On the quest for the fountain of youth with Jim Mellon

Growing old, ageing, senescence, whatever you want to call it, has long been considered part and parcel of being human. So much so that medical science, until very recently, has largely been focused on treating the symptoms of getting old, and has barely sought to mitigate the process itself.  

Jim Mellon is an investor helping to rip up that approach and his latest book, Juvenescence – Investing in the Age of Longevity, offers a tantalising view of where the human race might be heading and the opportunities available for those who, like him, believe there is money to be made from this nascent sector.  

“This is the biggest money fountain that I have ever seen,” he claims at the start of the book. “The longevity business has quickly moved from wacky land to serious science and within just a couple of decades we expect average life expectancy in the developed world to rise to around 110.” 

Intrigued, I’ve arranged to interview Jim, who made his name in the last millennium investing in mining and property, at the Wellcome Collection in London. I wanted to meet here for two reasons that resonate with the subject-matter being discussed.  

The Collection is part of the Wellcome Trust, a global foundation with investments of almost £27 billion that was founded by medical pioneer Henry Wellcome, and its two permanent exhibitions are aptly called “Medicine Man” and “Being Human”. 

Going existential for just a moment as we pause in front of a display of ancient fertility amulets, I ask Jim if he thinks this idea of subverting the ageing process, previously thought of as natural and inevitable, is somehow actually changing what it means to be human.  

It’s an interesting question, he concedes, but he is keen to downplay any notions of seeking immortality. “The point is, we are not trying to do cryogenics where you put people into an iced state for a long time, looking for a cure in the future. We’re not looking at taking the brain and putting it into a sort of hologram or anything like that. 

“All we are doing is continuing the paradigm of human existence of the past 200 to 300 years, where there have been remarkable advances in sanitation, antibiotics, vaccinations, infant mortality, less manual labour, and therefore fewer accidents at work, all of which mean we are living longer. But now, for the first time, people have identified the actual pathways of ageing and are able to influence them.”  

But although living forever may not be in our grasp quite yet, the concept isn’t strictly confined to the world of science fiction. “There are creatures out there which are immortal, or as near as dammit immortal,” points out Jim, referring to simple organisms such as the hydra. “All we’re trying to do is to replicate those pathways. It’s bio-engineering, but it's not gene therapy. It’s not altering our genes, that’s coming later. That’s what will keep you, or your children, alive for 150-plus years. But what we have today can keep us alive for 110 or 120 years.”  

The pages of Juvenescence – defined as the state of being youthful or of growing young and also the name of the business that Jim uses to “commercialise the science” behind longevity – are littered with examples of the science, and the companies, behind it that will deliver these extra years, some of them spectacularly complex. I ask Jim if he can distil them down to the areas that excite him most for the benefit of those readers of The Wealth Report – not to mention its editor – who don’t have a degree in biochemistry.  

“It’s a great question. All drug companies, including Wellcome, where we’re standing at the moment, and which was one of the great British drug companies, treat the diseases of ageing, typically cancer, heart disease, respiratory disease, Alzheimer’s, dementia, obesity and diabetes. 

“But what they’re treating are the things that are caused by ageing. You get cancer, you’re cured of cancer, you get heart disease, you’re cured of heart disease, but something else will get you. The emerging commercial science of longevity treats the actual fundamental disease of ageing – the absolute top part of the waterfall.  

“I’ll give you an example. You and I, as we get older, will have more senescent cells. These are cells that are basically in a state of limbo and they cause a lot of inflammation. When my dad, who’s 90, walks with difficulty, it’s because of senescent cells. There are now drugs that will be able to remove those senescent cells and restore people to a pre-frailty state. This is in human trials now.”  

So this goes beyond prevention and actually holds the promise of turning back the clock, of reversing the ageing process, I venture, just to check I’m on the right wavelength. Absolutely, Jim tells me, reinforcing his point with an eye-catching example from one of the businesses he has invested in.

“In the first half of this year, not ten years out, we will have a product that will be in sick patients that will regrow their liver in situ. We have found a technology that is implanted into a lymph node, of which we have hundreds, next to the liver, which will re-grow a brand new liver within four or five months. 

“Now, you might say that can’t be true,” he continues, perhaps noting the widening eyes of the person videoing the interview. “But we’ve done it in 600 animals, including dogs and pigs, with 100% success. The FDA [the US Food and Drug Administration, which licenses new drugs] has allowed us to go straight to a phase two trial on sick patients. This is no longer science fiction, this is here and now.”  

Although the cutting edge of science sounds like a very exciting place to be, I put it to Jim that it must also be a risky environment for investors. Prior to our interview the UK press has been full of stories about the collapse of former star stock picker Neil Woodford’s investment fund, which included a number of medical investments. The spectre of the Theranos blood-testing scandal still hangs over Silicon Valley. How does he avoid such traps, I ask. 

“That’s another great question,” says Jim, who clearly knows how to keep an interviewer on side. “Neil, who I never met, seemed to have concentrated only on British technology, which is admirable, but there’s not enough of it. He was doing stuff which I would consider to be probably overpriced: not that the science wasn’t good, but the price he paid to go into these things was too high.

“We’re not like that. We start these companies ourselves. We’re the principal shareholders. We put money in at every round of investment, so it’s our own money. Greg [Bailey, a Juvenescence co-investor] and I have each invested US$15 million in Juvenescence in hard cash. I wouldn’t say it’s a labour of love, but it’s very important to us to make sure that we have commercial successful products, and we’re going to do everything we can to avoid blowing money in a bad way.”  

And in terms of frauds like Theranos? “You could spot that quite easily, because she had people like Henry Kissinger and George Shultz on her board. Both of them are in their 90s and know nothing about biotech. She had no recognised biotech investors or people with a biotech background on her board, and she wouldn’t show anyone the product.”  

However, Jim concedes that he won’t back a winner every time. “This is complicated science, this is going to be difficult, there will be multiple failures – but we only need two out of our fifteen to work.”

Routinely researching and writing about the subjects he invests in – previous science-based investment guides include Fast Forward and Cracking the Code – must help increase the likelihood of picking winners, I suggest. He agrees, but adds that there is more to it than just learning about the topic. 

“In the case of Juvenescence, I did the research by driving around the US, 8,000 miles in two months, and I met all these people. We just hit it at the time when the science was catching up with the aspiration of all of us to live a longer and healthier life. We became friends and colleagues with a lot of these people, and as a result were able to do deals that others weren’t able to do.” 

Talking about deals, I ask Jim what he considers to be his best investments so far in this area. “Greg and I were the early investors in a company called Medivation. It was worth about US$100 million when he brought investors in, including myself, and we sold it for US$14.5 billion. The Biohaven investment, the most recent one, four years ago, was probably the most successful in terms of return. We owned 54% for US$3 million and it’s worth US$3 billion now on the New York Stock Exchange.”  

The figures are impressive, but Jim is quick to emphasise that it’s not all about returns. “From my own point of view the money will all go back to the charities that I support, because I’ve got enough money to live off. But we really want to make this a successful enterprise because then it will attract more people, more companies, and there will be many more therapies to help everybody to live longer, healthier and happier lives. The more money there is, the more accelerated the science.”  

In addition to his charitable work, Jim has also set up a non-profit organisation called The Longevity Forum in conjunction with economist Andrew Scott, author of The 100-Year Life, to look at the wider implications of longer lives on society and individuals.  

In the current environment of super-charged ESG and the rapid spread of the “purpose over profit” mantra increasingly espoused by business leaders, this approach seems to tick all the boxes. But in the past Jim has been at pains to stress that the duty of a company is only to its shareholders. Does he still stick by that view, I wonder.  

“Obviously I’m not investing in tobacco companies or arms companies or companies that are destroying the environment – my two principal areas of investment are longevity and clean meat, or new agriculture – but I do hold to the view that if you set up a company your responsibility is to the shareholders, and from that will flow benefits for other stakeholders. I really believe in that. However, what I do with the money that comes from these investments is my affair.”  

One of my next questions was going to be what will he be writing about next, but Jim has beaten me to it. From his previous answer I get the impression it’s going to be something to do with food and agriculture.  

“Yes,” he confirms, but as you’d expect his interest, while tapping into the climate change and animal rights discourse – “I personally don’t eat meat because of the cruelty factor” – is some way ahead of the investment curve. 

“Today plant-based meat is huge, so Beyond Burger, Impossible Burger, and all that sort of stuff is taking off, but we’re investing in non-animal cultured meats and derivatives like leather and milk. A few animal cells are fed and over time they grow to be meat, or they grow to be fish, and they don’t need any antibiotics [livestock medication is a significant contributor to rising global antibiotic resistance], they don’t have any hormones, they don’t have any waste, they don’t have any cruelty, they don’t have any emissions. What’s not to like?”  

But will vegetarians and vegans eat these new products that Jim says will be on our shelves by the end of the decade? “Not all vegetarians will accept it, but you’re not killing the animal. It’s a bit like me taking a biopsy from you. Am I doing you irreparable harm? No.”  

It seems ironic that we’re discussing a solution to a major cause of antibiotic resistance in the home of a business that made much of its money from such drugs, but also appropriate that the interview seems to have come full circle, from one existential question to another.  

Nothing can be taken for granted anymore, but if Jim Mellon is right and significant numbers of people are soon routinely living well into their 100s, the chances are that in the future we’ll be having to answer even more of these questions – and that people will be investing in sectors that don’t even currently exist.