There is no difference between saving lives and extending lives, because in both cases we are giving people the chance of more life.

The aim is to postpone frailty, postpone degenerative disease, debilitation and so on and thereby shorten the period at the end of life, which is passed in a decrepit or disabled state, while extending life as a whole.

I think it's reasonable to suppose that one could oscillate between being biologically 20 and biologically 25 indefinitely.

My approach is to start from the straightforward principle that our body is a machine. A very complicated machine, but none the less a machine, and it can be subjected to maintenance and repair in the same way as a simple machine, like a car.

It's not just about life, of course; it's about healthy life. Getting frail and miserable and dependent is no fun, whether or not dying may be fun.

The biggest handicap in research is an ability to think outside the box. The handicap is being encumbered by all the conventional wisdom in a given field.

What I'm after is not living to 1,000. I'm after letting people avoid death for as long as they want to.