- LEVITY
- Posts
- ”Spend a day in a cancer ward”: A VC's challenge to longevity research (and why I disagree with him)
”Spend a day in a cancer ward”: A VC's challenge to longevity research (and why I disagree with him)
LEVITY Podcast episode #13 - with longevity investor Sergey Jakimov
Peter Ottsjö
November 27, 2024
✅ Introduction to episode 13 with Sergey Jakimov. ✅ What is LongeVC investing in? ✅ A somewhat heated exchange on healthspan vs lifespan. ✅ My reaction to Sergey’s view on what’s important. ✅ Detailed show notes.
Join me and accelerate the Longevity Revolution with Vitalism Foundation!
Vitalism is the movement for humanity to fight its hardest against aging and death. And if you agree, you’re already a Vitalist at heart. Since it is LEVITY's sponsor, when you join Vitalism Foundation as a Mobilized Vitalist, you’ll support both Vitalism and LEVITY.
As a member, you'll join a fast growing group of over 200 Vitalists, including 100+ founders and investors. You'll enjoy special events, working groups, premium content and unique discounts on longevity products. But most importantly, you will join a community that's making a difference.
Special Offer for LEVITY Subscribers: Join today and receive a 30% discount on your membership using the code LEV at checkout.
A powerful emotional appeal shouldn't override logic
I need to start with something Sergey Jakimov, partner at investment firm LongeVC, says to me and Patrick in this episode. Because I think it’s important to adress it head-on.
Here’s the quote (very slightly edited for clarity):
”I think that whoever is courageous enough to get on the stage and start shouting that healthspan extension or dealing with age-related diseases is not important and we need to work on defying aging, needs to spend a day in a cancer ward. Okay, so spend a day in a cancer ward head and neck surgery, breast surgery, whatever. You'll see things, right? Which will eventually make you change your paradigm of thinking tremendously, right? And then if it's not good enough for you, you can go out there and you can actually explain to these people that, well, we cannot help you at this point of time, but we're working on defying aging. So maybe in 200 years, this cancer ward will be empty.”
In other words, Sergey is suggesting that focusing on extending lifespan and solving aging is misplaced when so many people are suffering from diseases like cancer today.
To which my reply to Sergey was:
”That's interesting because I'd say that you could just as easily go to a retirement home and talk to people that are about to die because they're over 90 and say that, 'Sorry, there's nothing we can do for you guys.' Because we are in the process of taking care of other stuff in the meantime.”
My counter argument is of course the other side of the moral equation - but the problem is that most people doesn’t even view it as an equation at all. After a certain amount of time has passed since we were born we are somehow not worthy of living anymore. And that’s not even a controversial view - it’s the norm.
There are several ironies here.
One: Cancer is fundamentally a disease driven by aging.
Two: We pour billions into cancer research every year, yet treat the root cause - aging itself - as a marginal concern.
Another irony worth noting: LongeVC's own tagline is ”for an ageless future”. Yet when I asked Sergey about this during our conversation, his interpretation revealed a much more conservative approach than such an ambitious phrase might suggest. Rather than pursuing that ageless future directly, they've chosen to focus on individual diseases and incremental improvements in healthspan.
