The Dublin Longevity Declaration
Aubrey de Grey and Brian Kennedy are prominent scientists in the longevity community who take very different approaches to the problem of human aging. They recently collaborated to write the Dublin Longevity Declaration, now posted online and signed by some of the leading figures in the aging research field, as well as fellow travelers in the longevity industry, founders of biotech companies attempting to implement interventions to treat aging. We live in a world in which the opportunity to produce actual, real, working rejuvenation therapies exists, but too few people believe this to be true. There is too little funding devoted to this goal. Declarations signed by prominent scientists, patient advocates, and biotechnology industry executives are one part of a broad range of advocacy that is still needed if we are to live in a world in which the treatment of aging stands alongside the treatment of cancer as a broadly supported goal.
For most of our history, even getting to old age was a significant accomplishment - and while centenarians have been around at least since the time of the Greeks, aging was never of major interest to medicine. That has changed. Longevity medicine has entered the mainstream. First, evidence accumulated that lifestyle modifications prevent chronic diseases of aging and extend healthspan, the healthy and highly functional period of life. More recently, longevity research has made great progress - aging has been found to be malleable and hundreds of interventional strategies have been identified that extend lifespan and healthspan in animal models. Human clinical studies are underway, and already early results suggest that the biological age of an individual is modifiable.
A concerted effort has been made in the longevity field to institutionalize the word "healthspan". Why healthspan (how long we stay healthy) and not its side-effect of lifespan (how long we live)? The reasons are linked more to perception than reality. Fundamental to this need to highlight healthspan is the idea that individuals get when they are asked if they want to live longer. Many imagine their parents or grandparents at the end of their lives when they often have major health issues and low quality of life. Then they conclude that they would not choose to live longer in that condition. This is counter to longevity research findings, which show that it is possible to intervene in late middle life and extend both healthspan and lifespan simultaneously. Emphasizing healthspan also reduces concerns of some individuals about whether it is ethical to live longer.
A drawback of this strategy exists, though: many current longevity interventions may extend healthspan more than lifespan. Lifestyle interventions such as exercise probably fit this mold. Many interventions that have dramatic health-extending effects in invertebrate models have more modest effects in mice, and there is a concern that they will be further reduced in humans. In other words, the drugs and small molecules that we are excited about today may, despite their hefty development costs and lengthy approval processes, only extend average healthspan by five or ten years and may not extend maximum lifespan at all.
Most experts in the field now acknowledge that this is a likely outcome in the near future and one focus of longevity medicine is now on achieving it. But far more is possible. Arguably, the avoidance of an emphasis on lifespan is a consequence of an overly pragmatic approach to two fundamental questions: Why do humans age and what can we do about it? These are surely two of the biggest questions in human biology. Although we try our best to ignore it, the prospect of an inevitable decline in health leading to mortality shapes our thoughts and actions. Despite the incredible advances in longevity research, these questions remain unanswered. What biological processes bring about the aged state? Can aging not just be significantly slowed, but more and more thoroughly reversed? How would humans, and their societies, be different if we achieve these goals?
It will cost billions of dollars in research and significant time to answer such questions, but we assert that it would undoubtedly pay for itself many times over. What cards need to be turned over to answer the longevity question? What interventional strategies are likely to take us beyond modest healthspan effects, and toward radical change in the rate of biological aging? Most of the lifestyle or small-molecule interventions that are currently being tested target pathways affecting longevity. These include those designed to improve metabolism, restore youthful immune function, maintain youthful body composition, eliminate deleterious cells, or improve cellular stress responses. But there are strategies on (and just over) the horizon that may have much bigger impact. These need to be seriously interrogated and resources need to be devoted to these big questions. There needs to be an acceptance and tolerance of significantly higher levels of failure in longevity research, knowing that big ideas are sometimes wrong and that the ones that are right will far outweigh the setbacks. Is radical lifespan extension foreseeable? No one can answer that question with certainty. But there are certainly enough tantalizing clues suggesting that aging is sufficiently malleable to warrant the allocation of very substantial resources.
I signed and hope all readers of Fight Aging will too.
Hi there! Just a 2 cents. TL DR: Long -haul one, keep reading. It's (probably) the longest one I ever wrote; but worth a read (I think).
This is great and it is better than nothing; albeit, I will try to answer these questions.
''Emphasizing healthspan also reduces concerns of some individuals about whether it is ethical to live longer.''
Yes, that's correct...it's good and bad. A double-edged sword.
The ethical/moral concerns of some individuals, morally/ethically inclined...I mean, this is one big problem; people may say it's not a big problem; but, it can become one. Many people will use their ethical/high-moral ground...objections against longevity, living longer. It is a very sanctimonious talk from them, (I won't say sermonating fools that lecture you/your idiocy to even think LEV or longevity is something, but rather a fool's errand/hopeless pursuit for the blind and deluded), they (moralists/ethicists/fatalists/fatality-obsessed ones/Defeatists) always say the same thing: ''planet will explode, only rich people can get therapy, you are crazy/nuts to think we can defeat aging, people whop want immortality/eternal life = selfish individualist people who care nothing of others but just 'their life'/immortal teenager child-in-adult-body rtards who don't grow up/dont 'mature'-stay immature in the head and 'fear death' like wuss, living forever = boring/imaging living a 1000 years - boredom defined, you would be sad / everyone around you dies...
except you (like Ponce de Léon/Dracula/monk living 657 years in the dark...Alone. everybody's dead, except him, in his 4 walls (prison) and his sarcophagus); nobody dies = planet overpopulation, we would be stuck with 'immortal dictators' and prisons woudld overflow with immortal convicts,...it co$$ts too much (in resources, financial ones, especially) to 'keep people alive-for so long'..it's better they die (cheaper) ----'next person in line., we 'tax' the earth's resources already limited/disappearing (drought, famine, hunger, poverty, food shortage, agriculture fields poor/devoid/dying like coral reefs dying in the ocean from water pollution...), tons of pollution (too many people), we can't 'take in' anymore'/planet loaded to max and global warming/extreme earth weather events (from CO2 increase, planet heating, cows producing methane by sht metric tons, trees dying/cut/forest wiped, gases/holes in ozone)...so the old people need to go (sacrifce self, 'can't stay/can't stick around', having lived 'long-enough' already, were lucky, must give up their place, are now 'has beens' 'used up' 'past due-date' and the final thing, is them gone 'of aging/too old' to continue to live)...and the young ones 'up coming' take their place/the Cycle of life, since humanity's dawn 3 million years ago......rinse repeat.
These arguments are always brought forward...and (quite easily) debunked, or should I say, we take them in account/seriously...but, they, do not, take the Inverse arguments/contrary ones, seriously. (to open their mind). People who believe in longevity, LEV, eternal life (are minority)..you name..it..well, they are, oftenly, far more willing to compromise; than the inverse.
And that'S a big problem. There is a majority, and that majority is the kind of people you read on Dailymail UK England.(near) allll the comments are exactly the same --- 'I CAN'T WAIT TO DIE..'.
If, by some very big mishap...some 'odd'someone 'dared' to come there...and say: ''But..I don't.''.
That'S problematic....you'Re supposed to go with the Fatalist Grain..and the grain is , you die.
It is the fatalistic obsession that is the major one, and lethal too. You can switch one word for the other, boils to same. ''Lethalistic fatal-obsession 4'' the film....that's what it is out there.
Recently, I saw a guy/father (mid40s) who does an Extreme regiment and does parabiosislike with his son...he takes 'blood/plasma' from his young teenage son...he said/asked his son: ''Are you ok with that...I'll give you my plasma''...his son agreed and he gets 'transfusion' of 'young fluid' from his son. And, indeed, it works...he rejuvenated and reversed his epigenetic age (visible in his face and his voice (young voice now)) so he is reversing some of his aging, and starting to look like someone in his 20s..half is age; that'S not really the most important thing...well it is..but, there's something else; he was asked:
''What'S you biggest regret or problem about people with aging/dying...since you, yourself, are eating vegetarian, shooting yourself with young fluid, doing crazy regimen no one has the strength to do''. And he said, ''dying.......stop.''.
That explained...all there was to understand.. he meant...people ahve to stop with the 'we die..' thing...he is living proof of it and is showing that he WANTS to live-on, for however long HE CAN, be that 100 or 10,000..to see his son...grow and be a good father...that's someone from in his 40s...not someone 90...I'm sure he wishes the same, for his child/son...he also said, I saw many people die in my life..from cancer, heart attack etc,..,,..,,...enough. This is why the fatalists/moralists/ethicists and other double sanctisermont lovers need to open their ears and mind. They lecture, patronize...time for the inverse. As the saying goes: ''keep your lectures and your sermons....''...(where the sun don't shiine/to yourself).
They will say: ''You are obsessed/a immortalty-obsessed fool, drinking the LEV 'kool'-aid'...''
Hey, I prefer that. I could say to them: ''But..you are, mortality-obsessed.......no difference.
Vice Versa.''.
It's because earth's societies, humanity....have Always been 'about dying' and being replaced..with new kids...and your parents die one day...always been like that...so It's WHY it's so f...hard to make people change their mind about this; about longevity, especially.
There's like this 'fear' you might be seen an 'alien' 'snakeoil' 'weirdo' who'S trying to convince others to reach LEV, defeat aging....stuff, that seems, like the obvious NEXT step...of fixing aging. But, no, outside...it's 'healthy aging'....hey, at least, we get to talk about it and people talk about it; it'S better than being totally forgotten; it'S just it creates another problem - it ENFORCE the fatalist views.
That, alll you can aspire too, if being 'realistic' and 'not outlandish/deluded'....is healthy aging; and stop with the immortal bs....'ain't happening' and it's hurting the 'seriosity/seriousness' of the meedical/biological domain --- hey, I get it....it's why scientists are quite 'reserved' anddon't make 'outlandish claims' (like ImmortaltyTM - 'tomorrow'...).
They want to avoid 'sensationalism' and loss of reputation/standing (look clown/not serious/not Taken seriously because make sensationalistic claims of 'eternal life'...soonTM). It's, totally, understandable. But, they have to understand something else...this healthy aging endeavors...end up lackluster, dismal (or, some, abysmal). ''But...we don't want to give you false hopes (cause we faileed repeatedly/aging is undefeatable/we abandon(ned)) and delude you with (your) 'ideas of grandeur of immortality and whatnot''....
oh, I know. If we continue with this healthy aging/healthspan stuff....we will only reach that...nearly, guaranteed of that. The saying is this:
''Aim for the moon, and if you don't make it.........you'll be dancing among the stars.''.
We do that, all the time...it seems, that now, 'aiming for the moon = healthspan/healthy aging'.
And, that,s sad beyong belief. It's like saying: ''We throw(n)...in the towel/raised white flag...we abandon....abandon Moon/moon settlement....to drift away in cosmos...forever. Like an astronaut (skeleton), spinning in the farfetching-'dead space env...for always''. That's defeat.
Defeatists, self-defeatism, like fatalists (self-fatalists).
I know...sometimes, you Have to Accept it...not much else you can do...''you let go the person...and they die.''. (like say, a person on a machine..survivijng...being in coma......but for how long...do you let them live..in this state...coma-tose...or one day, years later, accept it; pull the plug on them... Are not becoming back...are gone.''. It makes me think AI robots...like the AI film (I, Robot), in which AI sentient beings..Don't ...want to die...and disappear--to 'be disconnected' (like a toaster) by their 'human Creator'....well, it'S kind of Apt/put..today; with
AI everywhere, a revolution in the making, replacing even, the computer and robots. Artifical Mind, Artificial Brain....that's the next step for us...making/growing a (real human) brain-inlab...but, more so, a whole baby/child/human (yes, just like in Alien 1979 film...clones/twins, like Dolly the Sheep or Rippley the 4th one).
I tihnk we need a dose of acceptance/accepting, on both sides..of the issue. Thus, compromise.
Moderation, reach me half-way. It seems, many don,t want; and life is, already (for them), Maximal and the best it could ever be.
''Why healthspan (how long we stay healthy) and not its side-effect of lifespan (how long we live)?''
It is a more possible/tangible...much more tangible, realization/concretization..from alll that happened so far...it'S Feasible. Tangible, Doable. Concretizable...
But' that's the hic...it's That...and that's all, there is to it.
Some may not see it a problem (I see it, so; 2c).
OBVIOUSLY...nobody wishes 'unhealthiness'/pain...we All (well nearly -all) wish 100% health..no pain, no hurt...fed, happy, in love....peace...and everything I mean WHO DOES NOT...almost no one.
THAT'S 1 THING....ok...1 thing....the healthspan-thing. healthy aging, again.
THE OTHER...thing; is the Longevity, this is important, just as much...right now..it seems it is (getting) LESS (and lesss, 'too costly/impossible'..)...and that'S sad. Obviously, healthy primes because if people die of some disease...there is NO 'longevity...'...evidently, you need to keep healthy to 'reach long Longevity'...that's obvious.
Well, I mean, you may live3 a long life..but with 'health problems' -- Manageable/below Threshold..that would cause sarcopenia/frailty/chronic inflammation/weight/BMD los...become frail/ailling/dying..of some disease....so these people (like me, atherosclerosis struck) are Survivors...for example, Centenarians that had a Higher Burden of Diseases in their life...Survived them. High Pain Threshold -- They survived BECAUSE OF WILL (to live..on....-not die) and doing the doing/surviving/fixing their health. They are called 'survivors'..while the OTher centenarians are those that have it 'easy'...and get no disease/perfect health...and live (super)centenarians..had almost - 0 - disease Entire life....won, the 'genetic lottery'.
''Many imagine their parents or grandparents at the end of their lives when they often have major health issues and low quality of life.''
Absolutely...even I do so, and many do (as said); it's a normal human feeling/since dawn..of humanity...our parents are like the glue paste..that holds the cement(family)...from falling apart.
If there were no parents...there would be no 'family'...and humanity, neither. Just check apes...they're all about family....without that..no life. And ,that applies, to bascially...all animals, having offspring/pups...parenting is probably, the biggest thing, in whole animal kingdom. Because, it relates to specie survival..by parental sexual reproduction..to make new offpsring, new life,...survival (of specie).
We need to convince the skeptics (ethicists and good moralists), that Yes...you can suffer in old age..and no one wants that..they prefer toe 'end it' than suffer a life of slow elderly age decrepiting...of body. People need to understand that the whole point, was the solve aging, and all that accompanies it...including the health problems we gain and the loss of bodily function with advancing age.
The more you say...the more will understand, and open (the) mind....and not simply spout the (bs of) healthspan as solution...and that'S it that's all. We need to make them undesrtand both. Otherwise, kiss goodbye the LEV/longevity...you name it; not happening in our lifetime.
Solution..no, not solution; just sort of accepting defeat and is settling (for setteling.)
Skepticism/over(t)ethicism/fatalism/defeatism = 0 Money.
Believing/advocacy/invest//no bs...tell it, like it is = Flow Money.
This is the Single Most Important..conversation you could have---with any/any human....is about that life/longevity/health.......about death...impending (doom). 'birds and the bees'.
Why? Because we all die (still...), and that day (will) come...time is amiss/if we keep on being avoiding and being stuck in fatalisitc obsessions that are self-defeatism and are counter to Fighting Aging....
and, not just fighting it...Defeating it. Keep the 'defeating' for aging...not for fatal-thoughts.
Because, that's asking, for death (wish); &, that's, self-defeating. We aim, Aging-defeating.
People can say: ''You are nutssss/crazzy sect nut guru...thinking we will defeat aging..like it's a 'walk in the prov. park ''. No, I never said that, I never said it would be easy; it isn't...it's toughest battle humans have ever faced since their (very) existence. It.s going to the Moon/building space shuttle...all over again (''Small step on Mars soil...giant step for mankind/humanity''..such is, aging/defeating aging; a holy grall...bigger than going to mars (men) or pluto, or venus (women)).
''only extend average healthspan by five or ten years and may not extend maximum lifespan at all.
Most experts in the field now acknowledge that this is a likely outcome in the near future and one focus of longevity medicine is now on achieving it. But far more is possible. Arguably, the avoidance of an emphasis on lifespan is a consequence of an overly pragmatic approach to two fundamental questions: Why do humans age and what can we do about it?''
Exact-ly; may not -- or pretty muich...will not, extend maximum lifespan; or little if any; we might reach 150...pretty good, consider(ing), ..we only reach 122 or so max..
Is that all there is to it....is that 'all she wrote home about....and went home.'
No MORE -maximum..than that. Deceiving....utter deception, it's the most deceiving thing in my life. ''Take your 150...years old..and sht up...negative nelly/party pooper;be happy, you get any''.
Yes, I guess...
It's the old 'GO BIG...or go home'...like Jennifer Lopes song :''You could go Hard...or you could go Home''. ''Go All In It...or just don't go/forget it.''. Aging REQUIRES us to put all on the line. It will REPAY ITSELF - IN ROI/RETURN ON INVESTMENT -- RETURN ON LIFE' LIVING' LIFE AND WITH MONEY (we save 50-100 *Trilllion* dollars. with a 'T', when we reduce biological retiring age - by 1 year). Putting all them resources..on the line, for that 'long haul-shot/moon shot (..risky venture capitalist)...In poker, it is called 'Double or Nothing'. High Odds = Live dangerously...when fail...but when succeed (by micro-luck..), huge rewards; I know that scientists are not in the 'taking risks'...and are all about FDA security..above all; which, I totally undertand...it'S just it's slow'-mo..for things to happen; many of us, alive to day....could wait 50some years..to get anything remotely near the LEV , or their healthspan extension (probably, less years..because less demanding). Well, defeating aging..is in the 'micro-luck/femto-chances' territory...it might sound completely worthless trying (to spin the roulette of chance/luck/lotto-impossible); but, the Other thing..that awaits us...is death. The saying is: ''It is better to die try(ing)...than not.''
'' Arguably, the avoidance of an emphasis on lifespan is a consequence of an overly pragmatic approach to two fundamental questions: Why do humans age and what can we do about it?''''
Yes, overly pragmatic...timid....want tangible...and think LEV is bs....delusion...so, we end up with healthy aging therapy.
''Why do humans age and what can we do about it?''.
Because, we are not 'perfect' 'perfect beings' (like (supposedly) god is); we are mortals...complex machines bound to fail (with errors in the fray (unlike 'simple organisms = they get immortality')...and random sht..happening, mutations, damage, residue, crud, organs fail...); and because the elements in life...'destroy' (like, the main one, being O2 OXIDATION, rusting/breathing and ROS oxidizing...from that); if we were 'hermetic' like a clam at the bottom of the sea...funny, we would not age..(so much) anymore...it's just our 'master plan/blue print' of our specie ((epi)genetic program/script-roll/papyrus/'code'...to one day die..to stop repairing damage, stop anti-inflammate...and instead, Inflammate...and just perish..one day, to be replaced by new kids/the future ones);...we have to Turn that Around...and change the evolution of humans -- we ...-not evolution...We, change the evolutive trajectory of human body....not evolution.
Right now, it is clear, we are molding our evolution/adaptation...etc...to our needs/liking...not evolution doing this to us. We have to change the 'death trajectory' that all humans face..,when born. To have a new one -- a 'live however long you can/wish so...trajectory'.
That can be 10 years, 10 million years, or 10 minutes...
Yes, it may seem, once more going in 'extremes' (outlandish... 10 minutes vs 10 million years);
But, we need to Fathom these extremes...soon. Soon-er. And, it is not to put doubt and skepticism it is put this as some ACTUAL realit-y Tangible....we Went to the damn..moon...we did invent a plane...we flew...we did reverse/slow aging...a little...we made Miracles..yes miracles are rare(r) than rate. But, the other option, is death. You may say: 'No the Other 'in between' option..is healthy aging.'...
yes, well, that's an underwhelming one, sadly. It's a RESIGNATION....Literally. people may say: ''No...I love healthy aging...could not ask for better.''
I don't share that view anymore. ''That's because you have become 'greedy/needy' with 'aging' you want to live forever like a guru who knows what he's talking about...so of course, you're unimpressed and always negative about any potential health improvement.''.
Yeah.....it must be that.
Health improvement is good/Great even....but not the whole thing/whole picture; right now, the element removed from the picture..is longevity; and to me, that is the worst thing ever.
''Can aging not just be significantly slowed, but more and more thoroughly reversed?''
ABSOLUTELF...INKLY....(it) Can -be slowed....I say, if we cannot STOP or REVERSE aging...we have to SLOW IT DOWN...ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE....if we do, aging will be 'technically' solved. Slowing aging by 50%...is, I'm sorry, nothing....it's (sort of) ok..
it's minimal. Slowing aging by 500%...NOW, you're talking. That's slowing aging 5-Times.
Preferably, 4 or 5 zeroes....so 5000-50,000%...reduction of aging speed/rate; yes...kind of eternal-like.,,,at that point. age-ing 'dead-frozen' still....like when you go in cryopod...to be cryogenized/freeze/frozen (frozen 20 year old body) or when
you are locked in a hermetic sarcophagus...with no air...you could stay in that sarcophagus 1 billion years...you would not age 1 bio-day... you woul never 'damage/rust/oxidize' away to your death......No no...it's not some...bs/sci-fi bs.
Thourougly reversed..it's possible, but, so far, not so likely...NOT...if we do not fix the things Ì sayid...like, mainly the DNA domain things....ain't happening without fixing this.
''Couldn't we just 'replace our cells/body/organs...with stem cells/new organs/printed organs and infinited new cells....that you are 'young'...recycle our body, forever''.
Yes, we mightl, it's one of the goals..but this is Still Very unknown territory...and most likely, will Not be enouhg; it will help to 'replace used/damaged car parts'..of our old aging body...but..the damage..still there...in some parts...
''How would humans, and their societies, be different if we achieve these goals?''
Yes, absolutely, they would be Different...now, different is very subjective large encompassing word...I mean, different, in the sense, it'S not Exactly the same anymore...but you know the saying : ''the more it changes..the more it's the same''; ''same ol', same ol'...thing.''; ''..just moving the hurt..to another place....it still, hurts (just, elsewhere).'', ''same old sht....different day'', .
so, it will feel different..but people will realize there is still some similarity...in the way we live (like capitalistic societies are..); and but, there will be some strong changes -- especially, on the whole 'capitalistic models'....because, human life, is bound/locked-in with capitalistic endeavors/ socieities...money runs the show...so; I mean, money as resource may REDUCE..in the future...because of these (ethical/moral) concerns...'who gets the therapy..only rich fat cats..not poor hungry people..who can'T afford a vest on their back and live on pittance/crumbs'.
We can't continue TAXING everything...puitting a price tag on everything. espcially on vital resources (like food, air, water, etc...yes...it'S all about the penny/$/cent...I gave reason why it is important to defeat aging -- we SAVE money defeating aging..than Not. Yep...ROI MEGA ROI (R.eturn O.n I.nvestment)...by making people live longer...and even so....it seems now, in capitalist money run countries...your life..is worth a # of $$$....like, in the old days...of slavery..they could put a price tag$$ on your head...'you are worth $$ this or this...to Own you, as human servant/slave'....).
We should not get to that..because we may end up again on that. Money should not be the BE ALL END ALL....in the future; we have to realize resources ..can be faulty and not be best...if we make SUCH resources 'THE' resource...to depend on..as 'currency'.
CURRENCY = LIFE.
CURRENCY = $
CURRENCY = LIFE = $ = TIME....
Money = Time = Money = Life.
No money, no candy, no food, no living = no life/death.
This is why, resources, in the future (and Recycling them, to forever/rinse repeat recycling..) is so very important to become thrifty and reuse what we have, to not simply depend on 1 single resource -- Faulty resource, has its qualities - and flaws, as resource ($); and create new Also with what we have already; becfause we wil run out of resources and....yeah...money. again.
If we continue making money - The Crux...for/(of) our existence/life. Exitential need, of money.
(Good capitalism = invention/progress; Bad capitalism = death/hunger/greed/privileges/poverty)
''What interventional strategies are likely to take us beyond modest healthspan effects, and toward radical change in the rate of biological aging? Most of the lifestyle or small-molecule interventions that are currently being tested target pathways affecting longevity. These include those designed to improve metabolism, restore youthful immune function, maintain youthful body composition, eliminate deleterious cells, or improve cellular stress responses.''
The largest ones...are Any that touch on the damage....the rest...are far more redundant and littel result...on the maximum; they Will improve averga...not maximum...Hard Limit..pretty hard.
NOT, if we do what I say, and fix that damage....it's almost ''simple comme bonjour'' (simple..like ''hello''); we cannot stop the aging process...if we Do Not repair those damages...(impossible, because, they end up 'winning' and we end up doing 'catch up/mop up' job...we always lose at taht) or slow them down Dramatically/orders of magnitude..to matter (or at least, 'De-age' biologically 1 day...each chronological subsequent day)...or else, we accumulate damage...and we are set..once more....rfor 120 or so...Max. We have ---Quadrillions of mitochondrias....this is like trying to avert an incoming Tsunami of the size of entire earth or getting 10,000 megaton warhead on your head (you..don't survive; obliteration)...all of them contribue to our death...little by little...mito lesions/deletions, by lesions/deletions...faulty mito by faulty mito...you can't stop this; it's so massive/astronomic-size/Micro-cosmostic-sized-to-infinite-mini-size; and it'S why so many studies/therapies try and failed...it's just Huge...inside, i mean..
''There needs to be an acceptance and tolerance of significantly higher levels of failure in longevity research, knowing that big ideas are sometimes wrong and that the ones that are right will far outweigh the setbacks. Is radical lifespan extension foreseeable? No one can answer that question with certainty. But there are certainly enough tantalizing clues suggesting that aging is sufficiently malleable to warrant the allocation of very substantial resources.''
True...that sometimes...we're wrong...(True?...or wrong..confused?); it happens, big ideas can seem hopeless and just should 'cut your losses...and abandon/move on to next thing.'
EXCEPt...there is no 'real' other 'thing'...besudes the healthspan/healthy aging. That's the thing'.
People can accept that we fail, and tolerate, that we fail -becauase it'S extremely hard to defeat aging...I think people can do that...I juust don't think we must throw-in towel yet...and abandon,
the biggest thing (in the first place), and that waas the Longevity, how Long could you actually live ------- yes - (and) in good health..Also. Health is important (very); SO IS, longevity, Too.,
Don't downplay it...like it's unimportant, or we abandon...just fix health..and call it a day...
''Is radical lifespan extension foreseeable?''
Yes, absolutely,...only (and only),...if damages are targetted; otherwise, radical lifespan extension..will be an overstatement and hyperbole(-ic); like, peoploe will be : ''so That'S the radical...lifespan extension''...nothing to write home about (actually). What would that be?
Well, if improving health..to say...120....and that'S that, close the curtains. Impressive to be able to live 120 in great health...when we die at 85-90...or less....so, Pretty dam good...
BUT NOT ---THAT--- GOOD. 'OK..ish'..is more like it. I know it sounds like Ì'm 'asking for too much and being needy'....but, aging/death REQUIRES US TO BE NEEDY...or else, dead.
It is extremely seriousl...it's your life...do you want to die?....at 120..in good health...Yes?...
Okk...but....what about double--that??????...say 250 years,,,is that something interesting?...
What about double -that...also; 500.;....5000....50000...5,000,000....WTF not....
Oh oh I know 'why not'...because ethicists/moralists...and other sermonating/sanctimonious ones..from their perch who will tell me: ''because..we die....die, like all of us...120. & call it quits.''.
...I forgot...
Thanks for reading,
Just a 2 cents.
PS: It is Normal, that people visiting Fightaging.org..or any anti-aging..wbesite....have the desire to defeat aging...not as some Ridiculous delusion...Stop saying that of people who wish that...
(again, with the whole fatalism).
I just signed and encourage everyone else to sign it as well.