X-Message-Number: 29454 References: <> From: David Stodolsky <> Subject: Re: engineered negligible senescence Part III Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2007 18:36:31 +0200 On 15 Apr 2007, at 01:17, wrote: > This information is > unknown to most researchers in CR, even to the present day. A > good example of this is an eight page review entitled "Calorie > restriction > and Aging" in the March 14,2007 edition of Scientific American > Reports While your hypothesis may be true, you can't support it with a popular science reference. Sci. Am. is not a peer-reviewed/scientific journal. In the past, it did report some original work, this has become less common. The summary reports are often biased. > : Special Edition on diet and health, which makes no references > at all to glycotoxins. I'm not pointing fingers at any one scientist > here. Rather this is a global problem throughout the entire scientific > community, where it can take decades for advances in knowledge to be > recognized and built upon. The reason for the "slow" rate of > scientific > advance, as a whole, derives in part from this same tardy > transmission of > information within the scientific community. Why this delay occurs, > and > what can be done about it is a large question, which I do not have a > comprehensive answer to. However this is the main reason why the hopes > of life-extensionists are almost certainly to be in vain. Older life > extensionists like Roy Walford (79) have been dieing pretty much on > schedule. I expect this to continue to be the case for some time to > come. If anybody has any idea for facilitating the transmission of new > (as well as old) findings to the gerontology community for > consideration, > please speak up! I doubt if that community will have much to contribute to life extension technology. However, I do have a suggestion for resolving the problem of delays in the scientific communication system: Extended abstract: Stodolsky, D. S. (2002). Computer-network based democracy: Scientific communication as a basis for governance. Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Knowledge Management in e-Government, 7, 127-137. http://dss.secureid.org/stories/storyReader$14 Comprehensive: Stodolsky, D. S. (1995). Consensus Journals: Invitational journals based upon peer review. The Information Society, 11(4). [1994 version in N. P. Gleditsch, P. H. Enckell, & J. Burchardt (Eds.), Det videnskabelige tidsskrift (The scientific journal) (pp. 151-160). Copenhagen: Nordic Council of Ministers. (Tema NORD 1994: 574)] http://dss.secureid.org/stories/storyReader$19 The latest: Stodolsky, D. (2002). Scientific publication needs a peer consensus. Psycoloquy, 13(2). http://dss.secureid.org/stories/storyReader$20 dss David Stodolsky Skype: davidstodolsky Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=29454