With Friends Like This…

Dear Future Centenarian,

Admittedly, I’m a wild eyed optimist, especially regarding the prospects of indefinite youthful lifespans for you and me. But since I KNOW I’m an optimist, I try to take special efforts to see and understand pessimists’ points of view. Ten I try to balance the input and come to my own conclusions. In other words, I try to be objective about what our chances really are. I sent you my timeline and budgetary estimates several issues ago and stand by them.

So here’s an opinion from one who may be the most pessimistic of all well known gerontologists, followed by Reason’s commentary:

http://www.fightaging.org/archives/001354.php

"'We're all going to croak,' says Richard Sprott, the Ellison Medical Foundation's director, who expects that humans may eventually live as much as 30 years longer, but only in the distant future."

Read the full post; I find it incredible that anyone with Sprott's background can stand in the midst of the present outright revolution, of wild, foaming progress in bioscience, and say that things just aren't going to change all that much. It's an outlandish position - and an outlandish position held by someone who directs a fair amount of funding for aging research:

http://www.fightaging.org/archives/001331.php

It's a sad state of affairs we're in, wherein so much of the research establishment has declared defeat and stasis before even setting goals for aging science. How is it that we have an establishment community disbursing so much in the way of funds to exactly the people who are not going to make significant progress - those who say that progress is impossible or far distant in advance of any initiative?

The advance of science and technology is change itself, is the growth of opportunity and choice, and is the opening of new doors in the halls of the human condition. The hidebound and defeatist are not really contributing - if you want things done, if you want bold new progress, fund the people willing to set goals and shake trees.


NOTE: Sprott’s stance makes we want to toss my cookies. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. In his case though, I believe it will cost lives. Lots of lives. I say that not only because he may control more of the scarce “life extension” funding than almost all the administrators and researchers in the free market combined… but also because he is influential. With 100,000 people dying every day from aging, the last thing we need is anyone standing in the way of those who refuse to “go silently into the night”.

If someone were drowning and a lifeguard stood in the way of a would-be rescuer, what would you call the lifeguard? Multiply that by millions.