Trials in humans vs animals

We dismissed animal experimentation as a pathway for this competition in the assumption that this would fail to capture the public’s imagination. There have been trials in animals, particularly mice. Even if teams achieved a true breakthrough, we are skeptical it would catalyze the sort of innovation an XPRIZE is meant to achieve.

However, it may be the case that age reversal in pets (cats or dogs) would capture the public’s imagination and legitimize the field of longevity - which is another goal of this competition. Especially if teams could test more cutting-edge innovations.

What do you think? Should we take another look at animal trials? Or keep our focus on humans?

@sureshj, @GeorgePerry, @dani_chronomics, @SWBT, do you have an opinion on this? Should we consider trials in cats or dogs for our age reversal competition, or keep the focus on humans?

@NickOttens Interesting point, animal trials are certainly valuable and have the potential to deliver results much faster before starting in humans of course. I wouldn’t dismiss the interest in animal models as a stepping stone, particularly as the markets for domesticated animals are not insignificant… This is definitely something we could support with on the aging biomarker side of things, although we’ll leave it you to decide whether its a distraction or an accelerant to results in humans :slight_smile:

Humans are the best model for humans. All animals fall short.