X-Message-Number: 29380 From: Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2007 13:22:04 EDT Subject: Re: CryoNet #29379 Actually resveretrol is promising and available. It gets written up in such mainstream publications as Scientific American. First it was shown to extend the lifespan of yeast, and the critics said "Sure, but yeast are not animals." Then worms and fruitflies, and they said "But those are not mammals." Then mice. As they mentioned on this program, when middle aged mice got resveretrol, their lifespans increased 10-20%, equivalent to as much as 16 years in humans. And mice are indeed not people, but since the stuff is not known to be toxic and since it has worked in everything they have tried it on, it looks like a good bet to me. Life Extension Institute sells it, and others probably do too. The trouble with testing anything on humans or even monkeys is that they live so darn long you can't live to see the end of the experiment. Which is probably why they started with middle aged mice. I suppose if they started with 50-80 year old humans, they might get some die-off-rate results in 5-10 years, and I'd like to see them try that. But what do you think, Dr. Havelock? Alan I agree that the Rose round table piece was great and should be watched by anybody interested in where the research is going. This highlights what I would call the life extension R&D of "normal" science. For anyone who wants a really long life for themselves the progress in this field will seem agonizingly slow and perhaps not very adventurous. It holds out no promise that the elixer of life will arrive any time soon. However, the implications are extremely good for one of the assumptions of cryonics, that extending life indefinitely is where our science-based culture is headed in the long run and we will surely get there, though these panelists don't dare say so in so many words because it still sounds kooky to most people. Several commented that what they were into now would have sounded kooky a generation ago. Another point for those on this list to keep in mind is that life extension and cryonic suspension are two quite different ideas although the second depends on a chain of logic that stretches back to the first. The level of public interest in life extension, even by means of quackery, is extremely high, even though there is no realistic hope that it can be achieved within the life time of anyone now living as an adult. One panelist, probably Olshansky, said it was a 42 billion dollar industry [or maybe he said 4.2 billion, I'm not sure.] It remains to me a bedevilling fact that the level of public interest [as distinct from awareness] in cryonics to so pitiably low despite the fact that this is the only hope for most of those now living to benefit from what the normal science of longevity will eventually and surely provide. Ronald Havelock, Ph.D, O.D. CI Science Advisor ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" [ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=29380