Progress, finally!
David Sinclair’s Life Biosciences just got greenlit for human trials of ER-100—the OSK-powered age reversal breakthrough. David Sinclair has won awards for being in the top 50 people in healthcare in the world. This Harvard star, top-50 global healthcare innovator with his own lab, wins backing from elite scientists and MIT News. We unpack that MIT article here—while random GPs dismissing it lack this level of evidence.
What About This Trial?
This study is testing the ageing reversal on retinal cells. Retina trials test this therapy on one of the body’s most complex sites—where errors could prove disastrous if scaled body-wide—yet ER-100 remains viable for general use too. (Not medical advice.)
In this trial the ER-100 is administered with AAVs. AAVs are viruses. This is not the only way to administer CRISPR treatments. The viruses in this trial are “trained” to release the actual CRISPR treatment when a transactivator protein (rtTA or tTA). Which is “modulated” by the presence of Doxycycline, an antibiotic. Doxycycline is not used in this case for its antibiotic properties, just it’s ability to trigger the virus.
Do we Know Anything Else About How it Works?
He said on StarTalk podcast that 70% reductions in ageing are common place in his lab in cells and in whole animals, and that it is working in monkeys. But, this information is in quotes spread out through the podcast; it is there though.
Isn’t This Risky?
People claim this treatment causes tumours, but regulators have now approved it for human trials. Tumours form only when using the oncogene C-Myc—the fourth Yamanaka factor—to fully revert cells to pluripotent stem cells. This trial, like most age-reversal therapies, avoids inducing stem cells altogether. These treatments only use the other three factors Oct4, Sox2, Klf4, and there have been no cases of cancer growth in the glaucoma studies trialling OSK treatments like ER-100. It only sometimes happens with OSKM treatments (which isn’t this) and probably other CRISPR treatments.
The StarTalk podcast actually does say this. If you administer OSKM to go “all the way” to stem cells, rather than OSK to reactivate growth to peak health. Which is 25 years old in humans. If you did that, then you’d become a giant tumour (haha).
When are We Going to be Able to Access a working age Reversal Treatment?
Well, you can’t, yet. In the coming decade, it may become well enough researched that its officially available to humans in the regular medical system. David Sinclair has mentioned that “a few” companies are already reversing age. But, its not generally that available, or a recognised treatment. Ageing isn’t even considered a disease at the moment.
I actually wrote an “In theory, how would you access this treatment in medically deregulated zones like Roatán?” guide, and several paper like assessments and technical specifications to validate if society can viably restructure to support being ageless.
Please get involved!
If you want to share with me your concerns in a real way about the evidence, please leave me a comment. If you were questioning the 109% increase mentioned in some trials, and how confusing this is, leave me a comment. It’s because the mouse did not have time to recover. I assume. What basically happened in that study is that if the mouse was human, it would have had about 4 years left to live and have got approximately 5 years extra lifespan.
It’s important to remember that the papers describing this subject, prove one thing at a time. Science is about isolating and proving one consistent variable in each experiment/paper. That’s how it works, so in order to build with it, you need to be able to think clearly which elements to combine into a product.
This post should have now completely updated you about ER-100 age reversal. So long, for now <3