LongeCityNews Last Updated: 24 March 2026 - 06:31 PM

The dominant amyloid cascade hypothesis for Alzheimer's disease broadly states that amyloid-β aggregation occurs early in the progression of the condition, setting the stage for later and much more damaging neuroinflammation and tau aggregation. There remains a great deal of room to debate the details of this progression, how exactly amyloid-β and tau aggregation are linked. Is it as simple as a matter of chronic inflammation generated by amyloid-β aggregation slowly rising to the level of inciting a feedback loop between tau aggregation and further inflammatory signaling? Or some other more direct connection between the biochemistry of amyloid-β aggregation and tau aggregation? Here, researchers advance a novel theory on this topic.

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is defined by cognitive decline in conjunction with accumulation of aggregated amyloid β (Aβ) and tau, yet existing models of AD fail to provide a simple connection between Aβ and tau. However, microtubules provide an intriguing nexus for pathological interactions between the two. Tau binds to microtubules and is critical to maintaining their proper function. We demonstrate that Aβ also binds to microtubules with affinity comparable to that of tau itself.

We hypothesize that displacement of tau by Aβ leads to microtubule dysfunction and facilitates tau phosphorylation and aggregation. Importantly, in this model, aggregation of Aβ is not the primary cause of toxicity, which allows many of the apparent contradictions between Aβ pathology and cognition to be rationalized. This model highlights the importance of both tau and Aβ and enables additional therapeutic and intervention strategies to be considered.

Link: https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgag034

There has been a surge of interest in the potentially beneficial effects of late life vaccination in recent years. The challenge in looking at correlations between health and adult vaccination status is that we don't know the degree to which it reflects biological mechanisms, such as trained immunity effects reducing the chronic inflammation of aging, versus selecting for people who generally take better care of their health and thus tend towards better outcomes across the board. Causation is hard to derive from human epidemiological data.

Previous studies suggest that a shingles infection can cause blood clots to form around the brain and heart, raising the risk of events such as heart attacks, strokes, and venous thromboembolism. By preventing the infection, the shingles vaccine is thought to also help prevent the formation of these dangerous clots. For the current study, researchers used TriNetX, a database that includes health records of millions of Americans, to assess rates of serious cardiac events in people age 50 years or older with atherosclerotic disease between 2018-2025. The study included 123,411 people who had received at least one dose of either the Shingrix or Zostavax shingles vaccine and the same number of people who had not received any doses of shingles vaccine. Demographics and other health conditions were similar between the two groups.

When researchers examined cardiac events occurring between one month and one year after shingles vaccination (or the same time period for unvaccinated individuals), they found that vaccination was associated with a lower risk across all outcomes studied. Vaccinated individuals were 46% less likely to suffer any major adverse cardiac event and 66% less likely to die from any cause. They were also 32% less likely to suffer a heart attack, 25% less likely to suffer a stroke and 25% less likely to develop heart failure. These levels of risk reduction are substantial, comparable to what would be expected from quitting smoking.

The study focused only on outcomes during the first year after shingles vaccination, so researchers noted that the lifetime impacts may differ from those observed during this time period. A previous study released in 2025 found getting the shingles vaccine was associated with a 23% lower risk of cardiovascular events in a healthy general population, and the vaccine's cardioprotective effects may last for up to eight years.

Link: https://www.acc.org/About-ACC/Press-Releases/2026/03/16/19/33/Shingles-Vaccine-Drastically-Cuts-Risk-of-Serious-Cardiac-Events

The Buck Institute for Research on Aging today announced the launch of Healthspan Horizons, a new initiative designed to address one of the most urgent challenges in modern medicine: how to measure, understand, and extend healthspan—the years of life spent in good health.

People are living longer—but too many of those added years are spent managing chronic disease. In other words, healthspan—the years of life lived in good health—hasn’t kept pace. A growing body of evidence suggests that many aspects of healthy aging are changeable—and consequential for people, healthcare systems, and economies. What has been missing is the infrastructure to measure it coherently, compute it responsibly, and act on it collectively.

What Healthspan Horizons Is Building

Healthspan Horizons is building a new kind of healthspan research infrastructure: a platform that links multi-modal, real-world data from people’s everyday engagement with trusted wellness partners—like wearables, sleep, activity, nutrition, and labs—with periodic deep discovery measurements led by the Buck. The goal is to create uniquely powerful, long-term datasets that reveal what actually drives human healthspan over time—and to use responsible AI and the science of aging to turn those signals into interpretable healthspan trajectories and earlier signals of disease prevention.

Dense longitudinal datasets matter because their value compounds: when many different signals are measured on the same person over time, the data becomes exponentially more informative. That density makes it possible to detect subtle patterns, understand resilience, and identify early divergence from healthy aging—well before a sudden, life-ending, or life-debilitating disease takes hold.

Healthspan Horizons will support participation through partner programs and Buck-led studies, enabling individuals, wellness companies, and health systems to contribute longitudinal data under clear permissions and ethical governance. In return, participants gain access to a shared discovery engine: insights that emerge only when diverse data streams are responsibly linked over time—helping validate what works, identify earlier signals of decline, and benchmark outcomes across populations. Over time, the platform aims to translate these discoveries into clearer guidance on what helps people stay resilient—supporting more years of energy, strength, and independence.

Used responsibly, AI—grounded in Buck’s deep biology of aging—can integrate complex, multi-modal signals into interpretable healthspan trajectories, unlocking more years of energy, function, and independence. But that future is only possible if we can responsibly connect the right kinds of data at scale. Healthspan Horizons exists to make that integration possible—and to help democratize the benefits of healthspan science for all.

A Federated, Privacy-Preserving Model

Healthspan Horizons at the Buck Institute responds to this gap by reframing how healthspan science is organized. Instead of forcing data into a single silo, Healthspan Horizons enables partners to collaborate and learn together while keeping data stewardship where it belongs. Through a federated, privacy-preserving approach, approved analyses can run across partner environments—without requiring ownership or commercialization of individuals’ health data.

“The science of aging has matured to the point where extending healthy life is within reach. What we need now is the infrastructure to organize and apply that knowledge responsibly. Healthspan Horizons positions the Buck to help lead that next chapter—making healthspan measurable, trustworthy, and accessible to all,” said Eric Verdin, President and CEO, Buck Institute of Research on Aging.

“Most of us don’t just want a longer life—we want more years of energy, strength, and independence,” said Nathan Price, PhD, Professor, Buck Institute for Research on Aging; Co-Founder, Healthspan Horizons. “What’s been missing is a way to bring together deep, long-term health data and apply rigorous AI to understand what truly drives healthy aging—responsibly, interoperably, and at scale. Healthspan Horizons is built to make that possible.”

A Platform for Collective Healthspan Intelligence

Healthspan Horizons is designed as an open, federated platform that links deep biological data, longitudinal outcomes, and real-world context. By aligning fragmented data ecosystems through shared standards, interpretable intelligence, and ethical governance, the initiative creates the conditions for healthspan to become a practical and trusted unit of value across research, care delivery, and policy.

The platform invites participation not simply as users, but as co-builders of a healthspan commons.

• Researchers are invited to contribute methods, validation, and discovery into a shared framework that expands the reach, reuse, and real-world relevance of existing science —while preserving data privacy and consented data sovereignty.
• Clinicians and health systems can collaborate on translating complex data into interpretable healthspan trajectories that support prevention, early intervention, and functional longevity.
• Payers and employers can explore new models of value grounded in functional years gained, rather than episodic utilization.
• Individuals are invited to participate as informed partners, retaining agency over their data while benefiting from insights designed to support longer, healthier lives.
• Donors and public partners are encouraged to support shared infrastructure focused on healthspan as a public good.

Healthspan Horizons is focused on defining and validating shared healthspan measures—turning multi-modal longitudinal data into computable trajectories and early-warning signals that partners can use for research and prevention.

Why Buck, Why Now

Healthspan Horizons is driven by Buck Institute scientists and systems thinkers with decades of experience at the intersection of aging biology, data science, and translational research.

Led by Nathan Price, PhD, and Yi Sherry Zhang, PhD, this initiative launches with engagement from leaders across research, healthcare, philanthropy, and innovation ecosystems, including an advisory group spanning academic medicine, systems biology, precision health, and public health. Advisors include Larry Brilliant, MD, global public health leader and Co-Founder and CEO of Evity; Joel Dudley, PhD, biomedical AI entrepreneur, Co-Founder and CSO of Bevimi and former Chief Scientific Officer of Tempus; Kara Fitzgerald, ND, leading clinician–researcher advancing epigenetics and lifestyle medicine; Lee Hood, MD, PhD, pioneer of systems biology and CEO of Phenome Health; Shaista Malik, MD, MPH, Associate Vice Chancellor for Integrative Health at the University of California, Irvine and cardiologist specializing in preventive cardiology; Sara Szal, MD, functional medicine physician and New York Times bestselling author focused on precision longevity; and Eric Verdin, MD, President and CEO of the Buck Institute and internationally recognized geroscience leader.

“Medicine is shifting from reactive and episodic to predictive and preventive,” said Lee Hood, MD, PhD, pioneer of systems biology and Co-Director of the Center for Human Healthspan, Chief Innovation Officer and Distinguished Professor at the Buck Institute and Founder and CEO of Phenome Health. “To make that transformation real, we must move beyond fragmented data silos toward shared, federated intelligence. Healthspan Horizons helps build the computational and ethical foundation needed to make healthspan measurable and actionable.”

A Shared Commitment to the Future of Healthspan

The future of healthspan will not be defined by any single dataset, institution, or technology. It will be shaped by how effectively societies choose to organize, govern, and apply scientific knowledge.

Healthspan Horizons exists to help make that future possible—by ensuring that healthspan becomes computable, trustworthy, and accessible, while remaining grounded in human dignity and collective benefit.

The full Healthspan Horizons White Paper, Bridging Wellness & Clinical Science: A Federated Healthspan Data Framework for the 21st-Century Longevity Economy, outlines the scientific, technical, and governance foundations of this effort and is available at healthspanhorizons.org/whitepaper. Researchers, clinicians, organizations, and individuals interested in participating are invited to learn more at healthspanhorizons.org/join.

About Healthspan Horizons

Healthspan Horizons is a Buck Institute–based initiative focused on building shared infrastructure for healthspan science. Through federated data frameworks, interpretable intelligence, and ethical governance, Healthspan Horizons aims to accelerate discovery, translation, and collaboration across the global healthspan ecosystem. Learn more at: https://healthspanhorizons.org

As the treatment of aging as a medical condition became more mainstream, there was a tendency for advocates and researchers to avoid talking about extending life span. They instead talked about pushing back the onset of poor health and even said explicitly that the goal of research and development was not to lengthen overall human life. From the perspective of aging as an accumulation of cell and tissue damage and potential rejuvenation therapies as repair of that damage, this view is incoherent. A priori, we know that repairing damage will extend both the overall life span and the period of good function in machinery, including biology. This is well studied under the heading of reliability theory, modeling how damaged systems fail.

In medicine, however, we observe that about half of the upward trend in life expectancy over the past century or more arises from an extension to health without an extension to life span. How can that be? A common explanation is that some forms of late-life damage are relatively little affected by any advance in public health or medical technology. One possibility is that transthyretin amyloidosis is the mechanism of interest, an accumulation of harmful amyloid that contributes to cardiovascular disease, and is now thought to be much more prevalent than previously assumed. Since that is now a treatable condition, albeit one that is only actually treated in the rare very severe cases, it will be interesting to observe what happens when the therapies become generic and thus potentially widely used.

Healthy life extension: Geroscience's north star

Mikhail Blagosklonny was right to say out loud: the goal of geroscience is life extension. Not "vitality" or a polite euphemism for better late-life care, but life extension. He also insisted on disciplined evidence: if we claim we are modifying aging, we should demand hard outcomes in mammals rather than an endless parade of biomarkers. Where I would extend his argument, as a longevity physician, is: the field must stop treating "lifespan vs. healthspan" as a fork in the road. In medicine, and in the lives our patients actually live, they are not competitors. The only mission that is both scientifically coherent and clinically meaningful is healthy life extension: more years in full health.

The "healthspan, not lifespan" framing makes geroscience sound as though it is not about longevity, when longevity is what emerges from delaying the biology that drives multimorbidity. World Health Organization (WHO) data show that from 2000 to 2019, life expectancy increased more than healthy life expectancy, meaning we added years lived with disease or disability. A cross-national analysis quantified the global "healthspan to lifespan gap" at approximately 9.6 years. Modern systems deliver more years, but not more good years. That is precisely why geroscience must be more ambitious. We should treat healthy life extension as the goal and define success as health-adjusted longevity: extending lifespan while proportionally expanding function, resilience, and independence.

If we agree that the goal is healthy life extension, incrementalism becomes a choice rather than a constraint. Consider the balance sheet: within the National Institute on Aging (NIA) budget, the Division of Aging Biology is funded at roughly $346 million, whereas neuroscience-related research is funded in the billions. We have not resourced basic aging biology in proportion to its theoretical leverage: the possibility of delaying many diseases at once. This is not a call to rob disease programs. It is a call to stop pretending a civilization-scale problem can be solved with niche-scale funding.