CBS 60 Minutes and Aubrey 1/1/06

Karomesis
    There was mention of the MMPrize.  I remember being asked about it -- whether any of that discussion appears in the segment, well, I guess we'll find out on Sunday.  I don't recall my response, but if asked today, I would probably say I would prefer a MHPrize (H = human).  The Scientist article will surely get your attention!!
S. Jay Olshansky

Jay - Send me an email with your MHPrize thoughts when you've a mind to.

Dave

Man this is cool. The fight for radical life extension has final reached a fight on the front lines. This will let us get great attention and really spread our ideas of making this a mass reality.

Please post a link to the video as soon as you can

It was INCREDIBLY positive!

I just saw the east coast feed (one without overtime football interference). It was damn good. Jay was mostly fair, and Aubrey came across very, very well. Couldn't have been better.

---BrianW

Hehe, Jay, Jay, Jay. What ever will we do with you? [lol]

Online article on CBSNews.com:
http://www.cbsnews.c...in1168852.shtml

Watch an unaired segment with Safer:
http://video.cgi.cbs...dart=news.video

My link to come very soon.

Man I missed it because I live in OK and they interuped it with breaking news of fires in OKC. We haven't had any rain for weeks and we have 17 or so fires burning in the city.

Can't wait to see the video.

i just saw it.

they portrayed Aubrey really well I thought. And Jay was pretty fair. He's entitled to his view.

This was great.

Edited by JustinRebo, 02 January 2006 - 02:21 AM.

It was generally very positive. Excellent. The older demographic that watches 60 minutes can be swayed by a positive presentation by the 60 minutes crew.

I agree justin, I think the end comments by jay were the icing on the cake, he admited that aubrey was pursuing genuine science and needed to test the hypothesis to see what stuck.

Aubrey, do you think the X prize intro helped the MMPrize? I think it definitely did, What we really need is allen or branson to support the cause.

I second the INCREDIBLY positive. 60 Minutes liked Aubrey. You could tell by the way the segment was edited. They supported what he said, and backed it up by showing some dissenting views to be 'fair and objective'. You got a good 'feeling' from the segment, a little bit of hope for all of us old timers.

The question is how to make the most of the opportunity this positive publicity created for SENS?

I agree that Jay's portion was great. He was portrayed as the opposing the voice, perhaps even the "voice of reason", e.g. the whole "how do you forcast lifespans based on technologies that don't exist?" or something to that effect. But, as karomesis said, they included an admission that de Grey's theories aren't snake oil, they're scientifically testable and should be tested.

It was excellent! People who never even questioned the idea that they were on the way out, have now been implanted with the idea that they don't have to go. The result will be increased support for the cause. I live in Oklahoma, and often I feel overwhelmed by the prevalence of backwards thinking here. Every stride forward science makes, gives me comfort. Hopefully tonights segment will help bring about new advances even faster.

Forever always.

For those interested, I do have the file available, and I will post info about it as soon as I get word that Aubrey got it.

Joel, out of curiosity, was it delayed by football in your area? It was in mine. Messed up my DVR recording, so I had to record the show after 60 Minutes to get the Aubrey segment.

Extraordinary segment on extending human life. Everything seemed to be portrayed objectively and unbiased...finally.

Lets see if this creates a wave.

Congrats

What we really need is allen or branson to support the cause.

Who knows? Maybe the $1 mil anonymous donor was one of them.

I agree with the positive assessment of the show. Definitely the best we could have hoped for. I talked to my non-immortalist dad, after he watched the show, and he felt it was a fair presentation that tended to favor the skeptics.

I found it quite telling when they asked the mouse researcher guy what he thought of Aubrey's predictlions. He paused for a good while before answering, and then said that he thought it unlikely in the near term. I think these guys are very cautious not to say anything that would make them look kooky and harm their carreers.

Hugh

The individual (do not know if he also holds a Ph.D title), who was in opposition to Dr. Aubrey De Grey and other scientists who are for Biological Immortality may be overlooking the following. Apologies for being once again repetitive; the fact is, Matter in this existence cannot be created nor be destroyed, it is merely reactions happening in our bodies. Based on that, why can not one have an indefinite, preferably infinite, lifespan? He said something about Dr. Aubrey De Grey being too sure that the science will definitely lead to increased lifespan. Dr. Grey has every right to believe so; logic dictates that that is what will eventually happen. We see damage accumulation inhibiting nominal cell functions; leading to cancer and/or other diseases; most of all, death. Keeping it, cellular damage, under control surely will lead to significant life extension, barring, sadly, other life ending things such as accidents and murder.

At one point the person was showing a bottle, presumably which hold or held some sort of so called immortal substance, taking about all who vouched for it are dead. Is that the best he can do to deter people about Dr. Aubrey De Grey?, indirectly saying Dr. Aubrey De Grey is talking nonsense. In contrast, the truth is, as we all know, Dr. Aubrey De Grey along with others are about serious research.

Overall, in my eyes, it was an all right report.

http://www.cbsnews.c...in1168852.shtml


Watch the video on the right of the screen which shows Morley Safer talking about his segment with De Grey. He doesn't quite explain De Grey's escape velocity concept as well as i'd like, but other than that he speaks of the possibly near term life extension subject in all seriousness and doesn't brush it off. Very comforting. I just don't know how the 3 second Kurzweil on the piano clip got edited into it...it wasn't even used for the TV episode...

Also they interview kurzweil in the link titled aubrey de grey. Its as if they took kurzweil out of the segment at the last minute and forgot to do the same on the website. I wish they would have kept his section for the segment. De Grey and Kurzweil are like Shaq and Kobe in this field; those two together multiply there public effectiveness.

First came upon this forum when one of your organizers(?) appeared on the Daily Show with Jon Stewart. Anyway, I capped the latest 60 Minutes and saw it had a segment that I thought might be of interest on this forum. You will need a bittorrent client to download the program (ABC, Azureus and G3 are good ones). This is the full 60 Minutes episode and not just the segment on immortality.

60 Minutes - 2006.01.01 (TVRip.SoS)
http://www.mininova.org/tor/189383

ps: found this main thread after posting to another one earlier...

"For this Sunday's New Year's edition of 60 Minutes we'll bring you three stories of beginning anew. With innovation and technology, the future is now.

1. A plan to build the world’s first airport for launching commercial spacecraft in New Mexico is the latest development in the new space race, a race among private companies and billionaire entrepreneurs to carry paying passengers into space and to kick-start a new industry, astro tourism. The man who is leading the race may not be familiar to you, but to astronauts, pilots, and aeronautical engineers – basically to anyone who knows anything about aircraft design – Burt Rutan is a legend, an aeronautical engineer whose latest aircraft is the world’s first private spaceship. As he told 60 Minutes correspondent Ed Bradley when he first met him a little over a year ago, if his idea flies, someday space travel may be cheap enough and safe enough for ordinary people to go where only astronauts have gone before.

2. Correspondent Dan Rather asks the question, "What do you do if you’re a former president?" For former President Bill Clinton, the answer is fighting the AIDS epidemic, an issue he admits he could have done more for while in office. Rather travels to China to get a firsthand look at Clinton’s new project. He talks to Clinton about his efforts to stop the pandemic, his relationship with the Bushes, and Hillary's political future.

3. How’s this for an offer you can’t refuse: how would you like to live say, 400 or 500 years, or even more and all of them in perfect health? It’s both a Utopian and a nightmare scenario but there are those who say it is well within the realm of possibility. Though we live longer and healthier lives than our grandparents, 100 is more or less the outer limit because, catastrophic disease aside, we just plain wear out. But 60 Minutes correspondent Morley Safer talked to one scientist who says that’s old-fashioned thinking, that sometime in the next 20 to 30 years or so we’ll be able to recondition ourselves for the first steps towards immortality.

4. A Day In The Life Of Andy. Making decisions is a problem we all face but Andy Rooney seems to have figured out a way to tackle it while coasting through his day."

==
runtime = 44mins
xvid.544x416.995kbps.mp3.102.vbr

If you found this program informative, please support the network/series by purchasing their DVDs if available.
==
SoS = http://www.sonofshun.com/forums

Edited by syoung333, 02 January 2006 - 06:55 AM.

60 Minutes - 2006.01.01 (TVRip.SoS)
http://www.mininova.org/tor/189383

Thanks!!

Thanks for the torrent. I noticed it's choking a little, so if anyone wants to download just the segment on Immortality, here is the direct link from my site:

WMV (http://www.jmorgan.t...ubreydeGrey.wmv)
Quicktime (http://www.jmorgan.t...ubreydeGrey.mov)

I recommend downloading (Right click, save as...) as opposed to streaming it directly.

Edit: I will continue to seed the torrent for a while. It is really clear, and it's worth watching the other two stories, especially the one about Burt Rutan.

Edited by JMorgan, 02 January 2006 - 12:06 PM.

I just viewed Aubrey's segment on 60 minutes (courtesy of Joel). Terrific show. Guaranteed to raise awareness.

The individual (do not know if he also holds a Ph.D title), who was in opposition to Dr. Aubrey De Grey

He may be looking worse for wear (and probably secretly hoping Aubrey is on target on escape velocity estimates ) but the "individual" is in fact S. Jay Olshanksy - a professor in the School of Public Health at the University of Illinois at Chicago (bio) and a member of Imminst (user name sjayo ).

60 minutes I have to agree was good as well. It brings the idea of radical life extension to even greater masses, something that we need. It even allows the skeptics to take this idea seriously and not just pass it off as nonsense or science fiction. So I have to say bravo.

I'm stunned. Wow. Just stunned. That was a amazingly positive. One thing that lept out is that they let Mr. de Gray get a final, positive word in. Dr. Olshansky, I would love to know how much you were edited, because you basically complimented Mr. de Gray's lack of 'snake oil peddling', while I couldn't find fault with anything you said.

This entire clip makes me realize that if people are going to take a forefront role, they have to be prepared to avoid the appearance of profiting - which is something for the MPrize people to keep in mind.

Overall a very very good harbinger for the developments that are coming.

Dear QJones
I was very pleased with the 60 Minutes segment, although somewhat disappointed that the interview with Ray was eliminated. Both Aubrey and Ray are friends, and I had no interest in anything other than scientific discourse. I went in with the goal of being frank but respectful, and I achieved that. Since I did a 90 minute interview, they edited out about 86 minutes -- including some rather pointed comments I made about the underlying premise of the idea of immortality presented by Aubrey and Ray. That's okay with me, and I understand why the producer did that. Aubrey knows I have major issues with his ideas and they way in which he presents them, but the issue is not and should not be about Aubrey -- it's all about public health. The idea to modulate aging in humans began long ago, well before Aubrey and Ray entered the scene, and in the end the work that will lead to an ability to modulate aging in humans will be done by the very researchers that Aubrey criticizes. This is Aubrey's biggest mistake -- close behind is the claim about 1,000 or 5,000 year life expectancies, or even the mention of immortality. We discussed this in a rather pointed moment at GSA in Orlando - he knows how I feel. However, just because we disagree does not mean we cannot be friends and treat each other with respect. My comments on the end of that segment were exactly how I feel, so I'm glad they included it. However, for an important new development on this issue, I would direct your attention to a forthcoming issue of The Scientist -- as I said earlier, you're about to be pleasantly shocked!!!
S. Jay Olshansky

More video sources here, via Instapundit:

http://thepoliticalt...2/aubreydegrey/

...the underlying premise of the idea of immortality presented by Aubrey and Ray... I have major issues with his ideas and the way in which he presents them... This is Aubrey's biggest mistake -- close behind is the claim about 1,000 or 5,000 year life expectancies, or even the mention of immortality.

I'm curious to know what you mean by these statements. What is it exactly that bothers you about the concept of "indefinite" life extension? Is this not a worthwhile goal, assuming it's possible?

(Perhaps point me to where you might have already answered these questions to avoid derailing this thread.)

Thanks for your involvement, by the way, both here and on 60 Minutes.

Edited by JMorgan, 03 January 2006 - 12:36 PM.