X-Message-Number: 3183
From: 
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 94 19:00:15 EDT
Subject: SCI. CRYONICS Hayflick

                                     LIMITED HAYFLICK

BOOK REVIEW: How and Why We Age, Leonard Hayflick, Ballantine 1994, hard
cover, about 390 pages, $24.

(The author, a professor of anatomy and a gerontologist, discovered the
"Hayflick limit"--referring to the fact that, in vitro, cultured cells
of most kinds do not divide and multiply indefinitely, but die off
after a certain number of generations; i.e., that death is usually
programmed even at the cellular level.)

More flies with honey than vinegar and all that, so maybe we should be
tactful toward these people. Heck with it. Hayflick is sadly limited
all around, and will probably remain so no matter what anybody says.

First off, the book is obviously just the author's attempt to cash in on the
growing interest in anti-senescence. There are a few moderately interesting
tid-bits for laymen, but the book is not a useful source of information for
anyone with a previous interest in the subject. And it has a low-key but
definite pro-death outlook. (Immortality would be a BAD THING.)

In one of his few attempts to introduce something original-sounding, the
author says that giant Redwoods e.g. are not old, because their only
living cells are young. But he also acknowledges, elsewhere, that animals
replace many of their cells over time, and even when they don't the cells
may have a turnover of molecules or atoms--not to mention changing neuronal
networks. In other words he alludes to, but does not grapple with, the
"philosophical" problem of identity and survival. 

One chapter is called Life Extension and Anti-Aging Therapies. Sound good?
Think you're going to get an update on the latest? Think again. There is
NOTHING in it except maunderings about the difficulty of controlled
studies of human aging and the dangers of manipulating longevity.

Then there is the obligatory page on cryonics. If one were to judge the whole
book by this page, one would be forced to conclude that Hayflick knows
nothing about anything, and doesn't care either. Even on the basis of just
basic journalism--let alone science--he shows a mind-numbing indifference
to responsibility.  

For example, he speaks of a hypothetical member of "the Cryonics Society."
He speaks of waiting for "a cure for what killed them," as though that
were the main requirement for revival.  And of course he focuses on
"viability" of tissues frozen by current methods, ignoring any possibility
of future repair. This isn't just dreary; it is irresponsible and dishonest. 

To reiterate: aside from the negative biases, the book just doesn't provide
anything useful to anyone with the least familiarity with the field.
Don't waste your money.
              
Robert  Ettinger

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=3183