X-Message-Number: 26864 Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2005 09:46:29 -0400 From: Thomas Donaldson <> Subject: 2 antiaging books reviewed in NATURE Hi Everyone! Recently, doing research for the next PERIASTRON, I noticed that NATURE had published book reviews of two books by immortalists or those close to immortalists. The reviewer was A Townsend, who does research into aging himself, though it's clear from his review that he sees such research as strongly limited. The two books were: Philip L Miller (with Life Extension Foundation) THE LIFE EXTENSION REVOLUTION: the new science of growing older without aging and D Broderick, THE LAST MORTAL GENERATION Townsend's review was two-faced, in a way. He didn't like the title or its implications of either book, but did not find the content either unscientific or fallacious when it spoke of experiments done and our current abilities. He did criticise the notion that we could (judging from work with C. elegans, for instance) easily find ways to live 4 times longer than we now do. He had far more modest ideas as to the lifespans that would become possible. These reviews were in the 18 August issue of NATURE. I myself would actually say that (given the extreme caution shown in using biotechnology on human patients) that advances in antiaging may not come nearly as fast as many advocates believe. Successful and reversible suspensions look like they'll come much earlier. However Townsend shows his short-sightedness when he tells what he thinks will be possible. He's probably right for the next 20 to 50 years, or even longer: medicine moves slowly. But what are 50 years when we think of the final effect of such work? Best wishes and long long life for all, Thomas Donaldson Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=26864