Liz Parrish Just Announced That She is The First Patient to be Treated With Gene Therapy to Reverse Aging

On rare instances I blog about medical issues that are either unrelated to hair loss or perhaps/potentially related to hair loss.  This post is an example of the latter, since gene therapy could end up also being the ultimate solution for hair loss and be safe enough to be used regularly for cosmetic purposes...although I would never go through it for such reasons.

Update: Liz Parrish updates us in this October 15 video, and she is not pleased at some of the negative coverage she has received.

Update: This story is now getting more coverage. The best new articles as of October 14 are from MIT Technology Review: "A Tale of Do-It-Yourself Gene Therapy" and from IEET: "Ethics in Treatment With Telomerase."

BioViva CEO Elizabeth (Liz) Parrish has been in the news a lot lately and I highly recommend viewing three of her recent videos and a podcast interview from this year that I have embedded all the way at the bottom of this post. BioViva seems to be a legitimate and respectable company based on its stellar advisory board. Ms. Parrish herself is extremely intelligent and well spoken as you will be able to see in the videos at the end of this post. I also find her to be very sincere. Her 20 years of being a vegetarian and her initial interest in childhood diseases are further positives in the compassion department in my opinion. Hopefully that translate to her really meaning what she says when it comes to gene therapy being available for all at a low cost or for free in the future.

Earlier today, Ms. Parrish participated in a very interesting AMA on Reddit that is worth a thorough browse.  I was watching/reading the Ask Me Anything (AMA) live, and got a major shock when Ms. Parrish announced that she recently became the first patient (“patient zero”) to get gene therapy to reverse aging using her company’s proprietary technology.  She underwent this therapy several weeks ago (at least based on the date of the initial press release from September 30) , and announced on Reddit for the first time today that she herself was “patient zero.”  Apparently her whole procedure was filmed by a professional film crew and I am hoping that it turns into a documentary that airs on national tv.

Below is the initial announcement from Ms. Parrish in response to a set of four questions from a Redditor.  She answered many other questions about the exact nature of her treatment during the AMA.

I was surprised that Liz Parrish was the first patient to undergo this treatment, especially since she is only 44 years old and can perhaps afford to wait for a few years prior to getting gene therapy.   After all, BioViva has a lab in Colombia and has received interest from clinics in the Bahamas and Mexico per the third video below.  I assumed that BioVia would initially be testing their anti-aging gene therapy on Colombians or on aging/sick people from around the world who were willing to fly to Colombia/Bahamas/Mexico and so on.  Ms. Parish claims that she felt it was the ethical thing to do to get herself treated first before trying this on other people.

From a hair loss perspective, Ms. Parish mentions that hair loss and gray hair are a sign of aging in the Reddit and in one of the below videos if I recall correctly.  Perhaps this genetic treatment when perfected as much as possible will lead to a reversal in gray hair and regrowth of lost hair?  Even if this particular gene therapy does nothing for hair, it will represent a watershed moment in the use of genetic modification in humans.  Many hair loss researchers have stated that gene therapy is the ultimate solution to hair loss.

It should be noted that there are already many gene therapy treatments undergoing clinical trials on humans, but this one was the first one that was done to reverse aging and probably the first one that was filmed and will hopefully be shown on tv some day soon.  Moreover, Ms. Parrish is going to update us on her overall health and condition on a regular basis.  She claims that she feels more energetic and sleeps better at the moment in comparison to prior to getting injected, but it is too early to make any conclusions. We are finally moving from mice and rats to humans  (frustrated mice and rat hating long time hair loss forum members and blog readers really have to see the cartoon at 19:15 in the first video and Liz Parrish’s comments immediately thereafter).

From May 2015:

From July 2015:

From August 2015:

And finally, below is a great podcast interview in which I love the fact that she is highly critical of the patent-minded and money-minded modern pharmaceutical/medical industry complex.

From September 2015:

Liz Parrish podcast interview.

46 thoughts on “Liz Parrish Just Announced That She is The First Patient to be Treated With Gene Therapy to Reverse Aging”

  1. Interesting! Science is definitely advancing but I would be way to afraid to alter my genes. One little mistake could be life or death or a weird mutation

    1. it’s not about altering your genes. Your genes don’t change. It’s quite the opposite, it’s about maintaining your chromosomes integrity, and that’s what makes you look young and be healthful.

    1. Certainly looks like it will be the best ever such conference. I will write about it soon, but most people already know whats happening.

  2. Thank you admin for that interesting post. I am sure that in the future, with genetic therapies, stem cells and bioprinting whole the process of aging will be banished. I mean: humans won’t be immortal of course, but the visible traces of their age won’t be visible.
    As far as I know dr Angela Christiano was working on genetic therapy for hair loss, but now she seems to be decidedly more fouces on stem-cells, maybe she saw it is faster way to treat alopecia?

  3. The race for a new treatment that began a long time ago. Although some people may not like this. This is the real truth.

    I said in other posts that will be a AWESOME NEWS in Miami
    for people suffering the disease of androgenetic alopecia.


    Best Regards,


    1. The same things that work to prolong life expectancy in animals (especially rats) have usually shown inconsistent results in humans. Caloric restriction raised life expectancy big time in small organisms and mice/rats, but the results were not conclusive on larger apes. And you can’t easily measure results in humans unless you can find humans who are willing to follow a strict monitored dietary regimen for 30 plus years:-( But I do agree that since it works on animals, we will sooner or later find something that will work on humans too.

      1. But it should work in humans. it was tested in human tissues – in vitro – already and old ones became young again. I’ll have to disagree with you, this is way too different than caloric restriction, cause as you well said, this should have to be monitored – in humans – for a long period of time, in order to see if the effects are similar to what was observed in mice. So, it makes it hard to compare them today. With gene therapy theres a BIG difference, cause, just to start with, the telomeres can be measured, not to say that the signs of reversal will be obvious, and will not take 30 plus years, will be a lot faster.

        This beautiful girl is already testing it in herself now and will soon give us the answer, maybe within a year or less than that she will be even more beautiful and younger.

  4. I am shocked histogen will be there. Do you guys think she completed the third clinical trial since last year under the radar? It’s been exactly one year and we haven’t heard jack from them. Very curious what she has to say. It looks like a good conference with great presenters. Now we need them to show us awesome hair growth and at least one new treatment coming out in 2016. It’s been almost 20yrs let’s get the ball rolling and grow some hair and make millions for the pharmaceutical company who releases it

    1. Take it with a grain of salt. This is par for the course and I wouldn’t expect them to give out much new information but probably present some of their previous research/ knowledge, remember that this is an educational conference (from what I understand but could be wrong). It is very unlikely that they would have gotten their phase 2 trial done based on the most recent presentation they gave Oct. 2014 with the timeline they gave (starting early 2015) along with the fact that they were looking for funding for that trial as of recently (funding round opened in May 2015 specifically to finance HSC). With that said, I would love for Histogen to surprise me but I’m not getting my hopes up — admin, your thoughts?

      Side note/ question for everyone: Considering that most of our balding is rather slow and looking at numbers from companies like histogen and replicel the placebos lose about 15% of their hair per year from the baseline (starting point). If a company like histogen or replicel were able to steadily increase our hair count at 15%/ year, essentially reversing hair loss at the same rate you were losing it, would you consider it a successful treatment? This would mean for something like histogen getting a treatment every year to essentially reverse your hair loss slowly (for me it would take 5 years to get back to where I would want to be). Or would you want a one off, have all of your hair back within one or two years for it to be considered a success?

  5. If the results are crap or if they say 5 more years, or more research needed for next clinical trial I will just accept the fact they can’t grow hair or someone is stopping them from releasing a better treatment lol. Will cut my hair super short and just move on. F it

  6. @curious: ,,If a company like histogen or replicel were able to steadily increase our hair count at 15%/ year, ” – where did you see such an information? Yes, it’s true that Histogen hair will be thinning over time, but I don’t exactly in which pace. With Replicel this matter is completely diffrent, beacuse its protocol, according to official statements, is projected to stop hairloss in injected follicles. Regrowth with Replicel wouldn’t be so big as with Histogen. Theses are two completely diffrent treatments, but they could work together.

    1. @barthes – my apologies… I forgot you guys take hypothetical questions as imperical data.

      I was just wondering what IF the case was we could grow our hair back over time, with any treatment, but that time span wouldn’t be a fast one but a slow process, similar to the speed of a typical balding process.
      I guess I’m wondering what you guys feel as far as an acceptable treatment. I personally would be thrilled if a treatment came out that I could do once a year to get back to where I wanted to over time but that is me. I know some people won’t take a treatment seriously unless it has amazing results within a certain timeframe.
      I guess my thinking behind it is that a one time cure all might never be a possibility no matter how good our technology or our understanding of balding gets.
      If we have a once a year injection to stop hair loss with little or no side effects… To me that treatment is already light years beyond any treatment currently available (save hair transplants). Of course I want something better than that but I still see it as improvement and a treatment that I would be willing to take.
      I guess in the end I feel that when we treat other sicknesses we don’t expect to pop a pill and for that sickness to be miraculously gone the instant we take it. And the bigger the sickeness the longer we expect treatment/ recovery to take (generally). Do you see baldness differently? Should the cure be immediate (within the first year) or would it okay if it took multiple years but you steadily got your hair back?

      ****autor’s note: I am not providing any scientific data, facts or information nor claim to be knowledgable in the slightest in regards to new, upcoming hair loss treatments or technologies. I am just some guy on the internet that is curious and trying to find a reasonable treatment myself.

      1. The answer you want nobody has and I suppose you don’t need guesses from people who knows not much more than you know. What will be the next treatment, how it’s going to be, when and so on. All conjectures.. It may be Histogen, may be Follica, Replicel.. may be bimatoprost, stepparent… who knows. One thing is sure, we’re getting closer.. but how how much close we are unfortunately it’s very hard to know.

        If we can reverse aging, as Liz Parrish is on her way to try to prove that in her own CLINICAL TRIAL, phase 1, 2 and 3 all together, thanks to her boldness and live spirit, than we will have all the time to wait until baldness gets cured, won’t have anymore to feel this anxiety that we’re losing our youth until a cure is available.

        What would be very odd is the cure for aging, and therefore almost all serious diseases that come along, coming before the mere cure for hair loss!! a thing that should be way easier to reverse. And this happening just because a clever girl decided to do things her own way.

    1. I never expect much from conferences myself. I don’t expect much from this one. You may rest assured, you won’t hear of a cure or a new treatment in a conference, never!

      What will come is like Cotsarelis talking about pgd2 in mice, it will more probably make you want to sleep than to jump crazy from knowing a cure is on its way.

  7. Age reversal is possible! hair loss cure is possible!

    But, by the way things look, Age reversal will come first.

    Hopefully, Age reversal cures baldness too, as a side.. lol

  8. I hate to be a wet blanket, but I’m going to be a wet blanket.

    Does anyone have any confirmation, other than the Reddit, that any of this has actually taken place, or is in the process of taking place, in terms of an actual human trial at this point?

    Seeing someone speak on the possibility of something, and them actually *doing* what they believe is theoretically possible are two very different things.

    I’ve personally been unable to confirm via any of my contacts in biotech that any of this is anything other than an elaborate troll.

  9. You make good points. We will know more if the video is released. It also seems like if Ms. Parrish is a troll/fraud, she has fooled highly intelligent people such as George Church, Aubrey de Grey and Bill Andrews etc…to become her advisers.

    Its not hard to believe that one person volunteered to get herself injected with some kind of virus based gene therapy, and this person happens to own the company that has created this therapy and knows how safe it is (perhaps they already experimented on humans at their Colombian clinic and do not explicitly say that? I think she said the Colombian gene therapy patients were mostly people with cancer). Also, per the below link:

    “Gene therapy is in multiple clinical trials now in human subjects. The technology has been around for more than twenty years.”

    1. Thank you for making my point for me. There are multiple trials years ahead of this one being conducted by actual scientific experts in the field. Ms. Parrish (who is actually Mrs. Parrish) has NO M.D., NO PhD, no Masters in biology, chemistry or for that matter, anything. She did at one time hold a license to cut hair, but that’s already expired. For example, Dr. Michael Fossel M.D. PhD states: I am not and have not been on Liz Parrish’s board of directors, nor is she on mine. Our intent is to ensure safety, efficacy, and credibility by pursuing FDA-sanctioned human trials aimed at Alzheimer’s and other diseases, not to skirt accepted protocol. Liz did once put my name on her board WITHOUT my permission, however I immediately requested that she remove it, which (as far as I know) she did. To be direct and clear, neither I nor our biotech company, Telocyte, are in any way associated with either Elizabeth Louise Parrish nor her companies Biotrove Investments nor Bioviva’s, nor will we be, ever. To be clear, we are not associated with her.

      Dr. Brian Hanley PhD Phil of U.C. Davis states: I wrote an article for about telomerase triggered by Liz’ publicity campaign. That article resulted in me getting pursued by one of her minions on FB and kicked out of some longevity groups. Liz has corralled people as diverse as Daria Khaltourina, a Russian scientist in Moscow, to write to me and ask me to stop disputing her. Oh, well. The facts are Liz is an idiot, She’s an ignoramus who has learned enough to be dangerous, but still hasn’t learned enough to realize how little she knows.

      Dr. Harriet Hall M.D. a retired family physician, former Air Force flight surgeon who writes about medical quackery writes:

      Telomerase is not a good thing
      Encouraging telomerase is most likely dangerous. Cancer is characterized by unregulated growth, and telomerase is active in 90% of human malignancies. We don’t want cancer cells to live forever. Drugs that reduce telomerase activity are being investigated as cancer treatments. So if Product B really increases telomerase activity, that might not be such a good thing. We might fall from the frying pan of the aging process into the fire of more cancers.

      The role of telomerase in aging is still controversial. Short telomeres could be just a sign of cellular age rather than a cause. In at least one species of seabird, they are neither: telomeres become longer with age.

      Stephen B. Strum, MD, FACP states:

      What is disconcerting about Ms. Parrish’s approach to research is that it appears to lack any semblance of structure. I emphasize “appears” since we have no information as to what ns assessment could be at least an attempt at measuring any degree of efficacy of her self-experimentation. And what are the variables upon which to judge the efficacy or lack thereof of this single case experiment?

      Is there a formal protocol? Are there measuring sticks other than “survival” to judge efficacy?

      We are living in difficult times where the concept of translational medicine is mostly talk, rather than reality. So, again, I can see why Ms. Parrish went to Colombia, South America, but it would seem to me that her experiment could have been less sensationalistic and with far more scientific structure. Nowadays, more than ever, it is hard to know “Is it real or is it Memorex?”

      Stephen B. Strum, MD, FACP

      Board Certified: Internal Medicine, Medical Oncology

      ASCO (American Society of Clinical Oncology) since 1975

      FACP (Fellow American College of Physicians) since 1979

      AUA (American Urological Association) since 1998

      ASTRO (American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology) since 2002

      Society for Hematopathology Founding Member 1982

      PCRI (Prostate Cancer Research Institute) First Medical Director and Co-Founder 1997

      Member ISCA (International Strategic Cancer Alliance)

      Dr. Stephen Barrett M.D. and founder of Quackwatch states:

      Two very critical links to reports based upon Ms Parrish’s reports are posted below

  10. She doesn’t look like a troll. And the idea has been already proven to work, in many studies with animals and in human tissue, cells, bones… She mentions that Macular degeneration can be cured already using a similar therapy already FDA approved, but costs more than One million dollars and thats one big problem, that she wants to tackle too, the costs, not just make the therapy possible and applicable, but affordable. Another thing, she looks really optimistic and confident in the procedure, that was in May I guess, it really looks that she is so thrilled that she couldn’t resist being the first patient.

  11. So the goal of this treatment is to live to be 150 and look 100 lol. How about they just grow a freaking healthy non dht hair follicle so we can get our hair back and live a normal happy 90 to 100yrs

    1. The goal is to live 150 and look 25 and off course this includes a full head of hair.. believe it or not, but the goal is that.

  12. i dunno man, if i could live forever bald i would be okay with that. It sucks but hey, whatever i’m immortal so ..f… it! lol

    btw replicel beat propecia in the radio interview 2 years ago hall said “so we know were on the right track” but indeed to the skeptics still shady ill believe it when i see it.

    1. Yes, an excellent read. The same Dr Fossel stated to me less than a month ago: I am not and have not been on Liz Parrish’s board of directors, nor is she on mine. Our intent is to ensure safety, efficacy, and credibility by pursuing FDA-sanctioned human trials aimed at Alzheimer’s and other diseases, not to skirt accepted protocol by skipping offshore. Liz did once put my name on her board WITHOUT my permission, however I immediately requested that she remove it, which (as far as I know) she did. To be direct and clear, neither I nor our biotech company, Telocyte, are in any way associated with either Elizabeth Louise Parrish, Liz Parrish, Liz Babcock or any of the other names she introduces and posts under nor are we in any way associated with her companies Biotrove Investments nor Bioviva Sciences nor will we be, ever. To be clear, we are not associated with her.

  13. Thanks admin for the interesting post. We shared it as soon as we finished reading it on several websites.
    Another step toward solving issues considered currently unsolvable.

  14. there’s an update concerning Liz Parrish having done in herself gene therapy.. I’ve read it, and it is disgusting how it was treated.. They shouldn’t diminish her this way:

    “Although she lacks formal scientific training, over the last two years Parrish has emerged as an enthusiastic spokesperson for the life-extension movement on blogs and podcasts. According to documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 27, she’d raised $250,000 for BioViva, which lists a modest two-bedroom home outside Seattle as its headquarters. Her LinkedIn profile lists a work history going back six years, including administrative roles at software companies.”

    Ridiculous how he tries to discredit her…

    “Gene-therapy preparations, which use a virus to shuttle DNA into human cells, could prove risky. But the technology has advanced so far in the last decade that it is within reach of a small company.”

    1. Dr. Mohit Khera from the Baylor College of Medicine, told me privately that when DHT levels are in the low normal range, the use of DHT blockers such as finasteride will have little value and may not be effective in the treatment of genetic hair loss. With this as a suggestion, we will now optionaly offer DHT blood tests for any person who wishes to have this test prior to going on finasteride (Propecia). If the blood levels are low, we may not advise the use of this drug as the goal of using this drug is to drop DHT levels, which may already be low.

  15. It’s gotten so bad we are considering take hair from our nut sacks and putting it on our heads. Gotta love the advancements of 2015 haha scarred up scrotum and curtly little hairs on our heads haha

  16. Hair loss is one of the complicated problems that have been around since the existence of the human-being, yet there’s still no one found a way to slow it down or cure it, even though there’s some medication in the market today that allegedly believed to help regrow some, not all the lost hair include in their package bad side effects, for example Finasteride (brand names: Proscar & Propecia) was first introduced to the market and approved by FDA as a treatment for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia in 1992, then Merk Pharmaceuticals obtained FDA approval in 1997 for (1mg) Finasteride to treat hair loss, since some of the patients who used this medication to treat BPH reported hair growth, that’s when this medication hit the market as a miracle to fight hair loss. Inside the medication package there’s a written warning showing the potential risks and side effects associated with this drug, but a lot of consumers didn’t worry about the harm this drug may cause, their hair loss was overwhelming they couldn’t live with it, they couldn’t stand to look themselves into the mirror everyday and see the bald spot getting bigger, so they had to risk it, some of them now experiencing permanent side effects, whereas some others thinking of committing suicide because the lack of quality healthy life that have been stripped away from them.

    I’m a regular visitor to this page, and I really follow all the new technologies and advancement in hair loss treatment. I thank you Admin for your efforts in giving us the opportunity to follow all that matters in this subject. As for Liz Parrish’s work in gene therapy and becoming the patient zero to undergo this type of treatment, she is absolutely courageous to try it herself before anyone else, which takes a lot of bravery and true love for the science and helping others. After watching her presentation which was very informative, some questions just popped to my head like how the gene therapy will help with hair loss? Technically hair loss is due to DHT formation into the scalp and becoming sensitive to it that it will attack the hair follicles.

    I’m optimist and as you stated in this blog many researchers believe that the gene therapy will be the ultimate solution for hair loss. I believe so, and I hope something to come out very soon. I have been suffering hair loss myself for 13 years now, and I didn’t use any medication due to the fear of the side effects, and I’m sure there are many people like me who are crossing their hands praying for a cure, because hair is one of the most important facial aesthetics that can show confidence and class.

  17. Lastly, an article about Ms Parrish’s Medical Direcor. Now one might assume he be a biologist or chemist, or MD with a specialty in gerontology, but you’d be wrong. You know the Dr. That reads your X-Rays after an orthopedic issue?, you got it, he’s a radiologist with no board certification in ANY area that comes close to relating to this area of science and technology. His name is Jason Williams and in 2013 he was ordered by the FDA to cease and desist from this unproven, untried medical quackery.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *