LONGECITY

http://www.labspaces...in___st_century

This is good to see. Much more money needs to be focused on this aspect of human health. I think we are at a turning point. A new paradigm. Resveratrol is just the beginning I think.

Article Abstract at BMJ

I wonder if this is the "new statement" by leading gerontologists, that was mentioned at UABBA.

Resveratrol could be beneficial, but it is just a tiny part of the overall picture.

Some past Imminst interviews with Olshansky.

2005

2007

2007 feature article

Article Abstract at BMJ

I wonder if this is the "new statement" by leading gerontologists, that was mentioned at UABBA.

Resveratrol could be beneficial, but it is just a tiny part of the overall picture.

Thanks. Are we allowed to post the full text of such articles if available to us? I ask because I can probably get full access to the publication from my wife who is a PharmD student and has access through the library.

Copyright law applies at Imminst just the same as society at large. If you could post some short choice quotes, that would be nice.

Copyright law applies at Imminst just the same as society at large. If you could post some short choice quotes, that would be nice.

I thought so. Just checking. I'll try to find it later and will post if I see anything particularly interesting. Thanks for posting the links to the chats and interview.

Article Abstract at BMJ

I wonder if this is the "new statement" by leading gerontologists, that was mentioned at UABBA.

I read it and didn't see anything new and Resveratrol was not called out specifically. It boils down to the ounce of prevention vs. a pound of cure argument.

We are not calling for the modification of human genes to extend healthy life—that would not be practical, useful, or ethical. However, investigating how genetic mutations influence the basic rate of ageing is likely to provide important clues about how to develop drugs that do much the same thing[15,16].

For which the author's cite...

15. Kuningas M, Mooijaart SP, van Heemst D, Zwaan BJ, Slagboom PE, Westendorp RG. Genes encoding longevity: from model organisms to humans. Aging Cell 2008;7:270-80.
16. Martin GM, Bergman A, Barzilai N. Genetic determinants of human health span and life span: progress and new opportunities. PLoS Genetics 2007;3:e125

Both are good reads.

I don't understand how modifying genes is any different than modifying their downstream protein product. Why would ethical issues would be called into question here?

We are not calling for the modification of human genes to extend healthy life—that would not be practical, useful, or ethical.

Maestro949: I don't understand how modifying genes is any different than modifying their downstream protein product. Why would ethical issues would be called into question here?

I am thinking this statement had to be including to make the paper more palatable to politicians and acceptable to the general public.

I don't understand how modifying genes is any different than modifying their downstream protein product. Why would ethical issues would be called into question here?

If something goes wrong, it's a lot easier to back off a pharmacologic treatment. If it's a germline modification that's being discussed, then a lot of people freak out because now you're messing with the species, or creating a new one. Eventually we are going to have to face that issue.

News Flash... Most "disease" is the result of aging or the result of events the body cannot handle due to being crippled by the process of aging. It escapes me as to why it is so revolutionary to try to focus on aging. By slowing or halting aging we will have as a byproduct taken care of a great majority of diseases. What better way to spend research dollars than in the one area that will affect them all...

I don't understand how modifying genes is any different than modifying their downstream protein product. Why would ethical issues would be called into question here?

If something goes wrong, it's a lot easier to back off a pharmacologic treatment.

That makes sense. I think we need to learn a lot more about the genome anyway before we're successful in making any significant modifications but it shouldn't be ruled out for longer-term strategies which these comments indicate.

If it's a germline modification that's being discussed, then a lot of people freak out because now you're messing with the species, or creating a new one. Eventually we are going to have to face that issue.

I was thinking more along the lines of genes within somatic cells but I think you're right, once we start fixing birth defects and diseases in the germline we'll be on a slippery slope. If a combination of gene modifications are found that can significantly extend life it'll probably just be another checkbox on the website's form when ordering your designer baby.

I don't understand how modifying genes is any different than modifying their downstream protein product. Why would ethical issues would be called into question here?

If something goes wrong, it's a lot easier to back off a pharmacologic treatment.

That makes sense. I think we need to learn a lot more about the genome anyway before we're successful in making any significant modifications but it shouldn't be ruled out for longer-term strategies which these comments indicate.

If it's a germline modification that's being discussed, then a lot of people freak out because now you're messing with the species, or creating a new one. Eventually we are going to have to face that issue.

I was thinking more along the lines of genes within somatic cells but I think you're right, once we start fixing birth defects and diseases in the germline we'll be on a slippery slope. If a combination of gene modifications are found that can significantly extend life it'll probably just be another checkbox on the website's form when ordering your designer baby.

We can already insert genes in living cells with viruses. The hell with the baby, let him buy his own, where do I get mine?
Edited by maxwatt, 11 July 2008 - 05:39 PM.