<\/p>\n
http:\/\/www.washingtonpost.com\/business\/on-leadership\/peter-thiels-life-goal-to-extend-our-time-on-this-earth\/2015\/04\/03\/b7a1779c-4814-11e4-891d-713f052086a0_story.html<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
By Ariana Eunjung Cha April 3
\nPeter Thiel, 47, revels in being a contrarian. The billionaire co-founder of PayPal and investor in Facebook has set up a fellowship program that encourages kids to drop out of college, has given millions of dollars to Ron Paul\u2019s PAC and has started an organization dedicated to the world\u2019s first floating city out of reach of any government on Earth. But the idea he\u2019s most passionate about is using technology to extend human life far beyond what it is now and all the biological, societal and philosophical changes that come with that.<\/p>\n
He\u2019s funding dozens of scientists through his nonprofit, Breakout Labs, which aims to support early-stage companies that push the boundaries of what\u2019s possible, and directly through personal donations to institutions and individuals.<\/p>\n
This interview, one in a series of conversations with Silicon Valley figures who are shaking up philanthropy, has been edited for length and clarity.<\/p>\n
Why aging?<\/p>\n
I\u2019ve always had this really strong sense that death was a terrible, terrible thing. I think that\u2019s somewhat unusual. Most people end up compartmentalizing, and they are in some weird mode of denial and acceptance about death, but they both have the result of making you very passive.<\/p>\n
I prefer to fight it.<\/p>\n
Almost every major disease is linked to aging. One in a thousand get cancer after age 30. Nixon declared war on cancer in 1971, and there has been frustratingly slow progress. One-third of people age 85 and older have Alzheimer\u2019s or dementia, and we\u2019re not even motivated to start a war on Alzheimer\u2019s. At the end of the day, we need to do more.<\/p>\n
All your philanthropic projects are founded on the idea that there\u2019s something wrong with the way the current system works. What are the challenges you see in biomedical research?<\/p>\n
I worry the FDA is too restrictive. Pharmaceutical companies are way too bureaucratic. A tiny fraction of a fraction of a fraction of NIH [National Institutes of Health] spending goes to genuine anti-aging research. The whole thing gets treated like a lottery ticket. Part of the problem is that aging research doesn\u2019t always lend itself to being a great for-profit business, but it\u2019s a very important area for a philanthropic investment.
\nHow is your approach different?<\/p>\n
NIH grant-making decisions end up being consensus-oriented, focused on doing things that a peer review committee thinks makes sense. So you end up with a very conservative bias in terms of what gets done.<\/p>\n
[On the other hand,] the original DARPA [Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency] was phenomenally successful. You had a guy running it, and he just gave out the money. It was more focused on substance and less on the grant-writing process. That\u2019s the direction we should go. I worry that right now, we have people who are very nimble in the art of writing grants who have squeezed out the more creative.<\/p>\n
You\u2019re currently funding Cynthia Kenyon, Aubrey de Grey and a number of other researchers on anti-aging. What was it about these individuals and their work that got your attention?<\/p>\n
They think far outside the conventional wisdom and are far more optimistic about what can be done. I think that\u2019s important to motivate the research.<\/p>\n
Leon Kass \u2014 the physician who was head of the President\u2019s Council on Bioethics from 2001 to 2005 \u2014 as well as a number of other prominent historians, philosophers and ethicists have spoken out against radical life extension. Kass, for instance, has argued that it\u2019s just not natural, that we\u2019ll end up losing some of our humanity in the process. What do you think of their concerns?<\/p>\n
I believe that evolution is a true account of nature, but I think we should try to escape it or transcend it in our society. What\u2019s true of evolution, I would argue, is true of all of nature. Even basic dental hygiene. If it\u2019s natural for your teeth to start falling out, then you shouldn\u2019t get cavities replaced? In the 19th century, people made the argument that it was natural for childbirth to be painful for women and therefore you shouldn\u2019t have pain medication. I think the nature argument tends to go very wrong. .\u2009.\u2009. I think it is against human nature not to fight death.<\/p>\n
What about the possibility of innovation stagnation? Some argue that if you live forever, you won\u2019t be as motivated to invent new ways of doing this.<\/p>\n
That\u2019s the Steve-Jobs-commencement-speech-in-2005 argument \u2014 that he was working so hard because he knew he was going to die. I don\u2019t believe that\u2019s true. There are many people who stop trying because they think they don\u2019t have enough time. Because they are 85. But that 85-year-old could have gotten four PhDs from 65 to 85, but he didn\u2019t do it because he didn\u2019t think he had enough time. I think these arguments can go both ways. I think some people could be less motivated. I think a lot of people would be more motivated because they would have more time to accomplish something meaningful and significant.
\nHow long is long enough? Is there an optimal human life span?<\/p>\n
I believe if we could enable people to live forever, we should do that. I think this is absolute.<\/p>\n
You\u2019re currently funding researchers who are working on a lot of different ways to slow down or even stop aging \u2014 a treatment that would work on the cellular or molecular level, regenerative technologies to replace body parts, cybernetics. If scientists are able to come up with a way to extend human life, how do think it will work?<\/p>\n
It will be very multi-pronged. I don\u2019t think the answer will be a single pill. I think there will be a series of regenerative technologies and a series of cures for various diseases. I think it\u2019s probably a combination of those two that will be the most critical. Then there are a few problems that will probably require a different approach \u2014 like how do you avoid decay of the brain over time.<\/p>\n
What does the future look like if everyone lives to be, say, 150?<\/p>\n
Certainly if we could just live to all be 100, that would be quite a transformation. There is good news and bad news. The bad news is: If you don\u2019t believe in the good news, you\u2019re not saving enough for retirement and likely to spend much of your old age in poverty. I suspect if people live a lot longer they would be retired for a somewhat longer period of time. Just the financial planning takes on a very different character.<\/p>\n
I think you have far more generations in a family. People would have great-great-great-grandchildren in ways I think quite rare today. I think if you had a much longer life span, I do think the question of the future becomes more important. What would the 22nd-century world look like?<\/p>\n
[In terms of careers,] I think you could, for example, become a teacher and then you could become a writer, and then you could become a doctor. Those are completely different professional lives. If someone tries to do all these things now, that is generally seen as kind of a really confused person who doesn\u2019t know what they are doing. But in the future, there is a way in which you might be able to have these really divergent careers. Or maybe you could have something new \u2014 a combination of those three.
\nSo would you say you have an optimistic view of the future? Are there particular books, TV shows or other things that influenced your outlook?<\/p>\n
There is a sort of genre of optimistic science fiction that I like, and I don\u2019t think there is enough of. One of my favorites is a relatively short story by Arthur C. Clarke, \u201cThe City and the Stars.\u201d It\u2019s set in this far future on Earth in this somewhat static society and trying to break out. There is a sense we are just at the beginning of this infinite journey. .\u2009.\u2009. I was a fan of the original \u201cBattlestar Galactica\u201d and watched a few of the remake ones, and it was so much more negative than the original. The Cylons were the enemies, and it was generally a bad tech experience. I much prefer the original.<\/p>\n
What about you? What would you do with the rest of your life if you knew you would live that long? Would you want to be a rock star or take up professional golf or something like that?<\/p>\n
I\u2019m not sure .\u2009.\u2009. but I would be tempted to go back into some specific technical research area where I would just work on really understanding some area of science. I always have the sense that I don\u2019t have enough time to learn about all the things I want to learn about.<\/p>\n
Assuming the breakthrough in eternal life doesn\u2019t come in our lifetime, what do you hope to have achieved through your philanthropy before you die? What would you like to be remembered for?<\/p>\n
I think if we made some real progress on the aging thing, I think that would be an incredible legacy to have. I have been fortunate with my business successes, so I would like to encourage, coordinate and help finance the many great scientists and entrepreneurs that will help bring about the technological future. It\u2019s sort of not important for me to get credit for the specific discoveries, but if I can act as a supporter, mentor and financier, I think that feels like the right thing.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
http:\/\/www.washingtonpost.com\/business\/on-leadership\/peter-thiels-life-goal-to-extend-our-time-on-this-earth\/2015\/04\/03\/b7a1779c-4814-11e4-891d-713f052086a0_story.html Peter Thiel\u2019s quest to find the key to eternal life By Ariana Eunjung Cha April 3 Peter Thiel, 47, revels in being a contrarian. The billionaire co-founder of PayPal and investor in Facebook has set up a fellowship program that encourages kids to drop out of college, has given millions of dollars … Continue reading Washington Post: Thiel on anti-aging<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[12,10],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-256","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-interventions","category-reference"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ef.panicola.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/256","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ef.panicola.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ef.panicola.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ef.panicola.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ef.panicola.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=256"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.ef.panicola.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/256\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":257,"href":"https:\/\/www.ef.panicola.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/256\/revisions\/257"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.ef.panicola.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=256"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ef.panicola.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=256"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.ef.panicola.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=256"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}