Episode 8
Why Governments Still Ignore Ageing, and What Must Change with Dr Ilia Stambler
What does it take to turn longevity science into real-world policy? In this episode, Daphna speaks with Dr Ilia Stambler, historian of longevity, published author, Chair of the International Longevity Alliance (ILA), and Chief Science Officer and Chairman of Vetek (Seniority) Association, about why advocacy and ecosystem-building may be just as important as the science itself.
Dr Stambler shares how the ILA has grown into a global network connecting 76 nonprofits across 66 countries, organising international conferences, and running the annual Longevity Day (1st October) and Longevity Month (October) campaigns. He points to concrete wins, including efforts to support the inclusion of ageing-related conditions in the ICD and the WHO's work programme.
The conversation gets honest about the real barriers to progress. Dr Stambler argues the problem isn't convincing governments that ageing matters, it's getting them to treat it with urgency. Despite ageing representing one of the largest disease burdens globally, it remains chronically underfunded and deprioritised, in part because the research timelines required don't fit neatly into political cycles.
He also reflects on the deeper intellectual questions underpinning the field: how to balance holism and reductionism, why historical perspective is essential for longevity researchers, and how the same patterns of enthusiasm, scepticism, and neglect have repeated across centuries of rejuvenation science.
Looking ahead to 2030, Dr Stambler highlights the need for better public education, evidence-based criteria for evaluating interventions, and growing grassroots motivation, because ultimately, he believes, a longer and healthier life begins with wanting one.
In This Episode:
- How the ILA operates across 66 countries and what it's achieved
- Why governments acknowledge ageing but still fail to act on it
- The long funding timelines longevity research demands — and why that's a political problem
- Which countries are currently leading on longevity policy
- Why solo science isn't enough and advocacy changes outcomes
- The "Death Valley of ideas" and how to get research across it
- Balancing holism and reductionism in longevity science
- Why the history of rejuvenation science keeps repeating itself
- What meaningful success in this field actually looks like.
Ilia Stambler, PhD
Chairman and CSO. Vetek (Seniority) Association – The Movement for Longevity and Quality of Life, Israel http://www.longevityisrael.org/
Chairman. International Longevity Alliance (ILA) http://www.longevityalliance.org/
Fellow. Department of Science, Technology and Society, Bar-Ilan University, Israel https://sts.biu.ac.il/
Author. A History of Life-Extensionism in the Twentieth Century; Longevity Promotion: Multidisciplinary Perspectives; Healthy Longevity: Policies and Practices http://longevityhistory.com
https://www.longevityhistory.com/about-the-author/
00:00 Welcome and Guest Intro
01:28 Staler Background and Mission
03:18 What the ILA Does
04:04 Key Wins and Campaigns
05:25 Public Misconceptions
07:27 Getting Governments to Act
09:14 Funding Research Long Term
10:49 Education and Conferences
12:05 Which Countries Lead
15:22 Why Advocacy Beats Solo Science
17:38 Advocacy Success Stories
20:48 Breaking Longevity Silos
21:23 Holism vs Reductionism
22:28 Why History Matters
24:17 Death Valley of Ideas
25:49 Rejuvenation Patterns Repeat
27:42 Misunderstood Longevity History
29:22 Balance and Modesty
31:23 Measuring Real Success
34:59 Making Longevity Policy
36:09 Rapid Fire Takeaways
38:58 Final Wrap Up
Transcript
Welcome to Beyond Longevity, the podcast that explores not just how we age, but how we can build a longer, healthier future for ourselves.
Speaker A:My guest today on beyond longevity is Dr. Ilya Stambler, a historian of longevity, author of multiple books, papers and articles, and a fierce advocate for healthy lifespan research.
Speaker A:Dr. Ilya has spent decades helping to push longevity from the margins towards becoming a serious policy priority.
Speaker A:He's chairman of the International Longevity alliance and serves as Chief Science Officer and chairman of the Wittic Association, a movement for longevity and quality of life.
Speaker A:Dr. Elia is also one of the few people in the space with a deep knowledge of the history of longevity.
Speaker A:Where humanity's desire for longer life comes from, how those ideas evolved over time, and what they can still teach us today.
Speaker A:This is a conversation about how longevity moves theory into action, how governments begin to enact longevity policies, how advocacy can influence funding and priorities, and what it really takes to build momentum, momentum behind a field like this.
Speaker A:Hello.
Speaker A:Dr. Ilya, it's such a pleasure that you found the time to join us on Beyond Longevity.
Speaker A:Amongst being an author and educator and researcher and all the other things you do, you are chief scientist, officer and chairman of Vetec Association.
Speaker A:It's a movement for longevity and quality of life.
Speaker A:Do tell us a little bit more about yourself and the association.
Speaker B:Well, I am into longevity.
Speaker B:I've been since I was six years old.
Speaker B:But tell the whole story.
Speaker B:Yes, I'm a researcher.
Speaker B:I have over 80 academic papers, book chapters and peer reviewed articles.
Speaker B:Two books, that's one.
Speaker B:My focus, Magnum, magnum opus, you know, History of Life extensionism in the 20th century.
Speaker B:It includes the history of the field and the western world.
Speaker B:This one, the small opus, Longevity promotion, Multidisciplinary perspectives where I analyze the longevity from various angles.
Speaker B:History, philosophy, science, policy.
Speaker B:Apart of that, I'm also an advocate, I'm an activist.
Speaker B:I run nonprofit associations.
Speaker B:The Vedic Society, the Movement for longevity and quality of Life is my major Israeli affiliation.
Speaker B:I am also involved in all kinds of other organizations.
Speaker B:I'm a chairman of International Longevity alliance which is umbrella nonprofit for longevity organizations, which now includes 76 nonprofit associations from 66 countries.
Speaker B:And that's actually my main occupation over one time to write my papers.
Speaker B:But my main occupation is advocacy activism because I think that's the backbone.
Speaker B:It's the foundation also for others to.
Speaker B:To thrive.
Speaker B:I'm not interested to promote, I'll tell you from the start, I'm not interested to promote my research or my projects.
Speaker B:I'm interested to help build the longevity
Speaker A:ecosystem you just mentioned.
Speaker A:You're being connected to 76 organizations through the International Longevity Alliance.
Speaker A:What does the network actually do in practice?
Speaker A:I guess you share ideas, what else do you do?
Speaker B:Right.
Speaker B:So we meet, we network, we encourage each other.
Speaker B:Just knowing that you are part of a network of 76 organizations already very encouraging.
Speaker B:For example, if we go to some events, last year ILA organized about 12 international conferences.
Speaker B:This year we already organizing it with 13, and the year just started.
Speaker B:So it's very encouraging.
Speaker B:If you are an activist, a local activist, and you say you're part of ila, it also gives you more weight and it gives the ILA more weight.
Speaker B:That's the force of the synergy of all the organizations.
Speaker B:Some of our main achievements were a few years back, before the COVID 19.
Speaker B:We actually helped introduce aging at the back of the Interventional Classification of Diseases.
Speaker B:We are the first competition for including aging is a medical condition.
Speaker B:Now it has two ICP codes, agents associated decline in green C capacity and aging related condition.
Speaker B:So thanks to our doc, it's not only ours, but also ours.
Speaker B: the who Work program back in: Speaker B:So the force of ILAs, the power of ILAs is really campaigning.
Speaker B: Day and Months campaign since: Speaker B:Now for 13 years, every year in October, around October 1st or throughout October, we organize events.
Speaker B:In our good years, we had events in dozens of countries, up to 50 countries.
Speaker B:So in all those events, we, you know, rise with public awareness, interest.
Speaker B:So once again, it's always good to show yourself as a part of the network, part of the movement.
Speaker B:It gives the movement strength and gives individual strength.
Speaker B:So that's what ILA usually does.
Speaker B:Of course, we could do better, you know, with our background and potential, we could really be major decision makers.
Speaker B:But unfortunately, the longevity is still not so much in everybody's mind, not on everybody's agenda, but we try our best to put it there, to put it on the agenda.
Speaker A:When you say it's not generally understood really what longevity is, what do you think the public most badly misunderstands about longevity science today?
Speaker A:And as a secondary question, what do you think governments don't understand about it?
Speaker B:I think the main thing they don't understand or don't understand sufficiently is the major importance of this issue.
Speaker B:And there are various psychological reasons for that.
Speaker B:We can enter into details what parts of science they don't understand, what parts of education they don't have.
Speaker B:But the main thing is just to set up health longevity as A priority.
Speaker B:It is not set up as a priority.
Speaker B:When I started in the field, not to say at the age of six, but let's say about 25 years ago, when I started to actively promote the subject online, people didn't even think about it.
Speaker B:People in the west didn't even, it wasn't even an issue.
Speaker B:Health, longevity, healthspan, extension.
Speaker B:There weren't any words like this.
Speaker B:You could hear intervention to aging.
Speaker B:Not there.
Speaker B:And thanks to also our advocacy, you know, drilling and drilling and drilling into people's health.
Speaker B:It's more of an issue now.
Speaker B:We have discussed in the press, among decision makers.
Speaker B:It took 25 years to people to begin to realize how urgent this is.
Speaker B:And then still it's not realized by all.
Speaker B:Still, people prefer to block it out of their mind.
Speaker B:My explanation is that the psychological care management issue, people just don't think that they want to age.
Speaker B:So they, they prefer not to think about it.
Speaker B:So, you know, out of sight, out of mind.
Speaker B:If you, if you don't see the problem, it's not there.
Speaker B:So we don't have to address it.
Speaker B:Some people believe that they cannot do anything about it, cannot improve their aging.
Speaker B:Some people believe it will never reach them, that they will never get old.
Speaker B:So for all kinds of psychological reasons, people prefer not to to deal with aging.
Speaker B:And there's longevity, where when they do realize it's an issue that then they start getting involved in the longevity movement.
Speaker B:And our task is to get as many people involved as possible.
Speaker B:We're getting there, but we are far from being there.
Speaker A:When you speak to governments or public bodies, what language works best with them?
Speaker A:Do you use the words of longevity or healthy aging or prevention, resilience, quality of life?
Speaker A:What's the trigger word for them?
Speaker B:Longevity works nice.
Speaker B:The prevention of age related diseases is nice.
Speaker B:But the final thing, you know, I've been in this advocacy for 25 years.
Speaker B:Yes, I talked with governments.
Speaker B: In: Speaker B:And we should make a committee, advisory committee on that at the Knesset.
Speaker B:It's still not established after 14 years.
Speaker B:Still not established.
Speaker B:But when you talk with them, they all agree with you.
Speaker B:They lost.
Speaker B:The single person I talked with among decision makers and the regular people, the regular public that didn't agree with me, yes, it's very important to prevent age related disease.
Speaker B:But then you finish the talk and you walk your separate ways and they Return to their agendas, because that's still not urgent for them.
Speaker B:They still block it out of their minds.
Speaker B:They still have their more urgent agendas, like how they're going to be elected, where they get the next funding.
Speaker B:So yes, they agree with me, with us, with the Jerry movement.
Speaker B:They don't do much about it.
Speaker B:So that's the big problem.
Speaker B:They get convinced.
Speaker B:Believe me, when you talk that they understand.
Speaker B:They get convinced, yes, very important.
Speaker B:Then they, they forgot about it.
Speaker B:So the actual question is not how to convince them, but how to make them act on the conviction.
Speaker B:That's a question.
Speaker B:I don't really have an answer.
Speaker B:I guess once again, the answer is to have more people involved.
Speaker B:When they see that really constituency here, that people really want to see this happen, then they will start to move in the right direction.
Speaker B:Otherwise they go anywhere where they see the constituency, where they see the actual public interest, like that wars and gas prices in Tico.
Speaker A:But do you think it's a financial issue, they don't want to fund it?
Speaker A:Or do you think it's more a question of it's not as pressing or as important to actually do something about it?
Speaker B:Basically, they don't think it's urgent.
Speaker B:You know, we've been saying the same thing for 25 years.
Speaker B:They don't think many people died of old age diseases in the time.
Speaker B:They still don't think it's.
Speaker B:It's urgent in our country, in Israel, 50,000 people dying from age related diseases, much more than all the wars, all the accidents combined during the whole history of the country.
Speaker B:They don't think it's urgent.
Speaker B:Also, the financial issue is important.
Speaker B:What we advocate is we advocate investing in research.
Speaker B:So that requires long term vision, that requires some long term thinking.
Speaker B:And you know, they want to see the result right now, before the next election term, in four years.
Speaker B:Do you give me the pill for health?
Speaker B:Longevity maybe?
Speaker B:No, they just want the pill.
Speaker B:They don't even want to pay any money for the pill.
Speaker B:They ask me what should I do, what should I do?
Speaker B:I tell me, you know what you have to do.
Speaker B:You have to eat healthy and engage in exercise.
Speaker B:But when I try to explain that you have to also fund aging research, invest in aging research, that's something that's more difficult to understand.
Speaker B:You try to give examples like think about the defense systems.
Speaker B:First you invest in research and development, then you have all those wonderful system that protect us when it comes to aging.
Speaker B:They don't get this reasoning.
Speaker B:Basically the problem is that we want the money for research now and they promise the results in, I don't know, in 10 years and 15 years.
Speaker B:And that's.
Speaker B:That's a gap to cross.
Speaker B:That's an education.
Speaker B:Yes.
Speaker A:Education in general is a big part of your advocacy.
Speaker A:Do you speak to universities that teach medical students about the importance of teaching, about longevity, and do you find that they're receptive to it or not really?
Speaker B:Yes.
Speaker B:Yes.
Speaker B:I started to be active, active advocate about 25 years ago, at the beginning of this century and of the last century.
Speaker B:There's no comparison, the level of awareness now versus what was 25 years ago.
Speaker B:It's a different level.
Speaker B:People do get it or begin to get it.
Speaker B:We organize conferences every year in Israel and around the world.
Speaker B:As I said, ILA organizes 12 international conferences.
Speaker B:Out of them, Ayurvedic Association, Israel Association CO organizes about six or seven.
Speaker B:So in all those conferences, we have a great contingency of researchers, of physicians, of students.
Speaker B:They all get it, they all become interested.
Speaker B:And we continue to expand our education here in Israel.
Speaker B:We're also developing a course.
Speaker B:So our main agenda is to get more people involved through education.
Speaker B:There's no other way.
Speaker B:We have to educate people about the importance, about the ways things can be changed.
Speaker B:That's never enough.
Speaker B:Build it up and build up, but it's never enough.
Speaker B:We need to get everybody going back
Speaker A:a little bit to governments and their policy toward the idea of longevity.
Speaker A:Are there any countries, governments worldwide, that you're aware of, that are very proactive in the field of longevity and they've sort of adopted a more proactive mindset with regards to longevity.
Speaker B:Some people are surprised, but still the most proactive country is the United States.
Speaker B:People I tell to Americans, you're still the best, you're still number one.
Speaker B:They don't believe me.
Speaker B:But you still invest in aging research more than the whole world combined.
Speaker B:Through the National Institute on Aging, the National Institute on Health, you still fund most of it.
Speaker B:Most of the ideas come from the United States, especially after World War II.
Speaker B:If you read my book, you'll see that before the World War, research was more evenly distributed in France, Germany, Russia.
Speaker B:After the war, it was mainly concentrated in the United States.
Speaker B:There was some research in the UK elsewhere, but the main concentration was in the United States.
Speaker B:In terms of ideas, molecular, biological approach, the reductions, approaches all comes from United States.
Speaker B:They're still the main founder.
Speaker B:They're still most interested in the field on the population level, people taking supplements on the governmental level.
Speaker B:But still, with all that involvement, it's not enough.
Speaker B:We still don't have a cure for aging from the United States.
Speaker B:Actually, the Life Expectancy United States and Health act is declining.
Speaker B:It's one of the worst situation in the developed world with all that research.
Speaker B:It doesn't help to stall the decline in life expectancy.
Speaker B:It's not enough.
Speaker B:But if you ask what's the most active country, it's the United States.
Speaker A:I guess the gap between the ones that do and the ones that don't sort of is much wider in the US Than anywhere else.
Speaker A:You know, you have people who are really looking after themselves and, and want to live longer and healthier and better.
Speaker A:And I guess you have, you know, the other half who just, you know, lives much worse than, you know, let's say Europe or whatever.
Speaker A:So I guess the gap is wider.
Speaker A:Is that that your impression too or why do you think?
Speaker B:Definitely that's a part of the explanation for the declining life expectancy, but the part of the explanation why it is so well funded, relatively well funded in the United States is also thanks to advocacy.
Speaker B:You know, the United States has a strong culture of advocacy, of philanthropy.
Speaker B:In the 70s, there was a person, Robert Butler, not many people remember, but he actually went to the government and said, it's an important topic and please deal with it.
Speaker B: c movement and in the end, in: Speaker B:Also, many people remember other bad things about Richard Nixon, but he was the guy who started the war on cancer, and he was the guy who started the National Institute on Aging.
Speaker B:He was receptive to such ideas.
Speaker B:So thanks to advocacy, we have this basis for research funding in the United States.
Speaker B:It's still country, it's still the largest funder for aging research in the world with the budget of a few billion dollars a year.
Speaker B:And that was thanks to an advocate, a single person who was able to raise the advocacy movement.
Speaker B:And in America, we see it all the time.
Speaker B:You see it with the AIDS movement for AIDS research and cancer research.
Speaker B:You know, the.
Speaker B:That's a very strong culture of advocacy and hope.
Speaker B:Others can learn from that.
Speaker A:Let's speak a bit about your career path.
Speaker A:You decided that longevity advocacy, rather than the science alone, was the way to go.
Speaker A:Why?
Speaker A:Why do you think that that would have a bigger impact?
Speaker B:Right?
Speaker B:So if you calculate the main bang for the buck, that's obviously the way to work.
Speaker B:First of all, even my PhD in certificate, I did my PhD on the history of longevity research, and it's the best bang for the buck.
Speaker B:You know, the History doesn't cost anybody any money.
Speaker B:You don't have to invest in the regions and the lab.
Speaker B:You know, just sit down and with your computer and the library and the writing a nice history.
Speaker B:So many people become convinced was probably about tens of thousands of people.
Speaker B:So it's a good bang for the buck in terms of education.
Speaker B:In terms of advocacy, it's even more so.
Speaker B:Our conferences, our outreach costs really pennies and the outcome can be millions.
Speaker B:So I'm very proud to say that thanks to our advocacy, we were able to get millions for aging research.
Speaker B: Just Last year in: Speaker B:Very proud to say that it was mainly thanks for advertising.
Speaker B:Just went there and convinced that it's important.
Speaker B:I also have to write to sponsor proposals.
Speaker B:So out of practically zero investment in our association, we have very poor association.
Speaker B:We don't have enough funding for anything.
Speaker B:With the close to zero investment in our association, we got millions for the aging field.
Speaker B:So I think that's in terms of bang for the buck, that's probably the best that I also encourage other people to get involved in aging research advocacy.
Speaker B:Of course we need the actual scientists research.
Speaker B:I'm also actual research.
Speaker B:You know, I have the huge index of 20.
Speaker B:I do some things in research, but still, you know, compared to what I can achieve through my specific research versus what I can achieve as a, as a community builder, as an ecosystem builder, my effort is much better spent on building the community and the ecosystem and the, the public support.
Speaker B:And I hope more and more people will become involved in this and support advocacy as well.
Speaker A:Can you give us some other examples of what advocacy has genuinely changed already?
Speaker B:Okay, so first of all, in Israel, pretty much all the governmental funding for aging research was thanks to our advocacy.
Speaker B: In: Speaker B:I would say it was probably one of the first, if not the first conference is longevity in the title.
Speaker B:Before the gerontological conference, Aging conference, we said that the pathways to health and longevity.
Speaker B:So now we take it for granted, you know, like health longevity.
Speaker B: But in: Speaker B:And since then calculated about 20 and 2 million more dollars that were achieved for GMU.
Speaker B:So just in Israel.
Speaker B:So that's our work and I'm very proud of it.
Speaker B:And many, many studies were actually kick started from, from this funding.
Speaker B:Then that's just our small example of Israel, of course, in the United States, as I said, Robert Butler is a paramount of advocacy.
Speaker B:Thanks to Ingrid Billions and Aging Research.
Speaker B:But also in our work with International Longevity Alliance.
Speaker B: o the tablet award program in: Speaker B:But ILA was also very active, recruited probably hundreds of researchers, hundreds of organizations actually petitioned WHO and was included.
Speaker B:You know, they didn't think aging was an important topic for global health.
Speaker B:And we convinced them through advocacy that yes, it's, it's important.
Speaker B:So they included it in the WHO WORK program.
Speaker B:The inclusion of aging is a part of the ICD.
Speaker B:11 also thanks not only us, but also us.
Speaker B: You know, in: Speaker B:I think it was the first governmental level outreach for this issue.
Speaker B:After that the movement grew and grew and grew.
Speaker B:The ILA petitioned the WHO and all the other organizations joined in.
Speaker B:And now it's in part of the International Classification of Diseases.
Speaker B:We still don't use it, but that's a different issue that I'd be happy to discuss why we don't use it.
Speaker B:But at least thanks to advocacy, we were able to change public policy at the WHO level twice with the work program with the ICD in Israel, we established a national program for Health, Longevity Research, Development Education as a part of the Israel National Plastic Plant Aging.
Speaker B:So there are all kinds of things that you can do through advocacy.
Speaker B:Still people don't realize the importance of advocacy.
Speaker B:I still have to explain to people what is it that I do.
Speaker B:And they ask me, you know, what's your project, what's your lab and what, what molecule are you developing?
Speaker B:People still think in terms of separate projects and they can understand them.
Speaker B:You know, you do your own project, you, you try to do the funding for it, you get research and return investment for it and try to explain to them that we are trying to, to work, that many such projects will emerge if we establish a ground support program or regulation or policy that projects like yours will, will thrive like mushrooms after the rain.
Speaker B:But that's an approach that not many people take.
Speaker B:But we prefer to work in the areas.
Speaker A:Do you think that's because the field of longevity is still very siloed?
Speaker A:Everybody works in their own little corners instead of Coming all together.
Speaker B:Yeah, absolutely.
Speaker B:And even the very topic of longevity is already overcoming the siloed thinking.
Speaker B:You know, most of medical research still thinks in terms of individual diseases, individual symptoms.
Speaker B:You know, the very idea of neuroscience that aging is the main risk factor or the main cause of all age related disease, all chronic diseases, also the main risk for infectious disease.
Speaker B:It's already a huge step forward against the silos.
Speaker B:Most of the medical research is not even there.
Speaker B:And even if you are already in the longevity research, if you recognize that aging is the main risk factor, it's kind of unifying framework.
Speaker B:You have to be holistic, you have to think for the long term, you have to look for long term effects.
Speaker B:But still many people don't do this.
Speaker B:So many people are reductionist.
Speaker B:They prefer to work on single molecules online or single mechanisms, cell types.
Speaker B:So that, that's how it works.
Speaker B:There are not many true holists, people who try to synergize.
Speaker B:Let me be honest, the problem is with the synergies too.
Speaker B:You know, when you are a holist, it's, it's not so, so perfect.
Speaker B:You know, you try to lose the, the trees for the forest.
Speaker B:You see the forest, but you don't see the details.
Speaker B:You have to try to spread over the whole world, start involved in the government and the universe and the environment and all that.
Speaker B:And in the end you don't get any specific outcome.
Speaker B:It's difficult in that, in the other direction, it's unbalanced.
Speaker B:But still the majority of research is still.
Speaker B:The reductionists are still going with their specific projects and hope there is more unity, more synergy.
Speaker A:Let's go back a little bit.
Speaker A:Let's go back quite a bit back.
Speaker A:You've written a book about longevity in the 20th century, which is, I'm sure amazing to most listeners that in the 20th century people were thinking about longevity.
Speaker A:We all think it's a new buzzword.
Speaker A: thinkers and activists in the: Speaker A:I guess it's a book about how even then human beings try to beat aging and people believing that it is possible to maybe not stop aging, but slow it down a little bit.
Speaker A:Tell us a little bit about that.
Speaker B:Yes.
Speaker B:So first of all, yes, absolutely.
Speaker B:I wrote my book not as any, you know, archival document or some niche interest.
Speaker B:I wrote it specifically to encourage more modern research.
Speaker B:As they say, history is written by the winners.
Speaker B:So if we write a history, you know, we actually raise the generation of winners.
Speaker B:We're the winners.
Speaker B:We're the people who, who promote the subject.
Speaker B:And we have to see our rules, we have to see where we come from and what our basis is.
Speaker B:So I think this book will help continue to help also the current generation of researchers simply to show them the legitimacy of this subject.
Speaker B:Yes, as you said, yes, people thought about it.
Speaker B:They are not crazy.
Speaker B:They didn't fell off the moon.
Speaker B:There's a long history.
Speaker B:The title of the book is 20th century, but it actually traces the history to the Egyptians and Ayurveda.
Speaker B:You'll find it all there in the alchemists.
Speaker B:You'll find all this tradition there.
Speaker B:But the main idea is really to show that I guess important work was done and serious people work on this.
Speaker B:So it will increase the legitimacy.
Speaker B:There are also all kinds of other lessons that can be learned.
Speaker B:Yes, it is a history of human endeavor, of human attempts.
Speaker B:Most of these people died trying.
Speaker B:And it is also a history of unfulfilled promises, of broken dreams, of dead ideas, as you know in the term Death valley.
Speaker B:So if you look at my book, you'll see the Death Valley full of bones, of promising research directions that didn't yield any outcomes.
Speaker B:You'll be surprised to find many things that hyped now.
Speaker B:You'll find it in the already known in the beginning of the 20th century, like microbiome.
Speaker B:Right, A big hype.
Speaker B:Transplantation of microbiome and microbiome microbiome.
Speaker B:Ellie Messik of the founder of gerontology in the beginning of 20th century.
Speaker B:Talk about all that, about the microbiome, the importance of intestinal putrefaction.
Speaker B:And Nick just suggested a few ways to combat it included including transplantation of microbiome.
Speaker B:It was all there, still didn't work.
Speaker B:And still we are returning to this.
Speaker B:So there's a huge death benefit and huge gap between ideas and their implementations.
Speaker B:The subject is difficult to work through.
Speaker B:The subject of aging.
Speaker B:It's an immensely complex, difficult subject.
Speaker B:Some people try to reduce it to a few pathways, to a few hallmarks.
Speaker B:No, it's a very complex subject.
Speaker B:It's why most of the previous things didn't work.
Speaker B:But you know, it shows that people did try and they were great ideas.
Speaker B:But it was still upon us to actually bring it to practice to benefit from them.
Speaker A:You mentioned the microbiome.
Speaker A:When you study the history of longevity, what patterns or ideas keep on repeating?
Speaker B:First of all, the idea of rejuvenation is definitely not a new idea.
Speaker B:You know, you said some people are Surprised that people thought about rejuvenation in the 20th century.
Speaker B:They thought about it in the 19th century and 16th century.
Speaker B:So it's obvious if you go to sleep, you, you get up rejuvenated.
Speaker B:You know, you go to sleep tired and you get up rejuvenated.
Speaker B:So idea is, is in there that you can actually renew your new, your youth.
Speaker B:And all kinds of approaches were tried, including cell transplantation.
Speaker B:Actually, the famous cell therapists now called regenerative medicine.
Speaker B:They all started at least the beginning of the 20th century when cells were transplanted and organs were transplanted for rejuvenation.
Speaker B:Pieces of tissue, testicular tissue in particular, that all started at least in 20th century, but they were precedent in the 19th century.
Speaker B:So this idea of replacement therapy, hormone replacement therapy, tissue replacement therapy, all started at least a hundred years back.
Speaker B:So the ideas are solid ideas, but you know, the devil's in the details.
Speaker B:How to avoid being the injection, how to actually make those treatments work.
Speaker B:So it's, it's a complex scientific issue.
Speaker B:People think that, you know, we'll have the appeal tomorrow.
Speaker B:No, we'll still have to understand a lot.
Speaker B:So that's basically the pattern that we have.
Speaker B:The great scientific ideas with greater Chanel, like a microbiome, like the replacement therapy, hormone replacement therapy, they all had greater Chanel, but many of them were shattered by details, by technical difficulties, by human factors.
Speaker B:So, you know, once again we have to learn and we have to understand.
Speaker B:Yes, the Chanel is there, the feasibility is there, but it will be a long way until it's the rich results.
Speaker A:What do you think in today's longevity movement is most misunderstood about its own history?
Speaker B:You know, similar with the main problem with longevity that's not recognized enough.
Speaker B:Many people still think we have this history.
Speaker B:And you said, you know, how come Your people in 20th century thought about longevity?
Speaker B:They thought about it in the Egyptian times.
Speaker B:You'll be surprised to read some Egyptian manuscript.
Speaker B:I could, I can't read Egyptians, but.
Speaker B:And the translation.
Speaker B:So the people talked about aging being the main cause of diseases.
Speaker B:And they talk about rejuvenation and growing your hair and renewing your skin.
Speaker B:Where the term snake oil comes from, comes from the Egyptians.
Speaker B:You know, the Egyptians used the fat of snakes to rejuvenate.
Speaker B:Yes, people thought about it, but many people now think that, that, you know, this history simply doesn't exist.
Speaker B:They research this.
Speaker B:The longevity research starts with the, the, with the PubMed, with the latest publication of PubMed.
Speaker B:No, it starts much earlier.
Speaker B:And there's excellent ideas, a throw of treasures that can be found in history that may actually save some time for for many modern researchers we can look that it was already done and some of the bottlenecks that could be, could be identified.
Speaker B:So history is very important.
Speaker B:But the main problem with understanding history is to know that there's history.
Speaker B:Read my book, you know, get more interested in history and many people don't have time for this.
Speaker B:Once again everybody's trying to start from scratch and from the latest search on PubMed and now it's an AI.
Speaker B:You don't even have to think about anything just to do the ask chatgpt well what about this or that and get your answer.
Speaker B:Now you have to study history.
Speaker B:It's important.
Speaker A:So are there old arguments or mistakes that the current field is repeating without realizing it?
Speaker B:I wouldn't say it's mistakes, but the general pattern do recur.
Speaker B:There are some, for example in my book, in other papers identify a constant, a tug of war between reductionism and holism.
Speaker B:No, as I mentioned, there is the drawbacks and reductionism from drawbacks in holism and people simply switch like a pendulum from this to that direction.
Speaker B:So one lesson that you could learn is at least try to get some balance between reductionism and holism.
Speaker B:Otherwise you either see the forest and don't see the trees or they see, you see the trees, you don't see the forest.
Speaker B:And AGV research has been swinging this way for 100 years at least.
Speaker B:So that's one.
Speaker B:Also try to be modest.
Speaker B:You know, every time and again we see the huge promises.
Speaker B:Yeah, the solution for edgy is just around the corner.
Speaker B:We have such a great theory, such a great rationale, all the evidence is there.
Speaker B:In five years we will get the pill and we'll forever.
Speaker B:No, it's much more complex and every time that some such hope gets shattered, you know, people lose motivation.
Speaker B:No, we have to understand that it's a stepwise incremental process.
Speaker B:Some ideas get discarded, we get new ideas, the work in progress.
Speaker B:Yes, and another lesson probably, you know, we should be aware of charlatans and of unjustified claims.
Speaker B:You know, for some, some period anti aging as such was, it was discarded.
Speaker B:You say you're involved in anti aging.
Speaker B:Okay, you have a stamp as a charlatan.
Speaker B:Goodbye.
Speaker B:That's why also one of the reasons aging wasn't doctored in universities as a part of mainstream science now in the last 20, 25 years, I, I would say that we are become a stigma.
Speaker B:But still, you know, if you say anti aging still, it's Stigmatized.
Speaker B:And still many people, many, many practitioners still practice, you know, unjustified claims and promises.
Speaker A:When you look into the future, where do you see the longevity field heading in five to 10 years?
Speaker A: ment look like in, let's say,: Speaker B:Right.
Speaker B: So some people believe by: Speaker B: w, you can read some authors,: Speaker B: How will you prove in: Speaker B:How can you be sure that you or somebody else will live for a hundred years?
Speaker B:You know, people have to ask those basic questions.
Speaker B:What is our evidence?
Speaker B:When you go to Longevity Clinic, for example, what is our evidence that that will some treatment will extend your life?
Speaker B:How can you prove it?
Speaker B:You know, you cannot live for 50 years and say, you know, I took the treatment and somebody else in my age group took a placebo.
Speaker B:I'm alive, he's dead, Good for me.
Speaker B:Will change the treatment work?
Speaker B:No, we have to develop real scientific criteria for efficacy, real predictive models.
Speaker B:All these are very difficult questions.
Speaker B: egin to start solving them by: Speaker B:I've been advocating for this for 10 years.
Speaker B:My paper on the methodology of intervention to aging, I said exactly this.
Speaker B:You know, we don't know how to evaluate effectiveness anti aging treatment, this biomarker, that biomarker.
Speaker B:But what, what's your actual proof that this treatment will extend your life or healthy life?
Speaker B: rd that I see could happen by: Speaker B:Another thing is real public involvement.
Speaker B:You know, no comparison.
Speaker B:What is happening now, the level of awareness about aging, longevity now, no comparison to what it was 25 years ago.
Speaker B: And now by: Speaker B:So that's our main target.
Speaker B:That's, that's what we have to solve.
Speaker B: I think that could happen to: Speaker B:So right now I would estimate about 5% of the world, I begin to get it, I begin to be involved in longevity, getting interested.
Speaker B:I hope the whole world becomes interested that they are interested now in health.
Speaker B:Everybody now wants to be healthy.
Speaker B:But if you ask people, do you want to live long?
Speaker B:That's a question.
Speaker B:Maybe until 95, but not until 100.
Speaker B:God forbid.
Speaker B:120.
Speaker B:Judaism will say, still say until 120.
Speaker B:I sell 120 at least.
Speaker B:Okay, thanks.
Speaker B:I'll try 120 and then I'll go on.
Speaker B:So we should really set the longevity and health longevity as a global priority.
Speaker B: I think it could happen in: Speaker B:Of course there are all kinds of obstacles on this purpose.
Speaker B:Of course it's not easy to work on longevity when there is war around and I just came from a rocket shelter.
Speaker B:So still even now during the war, we try to promote the subject actually published in piece.
Speaker B:Even during the war, you have to continue working for longevity.
Speaker B:But that's just me and people like me.
Speaker B:We need the whole world to recognize the importance of the subject, to work for it, to compete for it in solutions, also to cooperate, both competition and cooperation.
Speaker B:And I believe when people really the role sets as a priority, then there will be no wars.
Speaker B:Obviously if you want to live longer, you want to go to war.
Speaker B:I think if longevity movement wins, becomes a real global priority, then will be the right way to achieve Castle in Germany.
Speaker A:And where do you think the longevity movement is still underestimating what it will take to become mainstream public policy.
Speaker B:When will we see the therapies first?
Speaker B:You know, I'm Jewish, so I answer with the question first, what does it mean Therapy?
Speaker B:We don't know how to evaluate the effectiveness of the therapy.
Speaker B:And then I say it only depends on us.
Speaker B:If the governments become convinced, then they'll start investing, then they will start developing the policies, then we'll start developing the treatments, then we'll start implementing the treatments, then we'll start relating the treatments.
Speaker B:In short, it's a long way off and the sooner we start, the sooner we finish.
Speaker B:So it all depends on us.
Speaker B:Once again, if health longevity becomes global priority, we'll get there Sooner.
Speaker B:Maybe in 10, 15, 20 years if nobody is interested.
Speaker B:If people interested about wars, we won't get there even in 50 years.
Speaker A:Very true, very true.
Speaker A:Thank you so much, Dr. Ilya.
Speaker A:We could go on for a long time.
Speaker A:You're just so insightful.
Speaker A:I always finish with asking my guests five rapid fire questions.
Speaker A:What's the single best piece of advice you would give your younger self?
Speaker B:Wow, that's.
Speaker B:That's a tough one.
Speaker B:Actually if, if I started later, I would tell him to.
Speaker B:To know, get involved in longevity research and advocacy.
Speaker B:But as I was interested since I was 6 years old and you know, I guess nothing to advise, I met my my life correctly.
Speaker A:Effy, you were Ahead of the game, name one habit everyone should adopt for a longer, healthier life.
Speaker B:One habit out of four.
Speaker B:You know, we have just four habits that we know and can actually extend your longevity.
Speaker B:That's a good rest and sleep, physical exercise, moderate and balanced nutrition and motivation.
Speaker B:And out of those four, I would say motivation.
Speaker B:You know, if you have motivation, you, you'll sleep healthily and, and eat right and exercise.
Speaker B:If you don't have motivation, you have a reason to live and you know, all the other things will not work for you.
Speaker A:Okay, now this is a tough question for you.
Speaker A:If you weren't in longevity science, what career would you have chosen?
Speaker B:I can't imagine, actually, I can't imagine.
Speaker B:No, really, I, I had this edifice, as I said, from six years of age and I, I can't imagine anything else.
Speaker B:You know, I could have been forced, but I can tell you I could have been forced to another career path, that's for sure.
Speaker B:You know, I haven't been English finish.
Speaker B:I could have become an English teacher.
Speaker B:I could have become clerk.
Speaker B:So I could do any, all kinds of things.
Speaker B:But in terms of the vocation is something I want to do.
Speaker B:I would think about.
Speaker A:See, I told you that was a tough question for you.
Speaker A:What microdose habit, a five minute routine or small daily action yields outsized longevity benefits.
Speaker B:Once again, out of the four things that we know can help for longevity, I would still think that education is the most important.
Speaker B:You know, get, get motivated, get interested, get others interested.
Speaker B:I think five minutes to get yourself up to date in the field will help.
Speaker A:What's the craziest longevity myth you've encountered and is there any truth to it?
Speaker B:The craziest longevity myth, that we're just around the corner towards living forever because we've been saying this for the past 3,000 years and the Congress is getting further and further away, so that's that.
Speaker A:So you don't think there's any truth to it?
Speaker B:Well, that means you just want to believe that.
Speaker B:You just want to believe.
Speaker B:It's so nice.
Speaker B:And I say okay, okay, you got me.
Speaker B:Okay, let's get the public, let's get the advocates with hammers that break this corner and you know, they get through the corner.
Speaker B:So the sooner we break the corner, the sooner we get through it, over it.
Speaker A:Okay, well, listen, thank you so much for coming on beyond longevity.
Speaker A:It was a pleasure talking to you, such an insightful conversation.
Speaker A:Thank you so much for taking the time.
Speaker B:Thank you.
Speaker B:It's a pleasure.
Speaker B:Thank you.
Speaker B:Thank you all.
Speaker A:That was Dr. Ilya Stambler on the policy and advocacy side of longevity and on the work required to make this field matter beyond its own supporters.
Speaker A:If healthier longer lives are ever to become a real priority, it will not happen through science alone.
Speaker A:It will take advocacy, coalition building, public funding, and government governments willing to turn longevity from an interesting idea into actual policies.
Speaker A:Thank you so much for listening to this episode of Beyond Longevity.
Speaker A:If you enjoyed this episode, please do follow, subscribe and share it with anyone interested in longevity, public policy, and the future of healthier longer lives.
Speaker B:Sa.
