This number seems oddly small and specific? If aging is "cured" in humans in 12-15 years, you would expect it to be already cured today in animal models. Is there such an example where we were able to make an animal immortal?
In any case I'm skeptical for the same reasons as the parent. Until we can do it to a mouse reliably, it's at least 20 years away.
The other thing that people miss is we have cures for a whole lot of things that people still die from in many parts of the world. If this technology was available, I don't see any encouraging precedent that it would become cost effective enough in any normal time horizon to be available to normies like the rest of us.
There are competing hypotheses for what's causing aging and how it may be "cured".
Among the more "simple" ones is that aging is programmed, for some reason like to ensure genetic diversity and that new genes can get a good chance to survive and reproduce. That's the thing with young blood seemingly doing some rejuvenation on older individuals. This has not yet resulted in huge lifespan extensions of any animals. Whether this is just because the procedures needs to be tweaked a bit or the hypothesis is wrong should become clear in the next few years I think.
There are 2 ways to fix the problem: have a cure for cancer or use other proteins instead of Yamanaka factors that only do partial reprogramming.
There's research going on in both direction, though the second solution could have more research in it (the $2B injection to Altos Labs by Jeff Bezos can help though).