As a complete dilettante in biology, I think this is a badass claim to make. I'm rooting for you guys. You're using science for direct, tangible benefit of humanity. Hoping to see the next post about the mechanism of the stuff you do soon! Best wishes to your work. P.S. Can you tell me using Forever Labs as an example what's the difference in responsibilities between the CEO and the President of the company? I wonder just how different it is from the sharing of responsibilities between you and those of a less medically-inclined company.Dr. Katakowski's hypothesis that bone marrow cell degradation directly contributes to aging and age-related disease is the founding principle of Forever Labs, Inc.
It's always safe to have a hypothesis. :) But seriously, the idea isn't that crazy. We've long known that bone marrow stem cells lose their therapeutic potential with age. Years ago b_b and I proposed to the NIA and NINDS to simply try young-to-old bone marrow stem cell transplantation in mice to see if it conferred health benefits. Hilariously, one of the reviewers said that our proposal didn't "use enough technology". A couple of groups have done similar experiments since, and have seen increased lifespan. We will be soon running our own study at Forever Labs. There's been a lot of studies about the 'young blood effect' recently, whereby young mouse blood seems to be beneficial to older mice. Blood cells are born in the marrow, and the marrow largely contributes to the profile of non-cell soluble factors in the blood. We think that younger marrow might result in a young blood effect. I get nearly the same authority, but with much less responsibility. :) Steve and I might not be a traditional example. He has a strong business background, and my expertise is science. We basically run the company together, but each take the lead where our expertise applies.P.S. Can you tell me using Forever Labs as an example what's the difference in responsibilities between the CEO and the President of the company?