If we miss out on the forthcoming technologies of rejuvenation, then it will be by only a handful of years - and that will be our fault for focusing on other matters and not getting the job done more rapidly. From Psychology Today, an opposing point of view: a skeptic who is doubtful that he will see rapid advances in his lifetime because advances in the past have been slow. "A look at cancer advances over the last 60 years - my current lifespan - is not encouraging. Research on cancer occupies much of the same intellectual terrain as longevity and anti-aging research. Put simply, cancer research primarily looks at why new cell production goes bad, which is also at the center of many of the theories of aging. If we can ensure the continued new production of healthy cells, the reasoning goes, we are on the road to defeating aging. But a recent article in the New York Times, 'As Other Death Rates Fall, Cancer's Scarcely Moves' (April 24, 2009), underlines how little progress there has been against cancer in my lifetime. Although death rates have plummeted for heart disease, stroke, influenza, and pneumonia, for cancer they have barely moved." This might be thought of as the anti-singularity viewpoint - denying that progress is accelerating, and expecting linear change in the future based on a sample of the past. It is almost certainly wrong, but sadly prevalent.