Biogerontologists' duty to discuss timescales publicly
A.D.N.J. de Grey
Department of Genetics, University of Cambridge, UK
Aging is not popular with the general public, and they look to the
scientists with the most detailed understanding of aging to provide
credible information on how much longer humanity must endure it.
Biogerontologists are acutely aware of their consequent responsibility
not to suggest unrealistically optimistic timescales for the defeat
of aging. However, they seem mostly to be unaware of their converse
responsibility -- not to suggest or imply unrealistically pessimistic
timescales. This may be because until quite recently there was no
such thing as an unrealistically pessimistic timescale for the advent
of real anti-aging medicine -- it was too far off to be foreseeable.
The data presented at this conference show unambiguously, however,
that this is no longer so: real anti-aging medicine is not science
fiction any more, but science foreseeable. This presents two huge
and quite imminent dangers to humanity. One is simply that funding
is not being adequately targeted to the translational research that
can make real anti-aging medicine a reality as soon as possible; the
simple fact that 100,000 people die every day of age-related causes
demonstrates the gravity of that error. The second danger is that the
laboratory breakthroughs which convince humanity that real anti-aging
medicine is on the way, and which therefore turn society upside-down
overnight, will occur before governments have had time to forward-plan
to make the transition to a post-aging world as smooth as possible.
Both these dangers are exacerbated by biogerontologists' perpetuation
of their once-justifiable stance of refusing to discuss timescales:
"eventually" is not a word that makes people change their pension or
life insurance plans, or politicians their spending priorities. Hence,
alien though it may be to the basic scientist's way of thinking, we as
specialists in the biology of aging can no longer shrink from publicly
estimating the timeframe for the arrival, if not of real anti-aging
medicine itself, then at least of the laboratory breakthroughs
mentioned above. I consider it highly likely that within ten years
from now, if the rather modest necessary funding is forthcoming,
we will have the ability to take a mouse cohort with a three-
year life expectancy, when it is already two years old, and treble its
remaining life expectancy (that is, give it a total life expectancy of
five years). I also consider it highly likely that the announcement of
that degree of control over mouse aging will overturn society's
prevailing fatalism concerning any chance of personal benefit from real
anti-aging medicine. The sooner that moment comes, the better -- but
we had better be ready.
Key words:
real anti-aging medicine, public debate, timescales
Problems or questions regarding this site should be directed to
the organiser