I agree with much of that article. There is no method of extending human ageing available in the marketplace for humans. CR is the most likely, but of course you can't sell that.
The CR research probably sends a false signal any way. It works in the laboratory because the scientists can control a lot of the variables: genetically uniform mice, consistent diets, isolation to prevent the spread of mousie diseases, etc.
Humans practicing CR in the real world, by contrast, start with wildly varying genomes and have little control over their food quality, suffer from exposure to infectious diseases and environmental toxins, experience stressful encounters with other members of their species (humans do form dominance hierarchies, after all) and so forth. Not to mention the initial damage loads we acquired in the womb, according to Gavrilov's reliability theory of aging. Under those conditions, who knows whether CR will increase anyone's maximum life expectancy?
"...these theoretical breakthroughs serve only as serious distractions from whats important, namely, learning to accept the universality and inevitability of ageing..."
Yeah right. That is exactly what us poor humans need..we *need* to learn how to accept the inevitabiltiy of ageing. because we struggle with that so much...
What a crock of shit.
We need to separate two issues here. Kurzweil's experiment on himself probably won't work, despite his claim that he stopped aging circa 1990. That makes him sound like the people in the old
Eternal Flame cult in Scottsdale, even though Kurzweil looks like a well-maintained 60-ish man to me. But Kurzweil's self-deception has no bearing on the dire moral urgency to find strategies that will work.