Antiaging Research Priorities [was Re: Major Criticisms of

James james at nospam.com
Fri Sep 18 19:20:34 EST 1998


> In your examples if the treatment used allows a person to live significantly
> longer than 122 years then the treatment has altered the basic genetic
> control of the aging process and you will probably be receiving a Nobel
> Prize.
>
> If, however, the treatment only improves the likelihood of living up to 122
> years in a healthier body then you are increasing life expectancy and
> improving the quality of life.  You'll probably get rich but forget the
> Nobel.
>
> James and others feel that we should prioritize and concentrate our efforts
> on the latter research areas in the hopes that by increasing life expectancy
> by 20 or more years we might then be around when the the research into the
> genetic control of life span finally achieves results.
>
> I think the genetic control of aging and lifespan has already been described
> and that research efforts to develop therapies based on this discovery should
> be our number one priority.

Just one comment:  I'm still all for genetic therapies.  Obviously you've got to
be working on both in order to derive any benefit from your extra 20 years.

James




More information about the Cellbiol mailing list