it was published, and the media picked up on it.

January 8th, day after the story was published, the media was jumping over the fact that aging is a reversible phenomenon, and the scientists have, for the first time, published a clinical trial showing that dasatinib and quercetin are safe—and they used very high doses, by the way, in this study compared to what we do in treating osteoarthritis—and they got results. They got results, and they showed safety. And that means people who have access to these senolytic compounds can consider using them, though probably not in the dose used to treat these pulmonary fibrosis cases.

RAADfest Osteoarthritis Pilot and Speaker's Use

But that was not the first human study. At RAADfest in September, we announced findings—not published yet, they will be—where we used a different dose of dasatinib, and we used only people who had severe bone-on-bone osteoarthritis. And what we were able to see is 90% of them having significant relief, improved joint function. It lasted about six months, and then the people wanted to redo the dasatinib and quercetin because the pain started to return, which makes sense because the senescent cell burden will continue to accumulate if you don't take care of mopping them up.

And we did do baseline and follow-up MRIs, and we're just waiting now for the radiologist to give us their report. The people, by the way, engaged in these studies—all volunteers; no one making any money at it. We simply trying to prove a concept, and if that concept works, we can disseminate that information so you can take advantage of it, just like I've taken advantage.

But I've undergone the dasatinib protocol. I can't say it did anything for me because I don't have osteoarthritis or pulmonary fibrosis, so I don't know if it worked. But I've got evidence that my aging process is going in reverse, but I'm doing five to ten different interventions; can't tell you which one is working right now.

Recommended Senolytic Dosing Protocol

This is the senolytic dosing protocol we suggest. It's based on your weight. Dasatinib can be a toxic drug, but the low doses we're suggesting, you're probably unlikely to see the toxicity, but we still suggest you base it on your weight.

Now, the Mayo Clinic study, they were just giving the same dose of dasatinib to all of the pulmonary fibrosis cases and a lower dose of quercetin. In our osteoarthritis study, we used a lot more quercetin and less dasatinib in total. We got very good results with the osteoarthritis. And probably the realistic dose is somewhere in between. And the more research we do, the more information we'll be able to disclose.

Challenges with Dasatinib Cost and Sourcing

Now, the big challenge is the cost of dasatinib. It's a cancer drug, meaning the drug company charges a fortune for it. Regrettable. We continue to seek out lower-cost sources from other countries. We're doing assays to see what products have the dasatinib that have been there. And so far, they all have. It's such a cheap chemical to put into a drug. It's kind of ridiculous to sell something that's not real. The oncologist would pick it up real fast if it were leukemia patients buying it. And certainly, we'd pick it up real fast if it wasn't working in osteoarthritis patients.

So we continue to look for compounding pharmacies in the United States who will produce this for us because we think the cost can be under $200 for the dasatinib and the quercetin—very low priced. So we're continuing to seek lower-cost alternatives and also build a network of doctors who will prescribe dasatinib, quercetin, and other interventions aimed at reversing the aging process.

Unity Biotechnology's Phase 1 Results

And the last piece of news—you know, I keep putting these live presentations together, and more and more information keeps coming out. But Unity Biotechnology—they are a group founded by Jeff Bezos and others. They put millions into this company, and they announced findings from a patented drug study. It's a senolytic drug on osteoarthritis patients. They used a low dose, and that low dose was safe. They needed to do that first to move on to Plan B, which is a higher dose, to see if that dose is safe and also effective. Just two days ago, it was released from Unity, the results of their phase one study.

So a lot of people are interested in identifying compounds to eliminate senescent cells. If this drug gets approved, it's probably going to be expensive. But the good news may be health insurance companies will see people taking this don't need much of anything else. So they may give it to you. They may pay for it themselves. That would be tremendous news.

Core Message: Foundation Before Experimental Therapies

But the fundamental message that I want to deliver this talk is that there are a lot of potential age-reversal interventions out there: stem cells, GDF11. But you wouldn't take your GDF11 and put it in a pot of boiling water. You wouldn't want to do that. And yet our aged bodies, with all the pro-inflammatory factors, the protein-degrading enzymes, all of the problems our aged bodies face—it's better to optimize our health today and then engage in the age-reversal intervention.

We're seeking the optimal house of health. We want our bodies to be in optimal condition before engaging in something that's experimental. And the good news is, well, lowering blood pressure, lowering LDL, controlling glucose—that can be done already. That doesn't require anything new. In fact, many of these technologies are almost 100 years old.

I ask people not to forget about level one as they're contemplating engaging in level two. Because with some of these interventions, if you've got very high blood pressure, very high glucose, LDL, homocysteine, you could wind up having a heart attack or stroke before you derive the benefits of the age-reversal drug, nutrient, hormone, whatever you're going to be doing.

So again, level one is your foundation; level two are the many experimental therapies. But again, before we experiment with some of these therapies, please consider just optimizing level one. Create a healthy foundation so you can build on that foundation and hopefully experiment with some of these therapies.

Path to Immortality by 2030

Please consider just optimizing level one. Create a healthy foundation so you can build on that foundation and hopefully achieve the kind of longevity that's going to enable us to live another 30 years. We feel if we can make it to about 2030, CRISPR/Cas9 gene-editing technology will make us biologically immortal. Aging will no longer be a problem. We need to get there.

And these are some of the steps. We don't have GDF11 in there yet, but we may add that depending on the type of results we get with our analyses. But what's good about these steps is they're all available now. They are all approved drugs, and we're simply advocating they be used off-label. We make it to year 2030, aging stops. We simply have to prevent ourselves from dying from all kinds of problems. And then we eventually merge into the cloud and achieve true immortality, whether it's biological or electronic, whatever you choose.

Conclusion: Lessons from the Wealthy and Historical Longevity

And I always like to conclude with people who missed the longevity boat. People with a lot of money, sometimes a lot of fame, and yet they're dead. They're dead. And for the most part, they didn't consider aging research that important. So people with a lot of money die at relatively young age.

And the Texans, they had a decent season this year. Problem is, the owner didn't get to really enjoy that season because he died with a lot of money and was founder of Southwest Airlines. I mean, he was a real innovator, did a lot of good work, but he's dead. Lots of money that his relatives can enjoy, but he can't.

And we try to advocate, when we run into wealthy people, if you're making charitable contributions, please put at least some of that money into aging research, because if nothing else kills you, that's going to do it.

That's going to do it. And I'm concluding with the slides I've shown before, but from the very beginning of any type of recorded history, we've seen this 300% increase in human longevity. But what's interesting is 50% of that 300% increase that's occurred over the last 175 years.

Just imagine what's going to happen over the next 10 to 20 with the rate of accelerated returns that we're seeing in the biomedical sciences.

Insights

• Foundation-First Hierarchy ("Healthy House"): Core intuition is that advanced rejuvenation (level 2: senolytics, GDF11, NAD+, plasma/exosomes) fails without foundational metabolic optimization (level 1: BP, LDL, glucose/insulin, homocysteine control), as chronic conditions provoke acute events (strokes, MIs) preempting benefits; akin to building on unstable ground.
• Senescent Cell Toxicity Mechanism: Senescent cells drive pathology via senescence-associated secretory phenotype (SASP)—systemic inflammation, matrix metalloproteinases (protein degradation)—cleared by senolytics (dasatinib + quercetin) yielding multi-organ rejuvenation; 2015 rodent clearance induces systemic youthfulness, midlife dosing extends mouse lifespan 36% (human equiv. ~80→100y), improves kidney/heart function.
• Hit-and-Run Senolytic Dosing: Intermittent low-dose pulsing (weight-based, e.g., dasatinib 100-200mg + high quercetin) minimizes toxicity (dasatinib's myelosuppression) while selectively apoptosing senescent cells; Mayo IPF trial (high-dose, safe bar 1 SAE) and RAADfest OA pilot (90% response, 6mo durability, MRI-pending) validate; contrasts continuous dosing.
• Translational Acceleration: Preclinical (parabiosis, senolytics) → human pilots (IPF, OA) → Unity Biotech phase 1; media/scientific consensus shift (Sinclair NAD+, Barzilai metformin, Olshansky healthspan) signals viability; off-label approved drugs bridge to 2030 CRISPR/Cas9 singularity.
• Economic Tricks: Source generic dasatinib internationally (assay-verified), US compounding (\<$200/course); insurance may cover patented senolytics if reducing comorbidities.
• Exponential Longevity Returns: Historical 300% lifespan gain (recent 50% in 175y) foreshadows biotech singularity; charity/advocacy since 1977 proves persistence yields validation.

Transcription errors?

• Drug Names: Heavy repetition of "dacetin(eb)/ebococetin/dacetinab/stacitinib/coercetin" → confidently corrected to "dasatinib" (tyrosine kinase inhibitor, senolytic) + "quercetin" (flavonol senolytic); standard in field per Mayo/JAMA papers.
• Names: "Barzelli" → Nir Barzilai (metformin/TAME trial PI); "Olshansky" → S. Jay Olshansky (demographer); "Unity Pharmaceuticals Biotechnology" → Unity Biotechnology (NASDAQ: UBX, Bezos-backed); "RADFEST" → RAADfest (Revolution Against Aging Death conference); "CRISPR-9" → CRISPR/Cas9.
• Medical Terms: "Senile cells" → "senescent cells"; "senoletic" → "senolytic"; "dacetineb" → "dasatinib"; "idopathic pulmonary fibrosis" → "idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis" (confirmed Lancet 2019 trial).
• Event/Date: "January 24th" + "January 2019" context → talk circa Jan 2019; "Texans owner... Southwest Airlines" → likely Bob McNair (d. 2018, Houston Texans/Southwest ties? Partial mismatch, possibly Herb Kelleher/Southwest founder d. 2019 conflated).
• Cuts/Repetitions: Transcript has duplicates (e.g., senolytics explanation, level one plea); smoothed for coherence. Abrupt end ("you—") likely "you" as audience address.
• Ambiguities: "This church" → speaker's longevity-focused church (context: German Galileo feature); "Steve Perry" → prior presenter (GDF11 focus); no chemistry beyond standard (NAD+, metformin);