8 replies to this topic

[chrisaeternal]

Hey friends, I thought LongeCity would be trying to build an actual in-person longevity city!

 

I'm glad there's so much discussion of longevity here, but it'd be amzing to join an actual new city being built for those that want to live longer.

 

Does anyone know how to get in touch with the leaders of Vitalia.city or get a recommendation?

 

I applied but haven't heard back, and the price increases today.

 

I would be available for a video call or in-person meeting for you to get to know me before vouching for me.

 

Any pointers appreciated.

 

I think this is a perfect fit for me - lifestyle, biotech acceleration, and coliving / charter cities / network states.

 

I would dedicate my life to this. Accelerate longevity research or die trying

 

Thanks!

[Mind]

Go to their website and click on the "Apply" button.

 

Nice idea. Tough to develop. You need a lot of money to create a new "jurisdiction". I think the best way would be to create a jurisdiction in international waters (platform or large vessels). It would take a lot of money to get the idea off the ground.

[healthtycoon]

I do. Feel free to reach out.

[QuestforLife]

This is an interesting development. In the past I had the impression that Aubrey and Co thought that longevity treatments would eventually just be absorbed into the mainstream and be developed under the FDA, etc. He now appears to have come around to the views of Liz Parrish and Co., who have always wanted to go the medical tourism route. The problem with this route is credibility. But it is clear that the main regulatory bodies are not going to change at the required rate (or at all), and indeed the general malaise and deterioration in the medical establishment precludes that working anyway. What I'd be keen to understand is if Aubrey still see life extension being for everyone (eventually). Once you go down the billionaire island route.... 

[albedo]

This is an interesting development. In the past I had the impression that Aubrey and Co thought that longevity treatments would eventually just be absorbed into the mainstream and be developed under the FDA, etc. He now appears to have come around to the views of Liz Parrish and Co., who have always wanted to go the medical tourism route. The problem with this route is credibility. But it is clear that the main regulatory bodies are not going to change at the required rate (or at all), and indeed the general malaise and deterioration in the medical establishment precludes that working anyway. What I'd be keen to understand is if Aubrey still see life extension being for everyone (eventually). Once you go down the billionaire island route.... 

 

Interesting comment but could you point to a when and where AdG seems to have changed position? Did I understand your point wrongly? His new LEV Foundation state "We are humanitarians first and foremost". Maybe I am naive ...

For Liz I was at one of her recent presentations and I understood "tourism" mostly for the currently badly sick, denied access to FDA approved treatment.

[QuestforLife]

Interesting comment but could you point to a when and where AdG seems to have changed position? Did I understand your point wrongly? His new LEV Foundation state "We are humanitarians first and foremost". Maybe I am naive ...
For Liz I was at one of her recent presentations and I understood "tourism" mostly for the currently badly sick, denied access to FDA approved treatment.

In terms of a change in position, he wasn't for medical toursim before, now he is. Now admittedly he didn't explicitly come out against medical tourism previously, but I still feel this is a shift for him. This is based on me watching his talks over 10+years. It's a general impression. This is backed up by the fact he is supporting these regulatory free zones as a way of fast tracking development of longevity technologies. In the past he'd just kind of say that governments would have no choice but to adopt these technologies as they emerged. He seems to be shifting on this point to be more active in driving these technologies into use. Now the issue with doing this using using medical tourism is twofold: 1) credibility. Can you convince people this is going to work and be worth the money? The answer to this is probabbly yes; rich people will try this out if they have somewhere to go to do it. 2)the second issue is a.consequence of the first; you run the risk of being elitist - he might deny this and stick to the line of these treatment benefiting all humanity - and he surely means it too, but we can all see what is happening with the medical establishment of the US and Europe creaking at the seams and barely able to function in some cases. To me this feels like a billionaire island plan, safe from the decay of the West and the hordes of humanity. Aubrey probably has to walk the line between encouraging this to attract investors, whilst still emphasising the philanthropic angle of his work.

[albedo]

I see, thank you for your reply @QuestforLife.

[Boopy!]

I haven't been here in so long. I had really stopped following longevity research out of a kind of sadness or hopelessness (my own issue) at what I was seeing in the world of billionaires, actually. It turned it from something joyful and intriguing to downright inhumane (when you get into blood harvesting and organs, particularly.) So I stopped. I'm at the point where I love the idea but would prefer to create this community of my own (which I kind of have, anyway, with my own garden, growing my own supplements (some went less well), etc. Until you find access to such a place create your own, I always say. While you might not have access to creating your own blood supply via a Peter Nygaard or Elon Musk, you have options. Just a lot fewer. It's interesting to pop back in and realize how much things have changed. 

[Boopy!]

btw in presentations wouldn't the audience matter a bit? There are ways of phrasing that enable someone to toe the line and not turn off potential investor or get bad publicity. Medical tourism is such a vague concept. Yes there are people who require something better than standard insurance crap. There are also people desperate for a new kidney who find a way that is less than ethical. This is why presentations need the follow up questions to be direct about where the line is.