X-Message-Number: 26864
Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2005 09:46:29 -0400
From: Thomas Donaldson <>
Subject: 2 antiaging books reviewed in NATURE

Hi Everyone!

Recently, doing research for the next PERIASTRON, I noticed that NATURE
had published book reviews of two books by immortalists or those
close to immortalists. The reviewer was A Townsend, who does research
into aging himself, though it's clear from his review that he sees
such research as strongly limited.

The two books were:
Philip L Miller (with Life Extension Foundation) THE LIFE EXTENSION
REVOLUTION: the new science of growing older without aging

and 
D Broderick, THE LAST MORTAL GENERATION

Townsend's review was two-faced, in a way. He didn't like the title
or its implications of either book, but did not find the content
either unscientific or fallacious when it spoke of experiments done
and our current abilities. He did criticise the notion that we could
(judging from work with C. elegans, for instance) easily find ways
to live 4 times longer than we now do. He had far more modest ideas
as to the lifespans that would become possible.

These reviews were in the 18 August issue of NATURE.

I myself would actually say that (given the extreme caution shown
in using biotechnology on human patients) that advances in antiaging
may not come nearly as fast as many advocates believe. Successful and
reversible suspensions look like they'll come much earlier. 

However Townsend shows his short-sightedness when he tells what
he thinks will be possible. He's probably right for the next 20
to 50 years, or even longer: medicine moves slowly. But what are 50
years when we think of the final effect of such work?

             Best wishes and long long life for all,

                   Thomas Donaldson

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=26864