"We are on the verge of a revolution in medicine: understanding, treating, and ultimately preventing the causes of degenerative aging. But medical revolutions only happen if we all stand up in support of funding and research. We did it for cancer. We're doing it for Alzheimer's. We can do it for aging - and create an era of longer, healthier lives!"

Email Contact
reason -at- fightaging -dot- org

  
Search

The Causes of Aging
Accumulating AGEs
Buildup of Amyloid Between Cells
The Failing Adaptive Immune System
The Failing Innate Immune System
Declining Lysosomal Function
Mitochondrial DNA Damage
Senescent Cells
Other Causes of Aging

Required Reading
Calorie Restriction
The Community, Visualized
Cryonics
Engineered Negligible Senescence
Envisaging a World Without the FDA
Healthy Life Extension Explained
How to Argue for Longevity Science
Introductory Articles
Longevity Meme Newsletter
The Odds of Human Longevity Mutations
The Need For Activism and Advocacy
Stem Cells, Regenerative Medicine
Twelve Ways to Extend Mouse Life Span
The Vital Debate in Aging Research
What is Anti-Aging?

Initiatives
Biogerontology Research Foundation
Campaign Against Aging
Campaign for Aging Research
Immortality Institute
Lifestar Institute
Longevity Consortium
Maximum Life Foundation
Methuselah Foundation
Mprize for Longevity Research
Science Against Aging (Translate)
SENS Foundation

Benefiting From Medical Research
How to Read Scientific Research
Researching Therapies and Clinical Trials

Objections Answered
Boredom
Inequality and Economics
Overpopulation
Stagnation
Being Older for Longer?
What About Retirement?

Recent Entries

  • Thyroid Function and Inherited Human Longevity
  • Longevity in the 21st Century, PowerPoint
  • Comparative Longevity in Ants
  • Cryonics, Process, and Preparation
  • "Hazy on the Topic of How Aging Relates to the Diseases of Old Age"
  • Taking a Look at Mitochondrial Repair Research
  • Fundraising for Mitochondrial Uncoupling Research
  • Anoxia Tolerance and Species Longevity
  • Second Meeting of the SENS Los Angeles Chapter on August 27th
  • A Selection of Singularity Summit 2010 Coverage
  • Another Good Sign for Induced Pluripotency
  • The Balancing Act of Longevity Research Advocacy
  • Artificial Intelligence and Engineered Longevity: the Better Tools Viewpoint
  • Escaping the Hand You Were Dealt
  • Impairment of Blood Vessels in the Brain Isn't a Good Thing
  • An Addendum on Solar Radiation, Reliability Theory, and Longevity
  • Twenty Minutes to Argue that Work on Radical Life Extension is Valid Research
  • Regeneration as Controlled Cancer
  • The Prospects for Generating Blood in Large Volumes, and as Needed
  • The Little Things Add Up Over Time
  • Blogs of Interest
    @ging
    Accelerating Future
    Ageing Research
    Alcor News
    Al Fin Longevity
    April's CR Diary
    Andart
    Biology of Aging
    Biosingularity
    CRON Diary
    Cryonics Society
    Depressed Metabolism
    Distributed Republic
    Ethical Technology Blog
    Existence is Wonderful
    Foresight Institute
    Future Current
    FuturePundit
    HumanPlus
    In Search of Enlightenment
    Marginal Revolution
    Maria Konovalenko
    Metamagician and the Hellfire Club
    Metamodern
    Methuselah Foundation Blog
    Michael Batin (Translate)
    Mises Economics Blog
    Ouroboros
    Overcoming Bias
    Pimm - Partial immortalization
    Responsible Nanotechnology
    ScienceBlogs
    Sentient Developments
    Singularity Hub
    Singularity Institute Blog
    Sonia Arrison
    The Speculist
    The Technological Citizen

    Archives (Monthly)

    August 2010
    July 2010
    June 2010
    May 2010
    April 2010
    March 2010
    February 2010
    January 2010
    December 2009
    November 2009
    October 2009
    September 2009
    August 2009
    July 2009
    June 2009
    May 2009
    April 2009
    March 2009
    February 2009
    January 2009
    December 2008
    November 2008
    October 2008
    September 2008
    August 2008
    July 2008
    June 2008
    May 2008
    April 2008
    March 2008
    February 2008
    January 2008
    December 2007
    November 2007
    October 2007
    September 2007
    August 2007
    July 2007
    June 2007
    May 2007
    April 2007
    March 2007
    February 2007
    January 2007
    December 2006
    November 2006
    October 2006
    September 2006
    August 2006
    July 2006
    June 2006
    May 2006
    April 2006
    March 2006
    February 2006
    January 2006
    December 2005
    November 2005
    October 2005
    September 2005
    August 2005
    July 2005
    June 2005
    May 2005
    April 2005
    March 2005
    February 2005
    January 2005
    December 2004
    November 2004
    October 2004
    September 2004
    August 2004
    July 2004
    June 2004
    May 2004
    April 2004
    March 2004
    February 2004
    January 2004

    Creative Commons

    Creative Commons License

    Fight Aging! is published under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license. In short, this means that you are encouraged to republish and rewrite Fight Aging! content in any way you see fit, the only requirements being that you (a) link to the original, (b) attribute the author, and (c) attribute Fight Aging!.

    Monday, March 24, 2008

    On Attitudes Towards Longevity

    Some interesting material from a scientific study of attitudes to healthy life extension and enhanced longevity is posted to Cryonet:

    The age of the respondent was related to life-extension attitudes [with] the older respondents tilting in the pro-longevity direction.

    Pro-longevity attitudes were strongest in the separated-divorced group and weakest in the single group.

    From a utilitarian, economic action viewpoint, that is much as I would expect. I think there's ample circumstantial evidence to suspect that those who claim to be fine with aging and dying will mostly change their minds when they get there. The unpleasant future is all too easily hand-waved away for another day - until that day finally comes home to roost.

    The study presented subjects with a range of positive and negative viewpoints on healthy life extension. The viewpoints vary widely in validity, with those on the economic side of the house being particularly bad, but I don't think that's too important when it comes to drawing conclusions from the reactions of study participants:

    I. Personal Emotional Rejection (PER) reflects a harsh rejection of life extension with endorsement of items focused on pointlessness and waste, and contrary-to-nature aspects of extending life span. Other items reflect the personal cost of life extension (e.g., delaying commitments or prolonging goals, inducing boredom).

    II. Utopian Vision (UV) points to the many advantages of life extension for older people and for society at large.

    III. Social Economic Burden (SEB) highlights the economic burdens on the individual and the health-care system flowing from life extension. The highest loading items stress preference for health over longer life and a fear of financial dependency for the individual, and exhaustion of resources for the society.

    Age was significant for each of the factors. ... The older the adult, the more likely is he or she to reject the harsh negativity toward life extension reflected by the items loading on factor I. Correspondingly, chronological age is positively associated with endorsement of items that promise a Utopian future with life extension (Factor II). Finally, the outcome for Factor III is somewhat counterintuitive as we observe that older adults are significantly more disposed to endorse anti-longevity items. These items concern the added costs of health-care and social welfare and hence raise the possibility of exhaustion of financial resources.

    That last point only reinforces my conviction that economic ignorance is one of the greatest threats to the future of healthy life extension (and indeed to all meaningful advancements in technology). It is a strange world when so many believe that more healthy people working away to produce value and trade with one another will somehow make us all poorer:

    The points that found the most favor in the study might lead us to a little more optimism, however:

    Of the positive survey items, these were the most stable across the studies:

    Longevity improving life more time for goals
    Extending life giving respect to old age
    Longevity research as duty to future generations
    Long Term Relationship (LTR) quality will increase with longevity
    Society will benefit from greater wisdom
    Increase budget for this research

    Other positive items from the LEQ:

    Favor longevity research even if product unaffordable
    Extend life to have more leisure time
    Estimate satisfaction greater at age 110 than 75
    Families benefit from cross-generation interaction

    I'm sure you'll recognize a number of these in past material produced by longevity advocates, myself included. Biomedical gerontologist Aubrey de Grey in particular has argued for duty to those yet to live - in his view, who are we to decide that our grandchildren's lives must be as short as our own? By failing to heed the moral imperative to longevity research, we condemn future generations to have no choice in their own longevity.

    Posted by Reason

    Share |
       

    Posted by: Ben at March 25, 2008 12:29 PM

    I am shocked and openly resentful of people whose immediate reaction to the idea of healthy life extension is to dismiss it out of hand as somehow being a bad thing. Of all the justifications given for this irrational, knee jerk prejudice the argument that it would be "unnatural" to extend the human lifespan by interfering with aging is the most offensive and morally reprehensible.

    The natural order has no thought whatsoever for the moral imperative of saving literally every human life on the planet present and future now that we are near to having the means. It is indifferent and hostile to the human cause, and we are at our best when triumphing over this indifference. Indeed, if nature has any conscience at all, that conscience is us. We alone are naturally predisposed to think not merely in terms of 'what is', but also in terms of 'what ought to be', and to then go about making the necessary corrections to the world as we find it. It is our nature, our birthright and our responsibility to make the world a better place, and shame on the fool who stands in the way.

    Down with irrationality. On with progress. And long, healthy, youthful life to all of us.

    [Posted by: Ben at March 25, 2008 12:29 PM]

    Post a comment; thoughtful, considered opinions are valued. Please note that comments incorporating ad hominem attacks, advertising, and other forms of inappropriate behavior are likely to be deleted.










    Remember personal info?