Friday, June 17, 2016

Dandelion Root Tea Is 100X More Effective Than BARBARIC Chemotherapy

Dandelion Root Tea Is  100 Times More Effective Than Chemotherapy

 By Douglas R. Whitman Cancer Survivor, Owner/Skipper see My Blogs  June 10. 2016

Dandelion Root Tea is an amazing drink, which when consumed regularly, can Eliminate cancer cells within a few days only, and that is not all, it can keep the healthy cells safe from the cancer affection. It is quite popular for its medical properties and it has great number of health benefits.  You may wonder whether this tea is easy to make, but do not worry it is very simple. Centuries ago people have been using the dandelion tea as a medical treatment for a number of various illnesses. Today, the root of this plant is used more often and it is helpful for reducing cancer.
Many researchers discovered that dandelion root is more effective than the Barbaric chemotherapy.
Recent scientific study made by the Dept of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Canada confirmed that the root of dandelion plant is capable of eliminating cancer cells and protecting the rest of the cells. This information will make the people suffering from cancer very happy and full with hope.
As  mentioned, the dandelion root can eliminate cancer cells less than two days in an efficient way. Because of the results made by these scientists, they got support for another more detailed study which will provide more proof about the effectiveness of the root of dandelion and in which way it is good for use.  A person that experienced the excellent properties of the dandelion root, is the 79 years-old Don Porter who CURED stage IV metasticized cancer more than 9 years ago.  Don has  been drinking  Dandelion Root tea ever since and first read about Dandelion's Power in -Confessions of a Kamikaze Cowboy: A True Story of Discovery, Acting, Health, Cancer, Health Recovery & Quality Life till Now 2016
by Dirk Benedict (of the A-TEAM)
WARNING: This book may change the way you look at Brainwashed Drs., the great American chemicalized diet, & health forever. This book will challenge your AMA Brainwashed thinking about looking at illness, taking responsibility, yourmiraculous IMMNE System & about actors--particularly Dirk Benedict, star of several hit television series (the A-Team), Charlies Angels, Battlestar Galactica & author of this book.    Initially, Confessions of a Kamikaze Cowboy tells the fascinating story of Dirk Benedict's journey from the big sky country of Montana to the hustle & hype of Hollywood.  It also vividly describes his personal odyssey of self-exploration, discovery, & growth--from struggling actor to celebrity, from meat eater to vegetarian, from cancer victim to cancer victor.  Confessions of a Kamikaze Cowboy is brilliantly written--insightful, witty, humorous, & always challenging--a "tour de force". You will come face to face with many of the newly discovered truths in Dirk's life. While you may not agree with everything Confessions of a Kamikaze Cowboy has to say, it will make you reconsider a great many realities in your own life.





Tuesday, June 14, 2016

Healing Mixture that has worked

Mix These 6 Ingredients and KEEP Cancer or any Tumors AWAY !

Cancer Expert Don Porter who cured stage IV Mets cancer 9 years ago, says that if you consume the mixture of turmeric and pepper (Theracurmin), Herbal Aloe Force, Astralagus, Resveratrol, olive oil, there is  little chance that cancer will develop in your body.
This is a mixture of six easily available ingredients.
He came to this awareness by exploring the two thousand years old tradition of use of these ingredients in eastern India, His own 20,000 hours of Research/Due Diligence and whose results were confirmed in the western medical research. Don recommends that you should use these three ingredients on a daily basis.
mixture
THE RECIPE:
Mix a quarter spoon of turmeric with half a teaspoon of olive oil and add a pinch of ground pepper 2 ounces Herbal Aloe Force, 40 drops  Mix the ingredients well.
The resulting mixture can be used as an addition to salads and meats.
If you want to add the mixture in meals that are on heat, you need to put it at the end of the food in order to keep the good effects that it has.
The best would be to dilute the mixture with some water. Consume it on a daily basis and as often as possible.
Everything is in the turmeric. Its anti-inflammatory abilities are incredibly powerful. There is no other natural ingredient that is effective in reducing inflammation such as the turmeric  

Silicon Valley - Venture Capital - Technology is Investing BILLIONS into Longevity and Quality of Life

Live for ever: Scientists say they’ll soon extend life ‘well beyond 120’
   
Fixing the ‘problem’ of ageing is the mission of Silicon Valley, where billions is pouring into biotech firms working to ‘hack the code’ of life – despite concerns about the social implications- 2016 MANY New Advances towards LONGEVITY 


ZoĆ« Corbyn    11 Jan 2015 
In Palo Alto in the heart of Silicon Valley, hedge fund manager Joon Yun is doing a back-of-the-envelope calculation. According to US social security data, he says, the probability of a 25-year-old dying before their 26th birthday is 0.1%. If we could keep that risk constant throughout life instead of it rising due to age-related disease, the average person would – statistically speaking – live 1,000 years. Yun finds the prospect tantalising and even believable. Late last year he launched a $1m prize challenging scientists to “hack the code of life” and push human lifespan past its apparent maximum of about 120 years (the longest known/confirmed lifespan was 122 years).
Yun believes it is possible to “solve ageing” and get people to live, healthily, more or less indefinitely. His Palo Alto Longevity Prize, which 15 scientific teams have so far entered, will be awarded in the first instance for restoring vitality and extending lifespan in mice by 50%. But Yun has deep pockets and expects to put up more money for progressively greater feats. He says this is a moral rather than personal quest. Our lives and society are troubled by growing numbers of loved ones lost to age-related disease and suffering extended periods of decrepitude, which is costing economies. Yun has an impressive list of nearly 50 advisers, including scientists from some of America’s top universities.   Yun’s quest – a modern version of the age old dream of tapping the fountain of youth – is emblematic of the current enthusiasm to disrupt death sweeping Silicon Valley. Billionaires and cos are bullish about what they can achieve. In Sept 2013 Google announced the creation of Calico, short for the California Life Co. Its mission is to reverse engineer the biology that controls lifespan and “devise interventions that enable people to lead longer and healthier lives”. Though much mystery surrounds the new biotech co, it seems to be looking in part to develop age-defying drugs. In April 2014 it recruited Cynthia Kenyon, a scientist acclaimed for work that included genetically engineering roundworms to live up to six times longer than normal, and who has spoken of dreaming of applying her discoveries to people. “Calico has the money to do almost anything it wants,” says Tom Johnson, an earlier pioneer of the field now at the Univ of Colorado who was the first to find a genetic effect on longevity in a worm.

In March 2014, pioneering American biologist and technologist Craig Venter – along with the tech entrepreneur founder of the X Prize Foundation, Peter Diamandis – announced a new co called Human Longevity Inc. It isn’t aimed at developing anti-ageing drugs or competing with Calico, says Venter. But it plans to create a giant database of 1 million human genome sequences by 2020, including from supercentenarians. Venter says that data should shed important new light on what makes for a longer, healthier life, and expects others working on life extension to use his database. “Our approach can help Calico immensely and if their approach is successful it can help me live longer,” explains Venter. “We hope to be the reference centre at the middle of everything.”
In an office not far from Google’s headquarters in Mountain View, with a beard reaching almost to his navel, Aubrey de Grey is enjoying the new buzz about defeating ageing. For more than a decade, he has been on a crusade to inspire the world to embark on a scientific quest to eliminate ageing and extend healthy lifespan indefinitely (he is on the Palo Alto Longevity Prize board). It is a difficult job because he considers the world to be in a “pro-ageing trance”, happy to accept that ageing is unavoidable, when the reality is that it’s simply a “medical problem” that science can solve. Just as a vintage car can be kept in good condition indefinitely with periodic preventative maintenance, so there is no reason why, in principle, the same can’t be true of the human body, thinks de Grey. We are, after all, biological machines, he says.  His claims about the possibilities (he has said the first person who will live to 1,000 years is probably already alive), and some unconventional and unproven ideas about the science behind ageing, have long made de Grey unpopular with mainstream academics studying ageing. But the appearance of Calico and others suggests the world might be coming around to his side, he says. “There is an increasing number of people realising that the concept of anti-ageing medicine that actually works is going to be the biggest industry that ever existed by some huge margin and that it just might be foreseeable.”
Since 2009, de Grey has been chief scientific officer at his own charity, theStrategies for Engineered Negligible Senescence (Sens) Research Foundation. Including an annual contribution (about $600,000 a year) from Peter Thiel, a billionaire Silicon Valley venture capitalist, and money from his own inheritance, he funds about $5m of research annually. Some is done in-house, the rest sponsored at outside institutions. (Even his critics say he funds some good science.)

Aubrey de Grey is chief scientific officer of his own charity, the Strategies for Engineered Negligible Senescence (Sens) Research Foundation. He funds about $5m of research annually. De Grey isn’t the only one who sees a new flowering of anti-ageing research. “Radical life extension isn’t consigned to the realm of cranks and science fiction writers any more,” says David Masci, a researcher at the Pew Research Centre, who recently wrote a report on the topic looking at the scientific and ethical dimensions of radical life extension. “Serious people are doing research in this area and serious thinkers are thinking about this .”
Although funding pledges have been low compared to early hopes, billionaires – not just from the technology industry – have long supported research into the biology of ageing. Yet it has mostly been aimed at extending “healthspan”, the years in which you are free of frailty or disease, rather than lifespan, although an obvious effect is that it would also be extended (healthy people after all live longer).
“If a consequence of increasing health is that life is extended, that’s a good thing, but the most important part is keeping people healthy as long as possible,” says Kevin Lee, a director of the Ellison Medical Foundation, founded in 1997 by tech billionaire Larry Ellison, and which has been the field’s largest private funder, spending $45m annually. (The Paul F Glenn Foundation for Medical Research is another.) Whereas much biomedical research concentrates on trying to cure individual diseases, say cancer, scientists in this small field hunt something larger. They investigate the details of the ageing process with a view to finding ways to prevent it at its root, thereby fending off the whole slew of diseases that come along with ageing. Life expectancy has risen in developed countries from about 47 in 1900 to about 80 today, largely due to advances in curing childhood diseases. But those longer lives come with their share of misery. Age-related chronic diseases such as heart disease, cancer, stroke and Alzheimer’s are more prevalent than ever.
The standard medical approach – curing one disease at a time – only makes that worse, says Jay Olshansky, a sociologist at the Univ of Chicago School of Public Health who runs a project called the Longevity Dividend Initiative, which makes the case for funding ageing research to increase healthspan on health and economic grounds. “I would like to see a cure for heart disease or cancer,” he says. “But it would lead to a dramatic escalation in the prevalence of Alzheimer’s disease.”
American biologist and technologist Craig Venter whose company Human Longevity Inc plans to create a database of a million human genome sequences by 2020. 
By tackling ageing at the root they could be dealt with as one, reducing frailty and disability by lowering all age-related disease risks simultaneously, says Olshansky. Evidence is now building that this bolder, age-delaying approach could work. Scientists have already successfully intervened in ageing in a variety of animal species and researchers say there is reason to believe it could be achieved in people. “We have really turned a corner,” says Brian Kennedy, director of the Buck Institute for Research on Ageing, adding that five years ago the scientific consensus was that ageing research was interesting but unlikely to lead to anything practical. “We’re now at the point where it’s easy to extend the lifespan of a mouse. That’s not the question any more, it’s can we do this in humans? And I don’t see any reason why we can’t,” says David Sinclair, a researcher based at Harvard.
Reason for optimism comes after several different approaches have yielded promising results. Some existing drugs, such as the diabetes drug metformin, have serendipitously turned out to display age-defying effects, for example. Several drugs are in development that mimic the mechanisms that cause lab animals fed carefully calorie-restricted diets to live longer. Others copy the effects of genes that occur in long-lived people. One drug already in clinical trials is rapamycin, which is normally used to aid organ transplants and treat rare cancers. It has been shown to extend the life of mice by 25%, the greatest achieved so far with a drug, and protect them against diseases of ageing including cancer and neurodegeneration.
A recent clinical trial by Novartis, in healthy elderly volunteers in Australia and New Zealand, found a variant of the drug enhanced their response to flu vaccine by 20% – our immunity to flu being something that declines with old age.  “[This was] the first [trial] to take a drug suspected to slow ageing, and examine whether it slows or reverses a property of ageing in older, healthy individuals,” says Kennedy. Other drugs set to be tested in humans are compounds inspired by resveratrol, a compound found in red wine. Some scientists believe it is behind the “French paradox” that French people have a low incidence of heart disease despite eating comparatively rich diets. 

In 2003, Sinclair published evidence that high doses of resveratrol extend the healthy lives of yeast cells. After Sirtris, a co co-founded by Sinclair, showed that resveratrol-inspired compounds had favourable effects in mice, it was bought by drug giant GlaxoSmithKline for $720m in 2008. Although development has proved more complicated than first thought, GSK is planning a large clinical trial this year, says Sinclair. He is now working on another drug that has a different way of activating the same pathway.
One of the more unusual approaches being tested is using blood from the young to reinvigorate the old. The idea was borne out in experiments which showed blood plasma from young mice restored mental capabilities of old mice. A human trial under way is testing whether Alzhemier’s patients who receive blood transfusions from young people experience a similar effect. Tony Wyss-Coray, a researcher at Stanford leading the work, says that if it works he hopes to isolate factors in the blood that drive the effect and then try to make a drug that does a similar thing. (Since publishing his work in mice, many “healthy, very rich people” have contacted Wyss-Coray wondering if it might help them live longer.)
James Kirkland, a researcher who studies ageing at the Mayo Clinic, says he knows of about 20 drugs now – more than six of which had been written up in scientific journals – that extended the lifespan or healthspan of mice. The aim is to begin tests in humans, but clinical studies of ageing are difficult because of the length of our lives, though there are ways around this such as testing the drugs against single conditions in elderly patients and looking for signs of improvements in other conditions at the same time. Quite what the first drug will be, and what it will do, is unclear. Ideally, you might take a single pill that would delay ageing in every part of your body. But Kennedy notes that in mice treated with rapamycin, some age-related effects, such as cataracts, don’t slow down. “I don’t know any one drug is going to do everything,” he says. As to when you might begin treatment, Kennedy imagines that in future you could start treatment sometime between the age of 40 and 50 “because it keeps you healthy 10 years longer”.
With treatments at such an early stage, guesses as to when they might arrive or how far they will stretch human longevity can only be that. Many researchers refuse to speculate. But Kirkland says the informal ambition in his field is to increase healthspan by two to three years in the next decade or more. (The EU has an official goal of adding two years to healthspan by 2020). Beyond that, what effects these drugs might have on extending our healthy lives is even harder to predict. A recent report by UK Human Longevity Panel, a body of scientists convened by insurer Legal and General, based on interviews with leading figures in the field, said: “There was disagreement about how far the maximum lifespan could increase, with some experts believing that there was a maximum threshold that could not be stretched much more than the current 120 years or so, and others believing that there was no limit.”
Nir Barzilai, director of the Institute for Ageing Research at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, is one of the pessimists. “Based on the biology that we know today, somewhere between 100 and 120 there is a roof in play and I challenge if we can get beyond it.” Venter is one of the optimists. “I don’t see any absolute biological limit on human age,” he says, arguing that cellular immortality – in effect running the clock backwards – should be possible. “We can expect biological processes to eventually get rid of years. Whether this will happen this century or not, I can’t tell you”. Such ideas are just speculation for now. But John Troyer, who studies death and technology at the Centre for Death and Society at the University of Bath, says we need to take them seriously. “You want to think about it now before you are in the middle of an enormous mess.”
What happens if we all live to 100, 110, 120 or beyond? Society will start to look very different. “People working and living longer might make it more difficult for a new generation to get into the labour force or find houses,” says Troyer. And, with ageing delayed, how many children are we talking about as being a normal family? “There is a very strong likelihood there would be an impact on things like family structures.” A 2003 American president’s Council on Bioethics report looked at some of these issues suggesting there may be repercussions for individual psychology, too. 
One of the “virtues of mortality” it pointed out is that it may instill a desire to make each day count. Would knowing you had longer to live decrease your willingness to make the most of life? De Grey acknowledges potential practical challenges but cheerily says society would adapt, for example by having fewer children, and with people able to decide when to end their lives. There are pressing questions too about who would benefit if and when these interventions become available. Will it just be the super rich or will market incentives – who wouldn’t want it? – push costs down and make treatment affordable? 
Will Britain’s NHS or health insurers in other countries pay for drugs that extend peoples lives? The medical cost of caring for people in their twilight years would fall if they remained healthier longer, but delayed ageing will also mean more people draw pensions and state benefits. But advocates say these challenges don’t negate the moral imperative. If the period of healthy life can be extended, then doing so is the humanitarian thing to do, says Nick Bostrom, director of Oxford’s Future of Humanity Institute. “There seems to be no moral argument not to,” he says. Troyer agrees but asks whether living longer does necessarily mean you will be healthier – what does “healthy” or “healthier” mean in this context? he asks.
The far future aside, there are challenges for the new tech entrants. Calico may get too side-tracked by basic research, worries de Grey; Venter’s approach may take years to bear fruit because of issues about data gathering, thinks Barzilai; while the money on offer from the Palo Alto prize is a paltry sum for the demanded outcome and potential societal impact, says Johnson. Still, history reminds us, even if they don’t succeed, we may still benefit.
Aviator Charles Lindbergh tried to cheat death by devising ways to replace human organs with machines. He didn’t succeed, but one of his contraptions did develop into the heart-lung machine so crucial for open-heart surgery. In the quest to defeat ageing, even the fruits of failure may be bountiful.
Tech billionaires who want to make death an elective
Why might tech zillionaires choose to fund life extension research? Three reasons reckons Patrick McCray, a historian of modern technology at the University of California, Santa Barbara. First, if you had that much money wouldn’t you want to live longer to enjoy it? Then there is money to be made in them there hills. But last, and what he thinks is the heart of the matter, is ideology. If your business and social world is oriented around the premise of “disruptive technologies”, what could be more disruptive than slowing down or “defeating” ageing? “Coupled to this is the idea that if you have made your billions in an industrial sector that is based on precise careful control of 0s and 1s, why not imagine you could extend this to the control of atoms and molecules?,” he says.
Peter Thiel
Peter Thiel, 47, PayPal co-founder and Facebook’s first investor, recently told Bloomberg Television he took human growth hormone (HGH) as part of his regime to reach 120 (there is no evidence it works and it can even cause harm). He also follows a Paleo diet, doesn’t eat sugar, drinks red wine and runs regularly. He has given more than $6m to Aubrey de Grey’s Sens Foundation, dedicated to extending the human lifespan. In a recent interview he identified three main ways to approach death. “You can accept it, you can deny it or you can fight it. I think our society is dominated by people who are into denial or acceptance, and I prefer to fight it.”
Sergey Brin
Google co-founder Sergey Brin, 41, is known for his love of special projects likeGoogle Glass and CEO Larry Page has credited him for helping bring its new biotech company Calico to fruition. “We’re tackling ageing, one of life’s greatest mysteries,” says the website of the research and development company launched in 2013 and which in September 2014 joined with biopharmaceutical firm AbbVie to pour up to $1.5bn into a research facility focused on fighting age-related diseases. An extra reason for Brin’s interest may be that he discovered in 2008 he carries a genetic mutation that gives him a greater likelihood of developing Parkinson’s disease. Bryn’s wife is co-founder of personal genomics company 23andMe.
Larry Ellison
Larry Ellison, co-founder of computer company Oracle, told his biographer Mark Wilson. “How can a person be there and then just vanish, just not be there?” Ellison, 70, created the the Ellison Medical Foundation in 1997 to support ageing research and has spent more than $335m in the area, though it announced in 2013 that it would no longer fund further grants in the area. Ellison remains tight lipped about why, but there are reports that, with the emergence of Calico, he felt that he’d done his bit.
Craig Venter
“A lot of people spend their last decade of their lives in pain and misery combating disease,” says Craig Venter, San Diego based pioneering biologist and billionaire entrepreneur who raced to sequence the human genome. “I think it is possible to begin to do more about that than we are doing.” Venter, 68, announced his new company, Human Longevity, to promote healthy ageing using advances in genomics and stem cell therapies in March 2014. Would Venter like to beat death? “I am not sure our brains and our psychologies are ready for immortality,” he says. “[But] if I can count on living to 100 without major debilitating diseases I would accept that Faustian bargain right now.”
Dmitry Itskov
A digital copy of your brain turned into a low-cost, lifelike avatar, which doesn’t age. That’s the vision of Dmitry Itskov, a thirtysomething Russian multi-millionaire internet mogul who founded an online media company New Media Stars. His 2045 Initiative, so-called for the year he hopes to complete it, aims to “create technologies enabling the transfer of a individual’s personality to a more advanced non-biological carrier, and extending life, including to the point of immortality”. Though not from Silicon Valley himself, his ideas draw on those of Ray Kurzweil, a prominent futurist, who is director of engineering at Google. Kurzweil has predicted that scientists will one day find a way to download human consciousness, no longer necessitating the need for our bodies.

How Silicon Valley is trying to cure ageing

Death has always been considered one of life's only real certainties, but now some of the world's top scientists are challenging the assumption

40
145
0
12
197
Email
Scientists believe that ageing is simply a medical problem for which a solution can be found Photo: Alamy
8:31PM GMT 14 Feb 2015
Humanity has long been in search of the mythical Fountain of Youth, from Alexander the Great to knights of the Crusades.
But now Silicon Valley scientists believe they are on the cusp of discovering the cause of ageing, which will help them achieve the unthinkable: find a cure.
Earlier this year, doctor and investor Joon Yun launched the Palo Alto Longevity Prize, offering $1 million (£650,000) to anyone who could “hack the code of life” and come up with a way to keep us young.
“It’s always been said that there’s two certainties in life: death and taxation, but death isn’t looking so certain anymore,” says Stuart Kim, one of 50 world-class advisers on the prize board and a professor in Developmental Biology and Genetics at Stanford University.
He believes ageing is simply a medical problem for which a solution can be found.


The prize will be awarded to the first team to unlock what many believe to be the secret to ageing: homeostatic capacity, or the ability of the body's systems to stabilise in response to stressors.
As the body ages, being able to recover from diseases, injuries and lifestyle stresses becomes more difficult. In youth, blood pressure and elevated blood sugar levels can return easily to normal levels.
As homeostatic capacity erodes as we get older, the body is no longer able to regulate these changes as effectively, resulting in diseases such as diabetes or hypertension.
Dr Yun, who worked for several years as a radiologist at Stanford Hospital before joining a hedge fund investing in health care, uses the analogy of a "weeble wobble" toy to explain that no matter how far it is pushed, it is able to centre itself again.A person only becomes aware of their body's homeostasis when they start losing it in middle age: often characterised by the loss of ability to tolerate cold or hot weather, or feeling nauseous after a roller-coaster ride where you once felt exhilarated.
"Up until about 45 years old, most people die from external stressors such as trauma or infection, but as we get older we die of what looks like a loss of intrinsic capacities," he tells The Sunday Telegraph.
Increased homeostatic capacity could allow people to live beyond 120 years – the theoretical maximum human lifespan.
Scientists could effectively slow down the body's clock and enable us to remain middle aged for 50 years or more, meaning we can feel 50 when we are really 80. The future could see us not just living longer, but staying healthier for longer.
"This isn't like plastic surgery where you're papering over the cracks, this is actually making a person younger from the inside out," Dr Yun says.
The first half of the prize will be awarded next year to the team that can restore the homeostatic capacity of an ageing adult mammal to that of a young one, thereby reversing the effects of ageing.
The second half to the team that can then extend the lifespan of their chosen mammal by 50 per cent of published norms.So far 15 teams have entered, including a handful from Stanford University as well as from further afield at the genetics department at George Washington University in DC and the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York.
But they face even fiercer competition outside the prize. Google recently unveiled its own $1.2 billion research centre Calico, or the California Life Company, aiming to achieve the tech giant's boldest ambition yet – extend the human lifespan. While their work, which is led by Arthur Levinson, former CEO of biotech firm Genentech, is shrouded in secrecy, they are said to be focusing on developing drugs for age-related neurodegenerative disorders.
"Our goal is to make progress on a very basic challenge: how to help people stay healthier for longer," Mr Levinson said of the project.
Meanwhile, Craig Venter, the geneticist who sequenced the first human genome, has set up his own company, Human Longevity Inc., alongside stem cell pioneer Robert Hariri.
They plan to sequence one million human genomes, including those of several supercentenarians, in order to build the world's largest database of human genetic variation. By looking at the DNA, they hope to discover a common feature among those living longer.
Dr de Grey, a British gerontologist at the SENS Foundation in Silicon Valley, has dedicated his life's work to solving the perennial problem of death. He believes it should be treated as a disease and can be postponed indefinitely.
"Since the dawn of civilisation, humanity has been enslaved by the knowledge that no lifestyle choice, no medicine, no quirk of fate, can enable anyone to live for more than a few decades without suffering a progressive decline that leads inevitably to death," the Cambridge University researcher says.
"But scientists have already drawn a road map to defeat biological ageing and will one day show there is no such inevitability. This is a when, not an if."
The idea of reverse-engineering ageing is not a new one. The American Academy of Anti-Ageing Medicine was set up in 1992, but only recently has the idea gained traction in mainstream medicine.
Dr Yun believes there had not been the support or funding needed to galvanise the field until now. "No one was incentivised to fix the underlying causes of ageing as too many of the big players in the medical and insurance industries benefit from the current system," he says.
There has also not been much of a public appetite, which scientists put down to lack of understanding. A recent survey by Pew Research found that most Americans did not actually want to live beyond the accepted human lifespan.
When asked if they wanted medical treatments that slowed the ageing process and allowed the average person to live to at least 120 years, 56 per cent surveyed said no. When asked how long they wanted to live, the median answer was 90.
Even Bill Gates, Microsoft founder and philanthropist, seemed to write off the desire to extend life as Silicon Valley hubris. "It seems pretty egocentric while we still have malaria and TB for rich people to fund things so they can live longer," he said, while in the same Q&A admitting that the last thing on his bucket list was "to not die".
Along with the reasoning that it felt "fundamentally unnatural", a number of survey respondents said they would worry about overpopulation and a potential lack of resources.
But Dr Yun says society will adapt to changes in life expectancy. "Just a few generations ago it was common to see people going into the workforce at 13, and dying before they turned 45. Things have changed since then – people now stay in education for longer, and have children and retire much later.  "Plus if people begin living longer, they will care more about what the world will look like in the future – impact concerns will shift from being their children's problem to being their problem."
Life-extending technology has become a booming industry in Silicon Valley.
Google X and Proteus Digital Health are among a dozen or so companies working on "ingestible tech" that they hope will go some way towards keeping us alive and healthy for longer.  Google's pill, which is filled with tiny iron-oxide nanoparticles that enter the bloodstream, is able to identify cancer tumour cells, which give off early biochemical signals when they contract the disease.  Proteus, having already gained FDA approval, is now in talks with Britain's National Health Service about the possible use of its sensor pill, which sends biological information it retrieves from the body to a smartphone.
At the same time, the XPrize Foundation, a charity that runs technology competitions, is working on developing a hand-held all-in-one diagnostic device. With one drop of blood, the "tricorder" will be able to accurately detect conditions such as diabetes and tuberculosis as well as measuring blood pressure and temperature – all from the comfort of your home.
Grant Campany, director of the XPrize, told The Sunday Telegraph: "It will all but eradicate the need to see a doctor for check-ups. The device will help people take their health back into their own hands."
The Longevity Prize's Dr Kim, who has spent the last 10 years looking into the causes of ageing, believes we cannot afford not to come up with a solution. "We shouldn't just be thinking of how to treat diseases like cancer, we should be looking at how to prevent them by figuring out why old people are much more likely to get them," he says. "If you could take 80-year-olds and make them biologically more like 60-year-olds, that's a 15-fold decrease in the rate of cancer right there.
"If we solve this, we all win."