Life is Long, Art is Short (and Sweet)

“The older I become, the more the landscape resembles me.”
Charles Wright – Sestets (2009). New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

The title for this blog segment is an obvious flip on the traditional expression of Ars longa, vita brevis that serves as a nugget of wisdom from Hippocrates (and Seneca)

Life is short,
[the] art long,
opportunity fleeting,
experiment dangerous,
judgment difficult.

but has since expanded to perhaps indicate that in our “short” lives (our temporal limits) can gain some degree of immortality via the creative arts that can be produced (or genetic reproduction). Think of Shakespeare’s sonnets which have outlived Shakespeare and yet Shakespeare still “lives on.”

So long as men can breathe or eyes can see,
So long lives this, and this gives life to thee.

But the title for this segment turns the expression on its head – life is long and art is short (and sweet) so that I propose the paradigm shift in our lives as the aging experience is much more “longer” than Seneca or Hippocrates were thinking of…and that the role of art is of course still long (Ars longa), but perhaps the impact and the role of art can help to create the reflection, the silence, the pause, the moment – that becomes momentous (instead of momentary).

While the researchers and the media revel in the marvels of increasing life expectancy and the potential “breaking” of the limits of the human life span (see Aubrey de Grey), I think – no make that – I feel, that we will need MORE (not less) of the arts to create and provide the necessary anchors-points along the journey that is long (vita longa).

    

I envision this as the metaphor and the visual and the heuristic:

I am drifting on a boat down the Mississippi River, being pulled along the current and I notice to my right, along the shore, an old wooden dock with another smaller boat tied with a tattered rope to a rusted cleat. As I drift along the river in one boat, I am now suddenly – on the dock – watching me go by on the boat down the river. I stand on the uneven dock sensing the flow of the river, a relentless flow southbound. I see me go by – we both wave at each other and as I stand I take in the moment that flows by me as I watch me on the dock reflecting on how I am moving forward and yet standing still for the moment – as the moments unfold on the dock. I see you write something on paper as I take the photograph of you writing about me taking a photograph. The great blue heron lifts from the naked branch – upward and into the glare of the afternoon sun. The sun that marks the days – that drift by and as my boat slips into the great open waters of the gulf and I think back to the moment of that person on the dock – who seemed so content on just standing there – observing/reflecting – and perhaps wanting to be on the boat that drifted by – going southward and into the vast horizon.

    

If life is to be long – if aging is to be more than an industry, a market, a burden, an unknown, then we need art more than ever. The art is short and sweet so that there are moments – and not just a ceaseless flow onward. For what difference does it make? If life to be 50 years or 150? Or 300 years? It is still one long journey onward – year after year.

But the opportunity to pull over to the side. To drop anchor. To tie up on the dock cleat. To step out onto the dock and stand and observe. Write. Sing. Touch. Smell. Sit. Breath – and let the river run on.

Life is both the flow and the back eddy. Entropic and non-entropic.
Life as Newtonian and Taoistic.

And so that is why (when asked) – why do we need art?

Answer: Art is our shortness that creates the momentous out of the momentary. And that is a sweet experience to counter the boredom, the ennui, melancholy, and the atrophy of experience.

Heidegger believed that poets renew our history, which act as the guardians of being (physis), which, under pressure of the applied science (Techne) becomes rigid and inflexible. Neal Oxenhandler (2009) noted how Rimbaud anticipated Heidegger – as Heidegger would later propose that, “Poems are not about things themselves but how they are masked, revealed, transformed, and recreated by consciousness.”

That can be haiku with Basho:

By the old temple,
            Peach blossoms,
A man hulling rice.

That can be a love sonnet by Pablo Neruda:

I love the handful of the earth you are.
Because of the meadows, vast as a planet,
I have not other star. You are my replica
Of the multiplying universe.

That can be the surrealistic gaze of Andre Breton:

I see the fishbones of the sun
Through the hawthorn of the rain
I hear the human linen being torn like a great leaf.

That can be the somatic and psychic connection of Laurie Sheck:

If I could see into a human genome I’d see long spaces much like this,
Vast stretches of empty surfaces, then clusters of information teeming,
Then still empty spaces…

Ms. Sheck’s verse (in “Captivity”, 2007) is like no other – visceral and it flows like the blood in capillaries; her verse on the “retreating figure” is mystical and organic – her skin is “a tapestry of doubts, a tablet evanescing.”

That could be the earthy space of Ted Kooser’s “Delights and Shadows” (2004) who found the back eddy in this verse,

All night, this soft rain from the distant past.
No wonder I sometimes waken as a child.

And now I end with the final example, from a fine publication by Charles Wright (2009) and it captures the essence of why we need the art in our lives so long ~

The metaphysics of the quotidian was what he was after:
A little dew on the sunrise grass,
A drop of blood in the evening trees,
a drop of fire.
If you don’t shine you are darkness.
The future is merciless,
Everyone’s name inscribed
On the flyleaf of the Book of Snow.

Old rule: Ars longa, vita brevis
New rule: Life is Long, Art is Short (and Sweet)

Thanks, Scott D. Wright

Do Transhumanists Swim in Electric Pools? : (The Hermeneutics of a Post-Aging World part 1

In case you are wondering – what in the world is he talking about? - 

The title of this blog is inspired with the title of the book, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? which is a science fiction novel by Philip K. Dick first published in 1968 and then made into a magnificent movie - Blade Runner (1982) -Wow, how the years roll by – why it seemed like just yesterday when I read that book and saw the movie when it first showed up at the theatre – OK, enough of the nostalgia – and so….?

               

Ok, back on track >>>  both of which describe and visualize the “future” – complete with replicants (humanoids) {see Nexus 6} – and set in the year 2019…

[side note: I don't know about you, but that seemed way off in the future when the movie first came out (1982) but now in 2009, thats.....2019 - thats about ten years from now! - which reminds me of the same psychological effect when 2001: A Space Odyssey was shown in 1968 - and then all of sudden 2001 came and went ----and then what about the sequel 2010 (aka Odyssey Two) which is ---- set in next year !]

- and the motto of the Tyrell Corporation (in the movie – Blade Runner) which makes the replicants was, “More human, than human” – but ironically some of the replicants do not want to “retire” (or die – as we would say it), rather they want to “live” longer (that is, exist beyond their programmed end point which was built in their system; a poison pill that was hardwired into their biomechanics). The film, Blade Runner, is a gerontological set piece, a philosophical mind-bender that opens the lid and pulls back the curtain on the current barrage and banter on all things posthuman, transhuman, and perhaps “post-aging.”  In the beginning of the film, when Deckhard visits the Tyrell Corporation, you see the heavy – but well-placed symbolism – of the owl flying at dusk (?) – a salute to Hegel – and we are supplied “wisdom” with the rest of the film on the nuances of a hell/heaven world of a tech-enabled landscape awash in dreary rain-soaked urban intencity – but only at dusk – when the owl of Minerva will fly (too late to learn from the lessons?).

First let me state the textual dynamite for this post (one of many to follow) on the Hermeneutics of a Post-Aging World – which basically will sustain the discourse on the possibility of a “post-aging” world whereby via the very optimistic possibilities associated with the efflorescence of technology (e.g., biomechanics, artificial intelligence, the singularity, etc.) will not only make senescence negligible (see Strategies for Engineered Negligible Senescence (SENS)  - Dr Aubrey de Grey), but also make aging moot and all of its attending complications (in theory). And furthermore (but with ultimate finality) mortality will become…..well, mortal !   The death of death. The end of aging and of finitude.

Maybe. We shall see. But is when engaging in speculative science there is bound to be lots of heresy and provocation – and of course – roguish statements about where are we are going (futurism) based on where we are at – which is always dangerous, reckless, exciting, and interesting. 

The catalyst was a singular (but there are many others) news report from of an aging workshop run by the International Longevity Center (ILC) which produces some solid and timely materials in our current (presentification of gerontology) representation of aging both nationally (US) and internationally. I recommend that you review their website for more info on policy issues and for the conprehensive reports on a variety of topics (via PDF downloads) . So the title of the news article was,

“Nix sedentary life, live to 100: Expert” by  Shannon Proudfoot for the Canwest News Service (June 1, 2009) – and the article went on to briefly describe the talk by Robert Fogel, a business professor at the University of Chicago, who basically projected that half of today’s undergraduate students will live to see their 100th birthday, provided they find some way to counteract their sedentary, tech-enabled lifestyle. I guess I also learned that Fogel left out the gerontology professors who would be teaching in the class with the undergraduate students {never thought about seeing the next century – until now ! – thanks Fogel for the not so subtle reminder; but I guess Ray Kurzweil is thinking differently ?}.

Fogel said that, 

“The future health of the IT generation is quite bright, provided that they adopt an appropriate lifestyle to go with their new technological opportunities,”

Proudfoot went on to report that,

“Today’s undergrads have grown up in relatively healthy, disease-free environments even from the time they were developing in utero, Fogel says, and that’s given them stronger bodies to withstand health challenges through the rest of their lives. On top of that, he believes medical advances will mean increasingly effective ways to treat and prevent the chronic illnesses that most frequently truncate people’s lives now.”

You can read the rest of the story at http://www.calgaryherald.com/Health/sedentary+life+live+Expert/1652221/story.html - 

but stay with me for now.

             Here is the fuse to the dynamite: It is ironic that many of the transhuman, posthuman, and anti-aging proponents envision the ultimate disconnect from the body whereby intelligence is no longer tied to carbon-based units (that would be “us” – presently) but will in the future – via disembodification – will become silicon based – and intelligence necessarily seperate from the flesh and blood (yes the grey matter too) {I did not say anything about WISDOM, but that is another gray matter – sorry I could not help myself there). Here we have a story where the tech-enabled generation of youth are vulnerable to becoming hyper-geriatrified because they are too engaged in sedentary behaviors centered around all things tech. So on one hand, the only way to get to the SINGULARITY (see R. Kurzweil) is to push the tech mode in hyperdrive, but with too much behind the “computer screen time” – one is bound to atrophy and decay (shall I say frailty and prematurely geriatric) because the body (soma) likes activity and action. Perhaps, the point is that in a post-aging world we will not need exercise and activity or action – only thought – only the cerebral – the neocortex rules, not the bicep or the quads. But in the mean time, it appears that immortality will not be gained by sitting as though a couch potato – rather, as long as we are both flesh and blood – cognitive and transcendental – we are still human (not more than) and in the immortal words taken from the movie Blade Runner -

“It’s too bad she won’t live; but then again, who does?” (not even the replicants)

Which I take to be our lesson – no one lives forever. And even if you did – are you then “human” – or posthuman – or replicant – or humanoid – or transhuman, or just really, really bored human. Just think: American Idol – forever !  (that’s the point I embrace the freedom of finitude – pull the plug: on the TV, LCD, Plasma screen – and on me).

100 years ? Ok, check, you got it. But please do ask this: What will be the status of your additional years? (whether they be 50 or 100 extra) Disability-free? Chronic conditions? Quality of life? We can live longer – but what is the difference —- when wanting to have a life that matters – longer. In that case, one year is the same as a thousand – if it matters. If it don’t – then infinity will not solve your problems or desires or illusions. Immortality is kinda of long time – to think and dwell and reflect… are you ready ? While it is possibly true that procrastination would rule the “day” (day – whatever that would mean) – as I have forever to do anything, I suppose, what I actually hope for  is the case in an post-aging world is basic and follows the wisdom of Joseph Addison:

Three grand essentials to happiness in this life are something to do, something to love and something to hope for.

If that is the case regardless of 50 years, 100 years, 200 years, 500 years, or an infinite possibility – then let me think about that some more. But until then, get off your chair while you are reading this blog – and go exercise – go outside – or go for a swim in the water – before it all goes virtual. 

Goodnight – as my neurons think of the possibility of dreams that are electric – and then are they mine? – or implanted there ?  

ZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz 

Thanks, Scott D. Wright

The Fountain of Youth at Subprime; Baby Boomers as Hedge Fund – {The anti-aging enterprise}

Youth is a wonderful thing.  What a crime to waste it on children. ~ George Bernard Shaw

For a small piece of paper it carries a lot of weight Oh, that mean, mean, mean, mean, mean green – Almighty Dollar!
~ For the Love of Money – The O’Jays

Like a preacher stealing hearts, At a traveling show, For love or money money money
~ Desire – U2

I figured out one thing.  If you’re growing older or getting younger it really doesn’t make any difference.  Whichever way you’re going you have to make the most of what this is.
~ Benjamin Button – from the movie, “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”. Screenplay by Eric Roth. Based on the short story by F. Scott Fitzgerald.

            Prologue

There are serendipitous events – meaningful intersections – that help to keep the momentum going when writing about the various topics that weave into the domain of the aging experience. For example, the following text indented below was copied directly from a website (complete with a Twitter pitch!) – and the link (the URL) was captured by the many alerts that I have set up to bring in information as it intersects the topic of aging. But first a quick preface (in the prologue no less).

What I hope to achieve with this post is to roguishly examine the topics of “anti-aging medicine” (and a few of the attendant concordant terms such as: prolongevity) – all of which brings up the prospect of negligible senescence (or SENS via Aubrey de Grey who poses the question: Must we age? – which begs the question on just about any other ‘issue’ associated with living – Must we pay taxes? Do I have to stop at red lights? Can I have it all? ) – or better yet (or worse?) – and can I go ahead and say it? – Can we achieve IMMORTALITY? Which ontologically speaking – may not be the same as reversing aging per se; in other words, one hopes not to get any older, but rather to stay “young” (whatever that means – what chrono set point is that?) because let us not forget that we humans do want to have our cake and eat it too.
                

So reader beware: I also plan to use the descriptors of the films from the Matrix trilogy as inspiration and heuristic to frame the development and serve as guideposts along way and to establish the need for a critical re-examination of the whole project that claims to be “anti-aging.” Why the need? Because I want to propose that the enterprise is not going to slow down nor will it stop given the presence of two major motivational forces that serve as both catalyst and lubricant to keep the enterprise moving – rapidly.

1. The “scientific process” – persons who seek to unveil the hidden, the mysterious, the unknown, the challenging, the secrets, to simply know “it” – and perhaps to be either the first or at least a significant part of the legacy (team work) that would lead to the discovery of the raw and primary factor(s) that would slow, stop, and reverse the aging process. I have scientific process above in scare quotes here to indicate the highly charged atmosphere that surrounds this activity – what does it mean to be involved in a scientific process such that some degree of legitimacy and provisional ‘truth’ is established for colleagues in the field and for the lay person (aka “the consumer”)?
2. The aging baby boomers. Read – their drive, their motivation, their desire, their money, their narcissism, their legacy, their gullibility, their relentless search for the ‘dream’, their final push to “get it right’, and their fetish to finally create and exist in a human-derived nirvanic garden of eden that has eliminated disease, aging, and death.

             

Thus my concern that between the two forces we have heavy potential for the anti-aging movement to see the fountain of youth as an opportunity for subprime activity (to get people to buy into it – when there other concrete higher priorities here and now; my point and as appetizer: To me this akin to the debate about space missions – we can do it – but is it all worth it? – and to what end ? Can we afford it – or is it a necessary debt to embrace because the benefits are so obvious and there is little risk). The other blunt issue is how the baby boomer cohort may be seen as one big cash cow – ripe for the taking – the mother of all hedge funds.

                

I also want to submit a working framework to tackle the dynamics of the enterprise will follow a sequential and incremental breadcrumb trail that goes something like this:

The Aging Enterprise > Revisited > Reloaded >Revolution

which sounds very familiar – because it follows the title sequence for the Matrix trilogy films – but here I use to facilitate textual examination and discourse on where we have been – and where we/are are/we going (?) {that can be both statement and question}.

I want to present the catalyst – the key event of the information first, then I will share with you some commentary related to the topic at hand {the anti-aging market} Here then is the blurb that caught me eye and lit the fuse for my reflections – and hopefully our discussion.

Global market for anti-aging products and services worth $274.5 billion in 201305.08.2009 – GLOBAL MARKET FOR ANTI-AGING PRODUCTS AND SERVICES WORTH $274.5 BILLION IN 2013

Wellesley, Mass—According to a new technical market research report, ANTI-AGING PRODUCTS AND SERVICES: THE GLOBAL MARKET (HLC060A) from BCC Research (www.bccresearch.com), the global market for anti-aging products and services was worth $162.2 billion in 2008. This will increase to $274.5 billion in 2013, for a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 11.1%.
The market is broken down into segments for appearance, disease and fitness. The disease treatment segment currently has the largest share of the market, worth $66.0 billion in 2008. This should increase at a CAGR of 12.5% to reach $119.2 billion in 2013. 
The appearance segment has the second largest share of the market, worth $64.4 billion in 2008. This segment is expected to generate $105.4 billion in 2013, for a CAGR of 10.4%. 
The fitness segment has the third largest market share and was worth $31.8 billion in 2008. This is expected to reach $49.8 billion in 2013, for a CAGR of 9.4%. 

The appearance market consists of the facial rejuvenation, skin rejuvenation, hair care and body shaping markets. The disease management market consists of preventive and reactive health care for all the diseases of aging such as joint and bone health, Alzheimer’s, sexual dysfunction, metabolic disorders, eye and cardiovascular diseases. The fitness market consists of gym, spa and massage services. The majority of the products include facial care, skin care, hair care, drugs and supplements, nutraceuticals, cosmetic equipment and fitness equipment. The majority of the services market includes cosmetic invasive and noninvasive services, complementary and alternative medicine therapies, bioregenerative services, spa treatments and massages, and gym services. The services market accounts for a major portion of the global anti-aging market, or around 54.2% in 2008, and will increase to 55.6% in 2013, for a CAGR 11.7%. The products market will increase from $73.3 billion in 2008 to $199.9 billion in 2013, for a CAGR 10.4%

First, some observations:

1) I do not know how you feel about the numbers being thrown around in the news item above, but given recent policy decisions at the federal level – a billion here and a billion there – $275 billion does not seem to carry the same gravity of an impressive jaw-dropping amount especially after having to (or at least to try) getting a grip on such sky-high amounts of money such as $700-billion federal banking bailout or our mega-trillion deficit in the US, but still – $ 275 billion is significant and substantial in its own right;

2) What I was impressed with was the wide net that was cast which purports to capture or represent the anti-aging market including the segments of disease, appearance, and fitness. In fact, I was both impressed and incredulous over such a claim that disease-oriented products and services would be under the rubric (or the matrix) of the anti-aging market.

In other words, I am still trying to understand what IS NOT a part of the anti-aging market (?) – Is there a boundary or firewall to demarcate “anti-aging” services and products from other types of activities that address aging issues but do not necessarily state explicitly that they are “anti” so instead we might have – just good ole – regular – traditional – conventional – status quo – market for dealing with transitions of aging.

But perhaps that sounds like caving-in – throwing in the towel so to speak – that if you are not “anti” (and read: progressive and bucking the status quo) – you are part of the “establishment” that is “for” aging (?). I can hear it now: “Sure, you say are for health and well-being, but pull the curtain back, and you still find those who are really the “biomedical disease model types” that are pessimistic and more into treating chronic conditions – than preventing them.

The “establishment” are (perhaps) all those who focus on career building (as you shall soon read – a soft connection to the scholarship of Carol Estes on the “Aging Enterprise” circa 1993; see next subheading below) on the “problems” of aging, rather than those in “anti-aging” who are more interested in the “solutions” of aging (i.e., stopping or reversing the aging process).

But, I digress somewhat here. We will get back to this boundary issue further into this post;

and 3) Now what was missing in this news blurb above was the explicit primary audience to which the commercial products could be (will be) targeted for – that is, the AGING BABY BOOMERS – and it is interesting to consider whether the primary audience (boomers) is asking for (seeking out) the products so that the “market” can react to and catch up to the demands of the baby boomers or is some or all of it based on the assumption that the baby boomers will react to advertising and commercial plugs that highlight “anti-aging” and thus cater to the assumed profile of this cohort as – extremely interested in anti-aging products (but they just don’t know it yet, thus most boomers are to be viewed as gullible and an easy mark to peddle anti-aging products to) or that it is all a perfect storm of outlandish vanity, and a desire to be healthy and “younger” by appearance (for example, the plethora of skin care products to make you “look” younger – at least on the surface) and by biomedical status

(for example, as Chopra & Simon did claim in their book [Grow Younger, Live Longer, 2001] that if you follow his recommendations, you can “reset” your Biostat {biological, or functional age} up to fifteen years younger than your chronological age) and that the boomers are more than willing to dedicate a significant part of the income/assets to this pursuing this endeavor in working (and buying) their way to (and into) the “fountain of youth.”

                     

I continue on with more detailed information from the BCC Research (www.bccresearch.com) website which specifically (and explicitly) indicates the “rationale for the analysis” (please note that this is NOT the full report):

REASONS FOR DOING THE STUDY
Anti-aging Products and Services: The Global Market (Report Code: HLC060A)
The anti-aging market is categorized distinctively into “boomers” (the population born between 1946 and 1965) and the youth anti-aging market. These markets differ in terms of products and service offerings, market structure, and positioning. This report has been focused on the boomer anti-aging market, which is a more mature market and controls 75% of the total anti-aging market.
The worldwide population of 200 million boomers is growing at 38%, compared to the general population, which is growing at 13%, making the boomer population more attractive for anti-aging companies. Anti-aging companies need to adapt different strategies while tapping the boomer market, which varies with race, sex, income level, family status, young and old boomers, insurance status, and distribution channels.
The boomers market has been the largest opportunity today in the world, mainly for their high disposable income. Therefore, all companies in the cosmetic, pharma and health care, biotech, medspa, and fitness services are strategizing hard to tap the double-digit growing boomer anti-aging market. In the current economic turmoil, the anti-aging boomer market can help the economy to grow and benefit the respective stakeholders. All the existing studies and third-party market reports do not provide a comprehensive understanding of the anti-aging market specifically targeting boomers. In this report, we provide full market estimates of the anti-aging market for boomers. The reports available do not cover the entire gamut of products and services under anti-aging; mainly, these reports do not provide information on services.
INTENDED AUDIENCES
The intended audience includes all the stakeholders of the anti-aging market: drug and supplement companies, cosmetic companies, pharmaceutical (pharma) and health care, biotech companies, medspa companies, physical fitness companies, and nutrition companies. This includes manufacturers, retailers and super retailers, technology providers, and research and development (R&D) companies.

               Perhaps I have overlooked something along the way, but it appears to me that this emphasis on the “market” – the commoditization” of products and services to create the ‘anti-aging’ experience is bound (and determined) to facilitate a tiered (or caste) system of the haves and the have-nots when it comes to accessing the services and products. In other words, not all baby boomers will have this disposable income to spend – nor can we assume that even if they did, would they necessarily want to spend their money in this fashion: on anti-aging services and products.

   Furthermore, I am still waiting to hear more on the potential scenario of where ONLY the elite –well-resourced and financially deep – may have the capacity to “buy” or pay for such services that claim to slow, stop, or reverse the aging process. The news blurb above speaks more to the investment potential – the venture capital possibilities – in benefiting (profiteering) from the projected sales and revenue created from the anti-aging market. When you think about it more – and deeper – this news blurb is pointing in the direction of the supply and demand route – and I wonder, or at least I am willing to hear and discuss more about how all of this anti-aging medicine activity will then benefit the commonwealth – the citizens – directly. Sure, I could hear about reduced costs (like the DRGs from the past) in terms of health care expenditures – over time and for certain segments of our society, but I ask: will this supposed rising tide of benefits from anti-aging medicine and all of these products and services – lift all the boats (ever-body?) or only those boats that have the income (and ability) to actually leave the harbor? There is also the rationale that any investments by private companies and corporations have to protect their interests and seek to maximize their profits for their “stockholders” (or is that stakeholders?) – and turn a profit for the general well-being of the company.

But again, with all of the marketing, publicity, hype, and promise of anti-aging medicine/services and the projected revenue to be generated, the money spent (or invested) has to come from somebody – and their wallets.

The questions that I have an interest in related to this – are: 1) Is the $275 billion (or so) spent going to amount to a significant change in the quality-of-life (having a life) whether one lives an additional two more years or twenty? If you can reset your aging clocks – then what? What is gained? More time? Time for what? If you were to slow, stop, or reverse aging, what are the implications of that monumental shift in the life course structure (and trajectory) for our social-cultural-ecological resources? – And 2) Aside from the notion that science or medicine or technology will trump all else, is there also room for (and the possibility that) philosophy or ethics or existential discourse may matter on this topic? Or at least enter the equation? Or is it all reductionistic scientism {is that an oxymoron?} from here on out? For example, what is it? – What is the underlying motivation and desire for this historical and contemporary quest in our humanity that would seek to be engaged relentlessly (cross-culturally) in “anti-aging” activities? That is, is the attempt to re-invent or re-create the life course away from – for what some might refer to – as the natural order of organic existence and being – something that is inherently human after all? And therefore can be based on what human characteristic? Or attribute? Or process? Is it a biological drive? Or is it something psychoanalytic? Or it is beyond the bounds of rational (reasoned) thinking – and instead more a metaphysical goal and attraction that is more akin to an affinity with Greek mythology?  Perhaps the quest is Platonic – like existing in the cave of shadows – to break free of the chains that restrain our “true” potential – if we could only climb out into the light of longevity – and freedom to exist forever.

And should we take as prima facie data (“fact”) that if “we” (humanity as the ultimate arbiter of this decision) seek to break the cycle of pain, suffering, aging, death (sort of related to the Nirvana principle) – who are we to decide? Or who amongst us shall decide? Shall I defer to Aubrey de Grey? Shall I pledge allegiance to the American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine {hereafter A4M – and “Established 1992.
A non-profit international medical society of 20,000 member physicians and scientists who believe answers to aging related disease are available now.” – from their web site} and then just get the hell out of the way and let the “pros” do their job in regenerative and biomedical technologies? Should I begin to trust that “they” have my “well-being” (physical and economic) in mind as they venture forth with capital and good intentions (naïve or otherwise) to discover the ‘scientific’ fountain of youth?

But I get the sense that a lot of the questions and concerns about anti-aging activities, outcomes, and side effects are neatly escorted to a back room where the speaker will politely tell us – “We will cross that bridge, when we get there.” But typically when we get there, the bridge has already been built – and burned down. I am not against the “American way” of enterprise and free-market ideologies (such as they are), but I detect that the greyhounds of science and technology have slipped the leashes – and are out of the gates – already chasing the rabbit of immortality. And this time it is different. This is not at the level of selling snake oil and bull testicles. This is a full-fledged industry – an entire enterprise at work – and as we have seen and read previously – the market related to “it” is not peanuts, especially with the working assumption that aging baby-boomers will demand that “we” do something about that nuisance – that bummer and bad trip experience of aging – and death. “Why haven’t we come up with a cure for that yet?” The invisible hand has got a new market segment to tap into – our quest, our desire, our dream, our fetish, our need and want – to eliminate and eradicate “it” – the new enemy to fulfillment and happiness and satisfaction in our culture – senescence.

And that makes me wonder further more about our current state of affairs within our country about decisions and priorities that affect all population segments of the life course: environmental, economic, military, medical, education, industrial, and technological. Is this where we want to go? Will this be our legacy as aging baby boomers? The quest to make sure we did it – we were the ones who broke the chain of generations. The search for the fountain of youth would mean that we refused to march into the abyss of frailty and morbidity. Yes! We are the dragon slayer and we have killed the beast that has haunted humanity for centuries upon centuries. No longer do we build edifices of religion, government, philosophy, art, and culture on the certainty of mortality – the finiteness of time – we can slow aging – reverse aging – and live forever – and let the chips fall where they may. We can all become the Curious Case of Benjamin Button – but with new spin: The Ordinary Case of Baby Boomers (or because we are boomers = The Extraordinary Case !) who all grow younger over time – and let everyone benefit from our willingness to become the pioneers into immortality. Don’t you see? We are doing it for you!  Everyone. Let someone else build the new paradigm of meaning and purpose – after all, we will have forever to figure it all out.

In fact, I can see it now: the aging baby boomers will have given us the ultimate gift of certain procrastination as we have no longer have the sense of hurry, there is no loss, no deadlines, no pain, no suffering, no end game at all; we will always have tomorrow. And what would you rather have? – The direction of youthful (a la Brad Pitt) progression? – Or morbidity and mortality associated with the end of a measly 80 years of life – or so. My guess would be that we want more – and both. We have made our preference very clear to all – youth without youth – eternal adolescence – healthy adulthood in perpetuity. And therein lies the heart of the issue – how to explain that preference? From where does it originate? And why? Is it a primordial drive within us to “naturally” define the aging process as the ultimate “fall”, a failure, a corruption, incredible loss, and chronic suffering. Well, because it is? And if it is – then we must overcome and defeat “it.” On one hand we could read Jean Amery’s “On Aging: Revolt and Resignation” and go into a funk because it is soooooooo depressing (albeit “real”) – Or you could pick up the numerous “cotton-candy” – “can do” optimistic books on aging that are apt to become best-sellers because they offer “the promise” of a “secret” that has been kept from us – the promise of eternal wellness – if you would only do the following (after buying the book or the tapes or the download) x, y, and z.

Yes, it is unfair – death is. It is a bitch that aging has to happen. Life is unduly truncated and perhaps we all want to believe that “science” will be the weapon – the ultimate tool – at our disposal to finally conquer death. And so to be rid of all things gerontological and geriatric would be….well, might as well say it – the deification of humanity. We are the gods that have reversed more than some original transgression – we have arrived back into the Garden of Eden. We have disconnected the awful burden of being human – to know that we will age and die. And so a human being – would forever be-ing (sorry Heidegger fans, I can tell you are getting antsy over your Dasein at this point – a being-in-time would no longer be in time – but outside of the time we used to be “thrown into” – now we appear and stay relentlessly in existence).

Although it would be easy to bring up cultural stories that offer “warnings” about seeking such a powerful attribute and outcome – such as the story of Daedalus and Icarus – I am thinking more of the entity of Gollum (aka baby boomers) in Lord of the Rings trilogy – seeking and desiring “the ring” (aka reversing aging – perpetual youth) – “So bright… so beautiful… ah, Precious.”), I will stick to the philosophical road for now as we contemplate what Robert Butler has termed, “The Longevity Revolution.”

Finally, a quick look at the person who wrote the original analysis for BCC Research (www.bccresearch.com).

                        ANALYST CREDENTIALS

The author of the report, Sandeep Sugla, is a chief research analyst with a Bachelor of Engineering degree from Shivaji University and over 8 years of experience in life science. He has been the author for reports such as telemedicine, sales force effectiveness, nutraceuticals, and new revenue models of pharma in the debacle of blockbusters.

            Okay, that is some interesting background and credentials. And here is my point by paraphrasing Shakespeare’s Hamlet: “What’s anti-aging to him?” {I ask} “Or he to anti-aging that he should care about the topic” Cui bono?  Well, who knows – which is my last reflection on this section in particular. Caveat emptor for anyone who would read this information – and at least Mr. Sugla (and BCC) inserted the “Disclaimer” at the end – because if there is any take home message for aging baby boomers (or anybody from any cohort for that matter) it is to beware and be-aware; to be cautious about any claim and product and service in the domain of anti-aging medicine or service. Furthermore, any claim to having the crystal ball on baby boomers as they age will have to be taken and interpreted with a skeptical approach. The baby boomers are not a hedge fund and to the best of my knowledge nor should the cohort be treated as though they (as a collective) were like Wall Street derivatives.

There are many possible angles to discuss with this “news item” referred to above – both good and bad – positive and negative. But my approach is more philosophical in the sense that I am still trying to understand the core motivation for humans when considering the allure of living longer – perhaps forever – and how that possibility would really change anything different than it is now – or what we currently have to confront as a living being – an entity that would rather “grow younger, live longer” (see Chopra, 2001) – in essence reverse aging – which appears at first to be against the natural order of things as we have to come know organic-multicellular life as having a beginning – and an end. And in between there is maturation, procreation, and then ultimately senescence. While I realize there are persuasive rationales and many arguments for pro-longevity and “anti-aging”, I am (personally) trying to understand the primary and the core need and want that goes beyond or transcends the casual and flip comments that are borderline banal or reminiscent of some Woody Allen lines:

I am not afraid of death, I just don’t want to be there when it happens.

I don’t want to achieve immortality through my work. I want to achieve it through not dying.

The “Aging Enterprise” Revisited (again), Reloaded, and Revolution

            My goal with this final segment of the Rogue Scholarship on Aging post on this topic is to take the titles of some academic articles and mash them up with the titles of the movies from The Matrix trilogy (especially the titles of the last two movies) in order to examine the “enterprise” (the market – the business – the commoditization – the profiteering) of aging experience, but more accurately, the business of “anti-aging.” And yet, the ultimate goal here is not to argue for or against “anti-aging medicine” (as you will see, there is plenty of literature already available that addresses both sides – and then some), rather I am more interested in the philosophical underpinnings that can help us understand (and I’m not sure if it can explain, but we shall see) why humans (our species Homo sapiens) have the drive, the desire, the fetish, the obsession, and the compulsion, and the motivation to seek out the discoveries and the purported “medicines” that would slow, stop, and even reverse the aging process. In other words, I am curious about the analysis of the WHY – and less so on the scientific merits or limitations of whether or nor we can possible live forever by finding a “cure” for aging – and then supposedly defeating the ultimate inevitability of life itself – that is, to conquer death. I will begin the examination and review of this section by unpacking the meaning of the subheading of this posting:

The “Aging Enterprise” Revisited (again), Reloaded, and Revolution

            This subheading reflects my desire at mashing up a series of scholarly publications on the “Aging Enterprise” (see Estes, 1993; Moody) and then slightly morphing it into a new perspective on the examination of the so called “anti-aging medicine” domain by using the titles of Matrix movies (reloaded and revolutions) as a way of looking over – and through – the matrix of the issues involved in this topic that relates to the “fountain of youth” and “anti-aging” medicine and services and the possibility of “ending aging” (see Aubrey de Grey, 2007).

            One of key elements of this sub-section, but really of the entire blog post, is the notion of the “Aging Enterprise” which we first hear of in the literature with Carol Estes’ book, “The Aging Enterprise” (1979).

And then there was the follow-up publication. There are a handful of journal articles (and only a handful) that, in my opinion, have presented a scholarly and provocative treatise contra to the prevailing and received view within the field of aging, which in effect has served as a Kafka-like “ice-axe” to break apart the frozen sea within us – or in other words, an article that serves as a good ole butt-kickin’ to jolt the status quo and grab the commencement regalia by the collar and shake the devil out of the pontificating old poops in the academy. When I first read this one particular article (out of the handful) I was shaken from my Kantian dogmatic slumber (and my graduate student dumber) and I thought perhaps, just perhaps, I had just read some Khunian paradigm-breaker that knocked over the applecart of normal science.

The article was authored by Carol Estes as a “follow-up” article (“The Aging Enterprise Revisited”) published in The Gerontologist (Vol. 33, No. 3, 292-298) to her original work The Aging Enterprise (the book) that was published in 1979. The article was a refreshing (and startling provocation in some regards) antidote to the received view found in many of the textbooks and readings assigned in the academic courses on aging, but what I found most engaging (an epiphany – illumination!) in the article was the philosophical exploration of the “social construction of reality” processes involved in treating and solving the “problems” of the aging experience. In other words, Estes forced the question (in a positive confrontational manner) upon the field of aging: Whose problem? What problem? Her point was this:

“These constructions of aging and the social policies that result not only reflect, but also reproduce existing social class, gender, and racial and ethnic disparities among the old. That is, social policy on aging does little to alter or disturb the relations of power or the distribution of economic and other resources in the society.” (emphasis from original article).

And I remember thinking: What? Who me? The gerontologist-to-be? Did I do that? Am I knowingly or unknowingly contributing to the very problem I wish to address and alleviate? And so, I forever after reading that article became much more aware of the insidious messages, outlooks, attitudes, and behaviors that might weave into the discourse and the policies that relates to aging. I would see the reality of aging in a whole new way – a different way. Thus, my tie in with The Matrix movie (# 1 – written by Andy Wachowski & Larry Wachowski) and from the very first film, we have the essence of the now classic scene between Morpheus and Neo in terms of epiphany, exposure illumination, and the “true” reality conjured up by Baudrillard, Lacan, Badiou, Zizek and a host of others in terms of our understanding (however possible that is) of reality and the significance of being (or take Heidegger’s Dasien). The impact of the scene was much like perspective in the text of Estes: a cold bucket of water in your face to wake up from a long night’s sleep – the jolt, the adrenaline producing snap of the brain –the mind – at full alert as the lighthouse cuts through the fog – and one can see clearly the shoreline, the horizon, the sky, and all of the stars as the FULL picture – the entire map is suddenly (and finally) revealed because all before it was an illusion, a representation, an orchestration of constructs and slogans that masked the essence of what really is.

    Morpheus: I imagine that right now you’re feeling a bit like Alice. Tumbling down the rabbit hole?        

    Neo: You could say that.

    Morpheus: I can see it in your eyes. You have the look of a man who accepts what he sees because he’s expecting to wake up. Ironically, this is not far from the truth. Do you believe in fate, Neo?

    Neo: No.

    Morpheus: Why not?

    Neo: ‘Cause I don’t like the idea that I’m not in control of my life.

    Morpheus: I know exactly what you mean. Let me tell you why you’re here. You’re here because you know something. What you know, you can’t explain. But you feel it. You felt it your entire life. That there’s something wrong with the world. You don’t know what it is, but it’s there. Like a splinter in your mind — driving you mad. It is this feeling that has brought you to me. Do you know what I’m talking about?

    Neo: The Matrix?

    Morpheus: Do you want to know what it is?

    (Neo nods his head.)

    Morpheus: The Matrix is everywhere, it is all around us. Even now, in this very room. You can see it when you look out your window, or when you turn on your television. You can feel it when you go to work, or when go to church or when you pay your taxes. It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth.

    Neo: What truth?

    Morpheus: That you are a slave, Neo. Like everyone else, you were born into bondage, born inside a prison that you cannot smell, taste, or touch. A prison for your mind. (long pause, sighs) Unfortunately, no one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself. This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back.

    (In his left hand, Morpheus shows a blue pill.)



    Morpheus: You take the blue pill and the story ends. You wake in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. (a red pill is shown in his other hand) 



You take the red pill and you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes. (Long pause; Neo begins to reach for the red pill) Remember — all I am offering is the truth, nothing more.

    (Neo takes the red pill and swallows it with a glass of water)

            And the red pill is our sign and signifier for getting to essential truth – the core essence of what is behind the constructed reality of our social programs and services for older adults.

But the red pill (i.e., a certain amount of legitimacy – scientific protocol – skepticism – testing – peer review) is needed again because the enterprise has “reloaded” into another industry – another social construction of our wants, desires, and searching for the elusive (or should I say illusive? – but of course Aubrey de Grey believes reversing aging is very much a reality – in our lifetime) holy grail of life – the fountain of age in a materialistic culture where a certain amount of capital can buy you products, services, and medicine that can ensure you everything (assuming this is pretty much all that you need) you want: growing younger, ending aging – and the Faustian bargain is no longer a “bargain” – you can have it, eternal life, not for your soul, but for your wallet, and then some. The enterprise had reloaded and it seemed everyone had came out with barrels blazing.

            And so the “war” began. Which also carries some Lacanian interpretative (via Zizek) potential with the rich symbolism of conflict between humans and machines al la Terminator movies – and the psychology of desire and language and “the Other” as we confront various schemas and reports and publications that claim the ‘truth’ – or at least scientific legitimacy on what is REALLY is going on “out there.” Because there is a lot at stake: profit, expenditures, careers, and of course ~ ego (oh, and did I mention the promise of immortality? – the long sought after and sought for prize by too many explorers and royalty and pirates to mention)

            So what is really going on in the battle and what are the positions of the stakeholders, the scientists, and the consumers? Like a work of art on the gallery wall – it appears that much is in eye of the beholder and not so much for beauty, but rather who is claiming that they are on the “right” versus all others who are labeled with a variety of derogatory titles (and categories to put them into).

            Let me conveniently begin with a report back in 2001 (the timing was the day before 9/11) from United States General Accounting Office titled, “Health Products for Seniors – ‘Anti-Aging Products Pose Potential for Physical and Economic Harm’.” (see GAO-01-1129 and GAO-01-1139T).

         Yikes ! When this report went before the Special Committee on Aging, U.S. Senate and it is the report from the GAO – the supposed (and hoped for) big-time arbiter of them all – with Accountability * Integrity * Reliability, then this sort of sets the benchmark, or does it? Well, sort of. It was only the first shot in the new aging enterprise revisited and reloaded.

            The battle between various scholars and researchers and disciplines (and disciples) heated up in the “Anti-Aging” domain with publications like (and see overall review by John Vincent, in Ageing & Society, 2003):

And so Harry Moody (among others) also took the concept and the shock value of the Estes article (again – in a positive manner) to examine the “new” emerging enterprise related to the domain of “anti-aging” with his publication in Generations – Winter 2004-05, “Silver Industries and the New Aging Enterprise,” (and see also the 2008 publication – http://assets.aarp.org/www.aarp.org_/articles/research/AgingEnterprise.pdf
It was in this publication that we begin to examine more closely the metamorphosis of the enterprise as it shifted into areas beyond (primarily) the bureaucracies (“the aging network”) and into the domain of the private, fee-for-service, profit-driven world of “anti-aging” services and medicine.

Moody (2004/05) elaborated the connection this way:

“It is more than twenty-five years now since Carroll Estes published her influential book The Aging Enterprise (1979), in which she described, and also criticized, the evolution of an aging human-service sector supported by government funding. Her book and her critique came at a historical moment when the human-service approach to an older population had reached its peak.”

And here Moody builds the bridge of the “new enterprise” (or Revisited – again)

“The problem is that if age brands are left entirely to emerging companies in Silver Industry sectors, then we’re in danger of getting products that respond to stereotypes and the lowest common denominator: businesses based on denial of aging rather than latent strengths of later life. Entrepreneurs, acting on their own, easily miss out on the accumulated knowledge and expertise that professionals in the field of aging have acquired over the past generation. As David Wolfe has shown in Ageless Marketing, too many companies approaching the “Mature Market” make huge mistakes and fail to provide the right products and services (Wolfe and Snyder, 2003; see also the article by Wolfe in this issue). Marketers too easily fall into a language distorted by the insidious power of ageism.        

The rise of “anti-aging medicine” is just one case in point. I have put quotation marks around this entire domain because, scientifically speaking, there is no such thing as anti-aging medicine, since there are no interventions (apart from caloric reduction) that have been shown to increase maximum lifespan and slow the biological process of aging, at least in nonhuman organisms. But whatever science may say, as Helen Dennis has noted in her article earlier in this issue, anti-aging medicine is thriving. To cite only one (dismaying) statistic: there are more M.D.s who are members of the American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine than there are members of the American Geriatrics Society. To be sure, there is a legitimate and very important debate about what regenerative medicine or “prolongevity” might mean in the future (Post & Binstock, 2004). But the emergence of anti-aging medicine is already an important lesson about the power of the marketplace in an aging society. Anti-aging products are brands based on ageism and age-denial.”

            But not every one was seeing the same picture – or story – on (and in) the anti-aging battlefront. For example, there was a strong rebuttal in the Journal of Gerontology: BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES (ã The Gerontological Society of America) 2005, Vol. 60A, No. 2, 139–141, a letter to the editor from a Michael J. Rae (of the Calorie Restriction Society – and please note: co-author with Aubrey de Grey with Ending Aging book that was to be published later in 2007) accused the journal (Journal of Gerontology) of “excessive pessimism in the ‘anti-aging medicine sections” which had several articles (see June/July 2004) by prominent scholars on the topic (excerpted from the letter – not the complete letter below),

To the Editor:       

I was greatly disappointed by the overwhelmingly negative assessment of the prospects for intervening in the aging process presented in the recent special sections on anti-aging medicine in the Journal (Part I, June 2004; Part II, July 2004). I must respectfully take the Guest Editors to task for presenting the unduly one-sided survey of the issue. All of the Guest Editors of these special sections are engaged in an ongoing (and entirely admirable) public crusade against the charlatanry of current ‘‘anti-aging’’ medical quackery. One wonders, however, if, in the process of incessant debate, they have lost sight of the wider context in which their specific battles are immersed, and of the widespread optimism within the legitimate biogerontological community on the feasibility of genuine intervention in the human biological aging process…The unconscious bias in choice of contributors was doubtless further exacerbated by the large overlap between the authors of individual articles and the guest editorship of the issue itself…In Part II—devoted to evaluating specific avenues toward intervention in the aging process—the Editors chose to primarily present articles devoted to a facile critique of the foibles of the current pseudoscientific ‘‘anti-aging’’ marketplace. While it is important for the conclusions of these articles to reach the lay public, the readership of a gerontological journal is already quite aware that neither growth hormone injections nor vitamin C capsules retard biological aging; their inclusion does not contribute to our understanding of the issues…The apparent feasibility of this panel of interventions led the authors to the conclusion ‘‘that indefinite postponement of aging—which we term ‘engineered negligible senescence’— may be within sight.” One has yet to hear a cogent rejoinder to these proposals from the ‘‘anti-aging” skeptics. Such a debate would have genuinely advanced our understanding of the technical and theoretical prospects and pitfalls of ‘‘anti-aging medicine.’’

            As you can see – there are points and counterpoints along this line and in other publications, letters, and reports there is tossing of verbal grenades from one side to other that carry labels such as: charlatan, quack, crusader, conservative, rogue, mainstream, maverick, traditionalist, and so on.

            And the war still goes on. However, in all the smoke and haze of battle, I did find the book edited by Stephen G. Post and Robert H. Binstock (2004)

The Fountain of Youth: Cultural, Scientific, and Ethical Perspectives (Oxford University Press) to be an outstanding overview of the issues – including what I think is most critical section of the book: Ethical and Social Perspectives on Radical Life Extension. Yeah, finally! This should be required reading for everybody – including all of the cheer-leaders for “anti-aging medicine” and the public – the consumers and taxpayers.

            Here is the overview of what the book addresses:

A wide variety of ambitions and measures to slow, stop, and reverse phenomena associated with aging have been part of human culture since early civilization. From alchemy to cell injections to dietary supplements, the list of techniques aimed at altering the processes of aging continues to expand. Charlatans, quacks, and entrpreneurs proffering anti-aging products and practices have always exploited uniformed customers and instilled doubt and apprehension toward practices intended to extend life. Recently, however, the pursuit of longevity has developed into a respectable scientific activity. Many biologists are substantially funded by the government and the private sector to conduct research that they believe will lead to effective anti-aging interventions. While many embrace this quest for “prolongevity”–extended youth and long life–others fear its consequences. If effective anti-aging interventions were achieved, they would likely bring about profound alterations in the experiences of individual and collective life. What if aging could be decelerated to the extent that both average life expectancy and maximum life span would increase by forty percent? What if all humans could live to be centenarians, free of the chronic diseases and disabilities now commonly associated with old age? What if modern scientists could find the modern equivalent to the Fountain of Youth that Ponce de Leon sought?

            Again, it is the - what if? - that concerns me the most; that is, the philosophical underpinnings of the why and the what for and the so what of this topic. I do not question the sincerity and the integrity of scientists like Aubrey de Grey (in fact, his book was indicated as the Rogue Scholarship on Aging book of the year) rather I want to hear more either from him (but I doubt we will get it) or his colleagues about the Ethical and Social Perspectives on Radical Life Extension. When I had the opportunity to hear Aubrey de Grey deliver his talk on his new book (at that time) at the University of Utah, I was delighted to see the roguishness of his approach, but he completely danced around the question from the audience about the “other side of the coin” – “the double-edged sword” of reversing aging in our lifetime. In essence, I remember something (de Grey’s answer) to the effect: that is not my concern, I leave that to others.

          The battle for hearts, minds, and souls in this war continued as Courtney Everts Mykytyn published the article, “Anti-aging medicine: A patient/practitioner movement to redefine aging”, in Social Science & Medicine (62), 643-653 who shared with us that, “…with dramatic embrace of future biotechnologies and disdain for current medical treatments of old age, anti-aging practitioners embrace a scientific revolutionary identity.” (emphasis mine) – Revolutionary – ah sounds like the next step >> Aging Enterprise Revolution! But actually, I envision the aging enterprise revolution to cut both ways, more on that later on. Mykytyn (2006) offers a more sympathetic viewpoint to those who are dedicated to anti-aging medicine (based on her interviews of the anti-aging practitioners) which counters the notion that they are cold, calculating, reductionistic, and profiteers,

“While the mission of anti-aging medicine involves treating aging biomedicoscientifically, involvement stories reveal that the anti-aging movement is based more than abolishing or retarding aging. Anti-aging medicine is grounded in a desire to use one’s skills as a health care practitioner toward curtailing suffering seen in aging, a distaste for current biomedical practice, and an identity in the revolutionary is hero. The growing anti-aging movement, populated by patient-practitioners, challenges perceptions of aging and expects broad changes in the very near future of biomedicine” (p. 652).

        In my opinion, we have left the RELOADED phase of this issue, and we have indeed entered into the REVOLUTION part of the sequence. Time for another red pill.

        As I mentioned before, I think the revolution that is emerging due to the debate on ‘anti-aging’ issues is fruitful and represents a maturation of the discourse and dialogue. I think it began with the book by Post and Binstock, the work by Harry Moody, and then just recently with the special volume in the Journal of Aging Studies, 22, 2008. I encourage you the reader to follow-up with this refreshing example of scholarship on the topic of the anti-aging enterprise and the point at which we have arrived – which is the  necessary cross-roads of the full spectrum and examination of (and pardon my Cajun French) – What the hell is going on in this enterprise?

            Beginning with the editorial, “The anti-ageing enterprise: Science, knowledge, expertise, rhetoric and values” by  John A. Vincent, Emmanuelle Tulle, and John Bond (2008) they offer this perspective:

“Our editorial outlines the nature of anti-ageing and its significance for the understanding of ageing and the condition of old age. It reviews the approaches from the existing literature and explains why it is necessary to widen the debate and explore the cultural significance of anti-ageing endeavours. We are concerned that, in its naturalisation of old age as a problematic biological process which can only be overcome by biology, the anti-ageing enterprise masks very important social and cultural issues which have hitherto been under-explored. The value of this volume lies in the fact that it is the first time those engaged in empirical social science research into the phenomenon have come together to present their data and analyses. The nine papers in the special edition are outlined and their contribution highlighted. These contributions enable us to move beyond debates simply based in a priori reasoning from established ethical and professional perspectives and into an understanding of how specific groups of people understand, respond to and seek to modify the process of ageing (p. 291).”

Wow, how refreshing and exactly what we need – now. The guest editors then go on to state their case for the necessity of the special volume on this topic:

“Indeed we posit that debates have so far been carried out largely within the terms of ‘scientific’ endeavour. Questions relating to the desirability of interfering with the process have been posed narrowly — for instance, what would be the impact of prolonging life on an already ageing population? What would be the socio-structural inequalities of access to anti-ageing interventions? At what point should we intervene in the process? To widen the debate significantly, we propose to explore the cultural significance of anti-ageing endeavours. We are therefore less interested in the feasibility of the science and more concerned to reveal three things:        

As editors we are ultimately concerned that, in its naturalisation of old age as a problematic biological process which can only be overcome by biology, the anti-ageing enterprise masks very important social and cultural issues which have hitherto been under-explored:

• Existential issues, ones that question the fundamental nature of the human condition. These questions include: What is old age? What is the purpose of life, and its different stages? Is life always preferable to death — is immortality desirable?

• Issues of ageism and the cultural, social and political status of older people. Should old age be considered a valued part of the life course or something to be abolished as soon as practicable?

• Issues which stem from the current advances in biology and bio-gerontology. What is biological ageing? Is it a single process or a variety of different processes? These issues are sometimes debated around the question of whether ageing should be considered to be a disease. What are the consequences of treating ageing as a disease? What are the priorities for research — fundamental biology or disease control?

• To what extent is a biological or medical model of old age an appropriate basis for policies for older people? Are there alternative models perhaps akin to the social model of disability that we should adopt and thus aspire to a more elder friendly society?

• Immediate personal issues, for example about lifestyle choices. What and how much should we eat? What exercise should we take? There are questions about preventive strategies of various kinds — what is effective in delaying the signs of ageing? What should the responsible consumer do in terms of living a satisfactory old age? How much should we demand that people regulate their behaviour and to what end?

The development of anti-ageing science and practice challenges us to consider how people should approach old age. Is it something to be avoided or something to be embraced? Is the anti-ageing enterprise part of the problem of ageism by prejudicially acting to segregate off old age and subject it to dissection, manipulation and control? Or, in contradistinction, should anti-ageing be considered as part of the resistance to ageism — as an effective way of overcoming the exclusion of the aged?

What is also at stake is the status of the body in our conceptions of valid and valued bodies and therefore personhood. Can old bodies be healthy? Can they retain cultural capital or is their ambiguity as both normal and pathological enough to deny old people any claim to a satisfactory sense of identity? Most of all we must ask whether the anti-ageing enterprise is the best way to combat ageism, to overcome the social and cultural exclusion of the old and to address the erosion of Welfare support (and its legitimation as the correct response to population ageing)

These questions are all the more urgent because in the last quarter of the twentieth century there have been activists and academics willing to challenge the ‘natural’ association of old age with illness and decline. A social movement developed in the 1980s and associated with Cambridge academic, Peter Laslett, the Third Age has sought to confront such assumptions. This social movement has attempted to create a positive image for old age as a period of personal development. While this movement has to some extent been successful in establishing the idea of a new positive stage in life, it has failed to overthrow the dominant image of old age as one of illness and decline. The concept of the Third Age can be seen in some circumstances as an attempt to prolong youth, not necessarily to create a new attitude to old age as a life stage valuable in its own right. But it is clear that despite the success of parts of the re-evaluation/emancipation agenda, the dominant contemporary cultural attitude to later life is that of ‘anti-’; predominantly western culture seeks not to celebrate ageing but to avoid it.” (p. 292-293).

(above is from Vincent, Tulle, and Bond, 2008, The anti-ageing enterprise: Science, knowledge, expertise, rhetoric and values, Journal of Aging Studies, 22, 291-294).

            Very well then – let the revolution begin and I hope that the enterprise that is carried out with the full realization of the symbolic, the language, and the social constructions that are used to convey the proximate and ultimate significance of the endeavors in this domain. I hope that the revolution is by both sides of the debate and that the revolution is actually the synthesis of the two – at some point.  I hope the revolution is more about quality of life and less HOW LONG we can live.

But until then, it is the aging baby boomers who will have to carefully monitor this new revolution – the longevity revolution – that is underway. For some who would seek the quick buck, ultimate hedge fund, and a group that can be suckered into buying “a stairway to heaven” – the boomers would be that group. The cohort is like a largemouth bass waiting for a shiny silver spoon to pass by (with hooks of course – and what is the hook?) – and that lure is all the promise of growing younger, living longer, and all it will take is your contribution $$$$$$$

              …remember The Beatles? Revolution ? ~

You say you want a revolution, Well you know
We’d all want to change the world
You tell me that it’s evolution…Well you know…

Okay, you get my point … Keep that red pill handy….  

     thanks, Scott D. Wright

From Dust to Dust: Michelangelo to T.S. Eliot to Borges to Darwin and Human Longevity (Just another day on the job in the field of aging)

From the point of view we have been taking up until now, life may be compared to a piece of embroidery, of which, during the first half of his time, a man gets a sight of the right side, and during the second half, of the wrong. The wrong side is not so pretty as the right, but it is more instructive; it shows the way in which the threads have been worked together. 
~ Arthur Schopenhauer – Counsels and Maxims – “The Ages of Life”

      

  From dust to dust …..

  
 ( I hope you do not mind that I have woven in some Da Vinci images into the text too)

          How does one go from the drawings of Michelangelo to T.S. Eliot’s The Waste Land to Jorge Luis Borges and then build a “bridge” from Michelangelo to Darwin and human longevity – and thread in the symbols of “dust” and “time” – and then complete the loop?

            In the interdisciplinary field of aging, you never know what interconnections can be woven – like threads – into a tapestry by foraging (I sometimes call it “poaching”) on the array of disciplines, specialties, and professions that can potentially intersect the aging experience. The tapestry is the result of taking (seemingly) disparate pieces of information and then creating illuminating patterns of knowledge that can add to the rich depth and breadth of issues that represent the study of aging. Here is but one example of “weaving” and it is related to the title of this blog post. But along the way with this one thread (which would be the {“warp”}) going down the page:

                                                             v
                                                             v

                                                             v

                                                             v

                                                             v

there are also several cross-threads that intersect as well (the “weft”). Or going from left to right on this page or across the computer screen. For example, and speaking of threads “weaving together” –

>>>> [Weft]  The article by Phiroze Hansotia, MD in  Clin Med Res. 2003 October; 1(4): 327–332.
A Neurologist Looks at Mind and Brain: “The Enchanted Loom” >>>>>>>>>>>>>

                                                             v
                                                             v

                                                             v

                                                             v

I will indicate a few of those, but we shall follow the warp – the thread that would go lengthwise or down this page on your computer screen.

                                                             v

                                                             v

                                                             v

{Warp}  So I started of with the book, How To Use Your Eyes by James Elkins (2000), which caught my eye when browsing the library for new books – and there it was lying face-up in the reshelving area. It had an intriguing cover design – and the inside front cover set the hook,

“Grass, the night sky, a postage stamp, a crack in the sidewalk, a shoulder. Ordinary objects of everyday life. But when we look at them – really look at them-what do we see?”

                                                             v

                                                             v

So I skimmed through the pages and stopped at the section titled, “How to Look at a Face” (Chapter 19 – pp.146 -153).  There were several drawings of both an old and young man to demonstrate that, “Because we attend so closely to people’s expressions, the face is full of names.” Elkins then went on to use the drawing Michelangelo’s study for the Cumaean Sibyl on the Sistine Ceiling to indicate over 25 different features of the face. Elkins noted that the underlying “architecture is provided by the skull, which is especially strong on this wonderful drawing of an old woman {emphasis mine} (Fig. 19.1 in the book). We will come back to this in a moment.

Elkins then used Michelangelo’s drawings to indicate what he called, “some sad observations about aging” –

“As a person ages, the muscles atrophy and the fat migrates, slumping downward until it comes to rest on a facial sheet. The bags and flabby folds of old age are like fat people slumping in hammocks. This mans face (in the book Fig. 19.4) shows all the signs of the impending age.”

Elkins goes on describe in great detail – like a CSI episode – all of the features of the anatomical process in the “aging” face,

“That is what it means to say that gravity takes its toll. Gravity pulls the fat down, revealing the underlying fascia. What was once a network of tissues becomes a series of slumps and slides in ending in hammocks of fascia.” (p. 153).

Okay, that is mildly interesting, if not slightly depressing, about the forces that affect the face that sound more like geological tectonic plates sliding around,  but what intrigued me the most was the use of the drawing of the Cumaean Sibyl on the Sistine Ceiling to indicate and exemplify the physiological features of the aging face.

                                                   v

                                                   v

                                                   v

The Cumaean Sybil? So?

{Warp}  What is strangely correlative in Elkins choice of Michelangelo’s drawings for portraying an aging face is that the Cumaean Sybil has an interesting story to tell as it relates to aging.

                                                   v

                                                   v

Many of you will recall that in the great work of Virgil, The Aeneid, The Cumaean Sybil is the one gives Aeneas a tour of the underworld which are entered into in the land she inhabited (this story is the reason for Dante’s having chosen Virgil as his guide in “The Divine Comedy”).

[Weft]<<<<- The Aeneid – you cannot go wrong with Sarah Ruden’s translation of The Aeneid of Vergil, Yale University Press, 2008;
not to mention Robert Fagles version The Aeneid (Viking, 2006) – and then starting off with Aeneas carrying his father from Troy –  >>>>

                

[Weft]  but that is another story –and then don’t get me going on Dante’s work with Virgil as his guide; there is a whole
bunch of threads to aging issues in there (see John Freccero, Dante: The Poetics of Conversion, 1986 Harvard University Press;
<<<<<<   or Life of Dante by Giovanni Boccaccio).

                                                                   v

                                                                   v

                                                                   v

                                                                   v

                                                                   v

{Warp}  The Sibyl of Cumae gained her powers by attracting the attention of the sun god Apollo. Apollo offered her anything if she would spend a single night with him. She asked for as many years of life as grains of sand she could squeeze into her hand.

Granted, the sun god said; and Sibyl, glad to win her boon, refused his advances. Thereafter she was cursed with the fulfillment of her wish–eternal life without eternal youth. She slowly shriveled into a frail undying body, so tiny that she fit into a jar.

“I have lived seven hundred years, and to equal the number of the sand-grains, I have still to see three hundred springs and three hundred harvests. My body shrinks up as years increase, and in time, I shall be lost to sight, but my voice will remain, and future ages will respect my sayings.”

An ancient woman doomed to live a thousand years, but without youth, shrinking with age each year until nothing is left of her but her voice — a voice which some say is kept in a jar in the cave, and that others say one can still hear there in her Cumaean grotto.”

                                                        v

                                                        v

So there is the thread of aging content from Elkins to Michelangelo (via the Cumaean Sybil – with some ultra-aging issues going on – like forever!) and then it connects T. S. Eliot’s great poem – The Waste Land.

  

                                                        v

                                                        v

                                                        v

“Nam Sibyllam quidem Cumis ego ipse oculis meis vidi
in ampulla pendere, et cum illi pueri dicerent: Σιβυλλα
τι θελεις; respondebat illa: αποθανειν θελω.”

                                                         v

                                                         v

{Warp} This is the epigram (Latin and Greek – From the Satyricon of Petronius (d. A.D. 66), chapter 48) at the very beginning of The Waste Land and strangely enough – the passage refers to the Cumaean Sybil and her plight.

<<<< [Weft] But of course, that depends on what version you want to start with when it comes to T. S. Eliot’s The Waste Land.
I highly recommend – “A facsimile and transcript of the Original Drafts Including the Annotations of Ezra Pound,
Edited and with an introduction by Valerie Eliot” (1971) – which indicated another epigram by Joseph Conrad
relating to “The Horror- The Horror” – which then could weft all the
way over to the movie Apocalypse Now (see Marlon Brando – but we will not go there – for now)    >>>>

                

                                                             v

                                                             v

                                                             v

            {Warp} So, the epigram for the “post Ezra Pound” The Waste Land (1922) translates into:

With my own eyes I saw the Sybil of Cumae hanging in a bottle; and when the boys said to her: “[Sybil, what do you want?]” she replied, “[I want to die.]“

            And knowing of her curse – eternal life without youth –

[Weft] <<< Relating to other works of fiction such as Youth Without Youth (Mircea Eliade and movie by Francis Ford Coppola)
and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (short story F. Scott  Fitzgerald and then movie) >>>>

                                                              v

                                                              v

                                                              v

is one of those mythological stories that offered a lesson about “be careful what you wish for” even when you hold what you think is lot of years (a handful or a thousand) in your life – what matters is the quality of the time that you have – and that eternity can be a double-edged sword if not structured in the right way.

[Weft] <<<<< Which is related to another story in  Greek mythology, Tithonus was a handsome mortal who fell
in love with Eos, the goddess of the dawn. Eos realized that her beloved Tithonus was destined to age and die.
She begged Zeus to grant her lover immortal life. Zeus was a jealous god, prone to acts of deception in order to seduce
beautiful gods and mortals, and he was not pleased with Eos’s infatuation with a rival. Zeus granted Eos’s wish – literally.
He made Tithonus immortal, but did not grant him eternal youth. As Tithonus aged, he became increasingly
debilitated and demented, eventually driving Eos to distraction with his constant babbling.
In despair, she turned Tithonus into a grasshopper.>>>>

                                                               v

                                                               v

                                                               v

                                                               v

- Time becomes the ultimate curse in that one must suffer it relentlessly – without end. What do you want? – To die.  If not to make the present moment much more important and ecstatic – more so than the next – and the next because they are finite and each one a gift.

[Weft] – <<<<< So much so that we are reminded of T.S. Eliot’s other works of poetry as they relate to the aging experience –
with the same dry and ‘dusty’ grains of sand to measure out one’s life like in
The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock where strangely enough, “In the room the women come and go, Talking of Michelangelo.” (emphasis added). And where Prufrock said, “I have measured my life out in coffee spoons.”    >>>>
And later, the quote, “I should have been a pair of ragged claws, Scuttling across the floors of silent seas” is
spoken by American photo-journalist (played by Dennis Hopper) in the movie, Apocalypse Now
[which ironically – is based loosely on Conrad’s Heart of Darkness which goes back to the opening lines in the The Waste Land pre Ezra pound!] who worships the enigmatic, genius “poet-warrior” Kurtz as a personal god and
expounds Kurtz’s cause: “You don’t talk to the Colonel, well, you listen to him. The man’s enlarged my mind.
He’s a poet-warrior in the classic sense…I’m a little man.
He’s a great man. I should have been a pair of ragged claws, scuttling across floors of silent seas.
[These lines were taken from T.S. Eliot's The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock]
I mean…He can be terrible and he can be mean and he can be right. He’s fighting the war. He’s a great man.”
[Notice the graffiti title to the film on the temple's stone blocks.].
In the poem, Prufrock announces to the world, “I grow old…I grow old…” and one can feel the existential angst and regret –
swimming in a dry, dusty sand dune, drowning, sinking below the surface. >>>>

                                                            v

                                                            v

                                                            v

And the symbolic weight of the metaphor continues into T.S. Eliot’s other enigmatic verse, Gerontion, which opens with the epigram,

Thou hast nor youth nor age
 But as it were an after dinner sleep
Dreaming of both.

And the first line of that verse is:

Here I am. An old man in a dry month.

And ends with this line:

Thoughts of a dry brain in a dry season.

                                                v

                                                v

                                                v

[Warp] Which can also connect to T. S. Eliot’s magnificent Four Quartets (to which I could use an entire gerontological course in one semester dedicated just to it alone) – and its weaving with the Cumaean Sybil and dust and endless time – and the flow of life – Linear? Circular? – Infinite? It is no wonder Eliot is intrigued with the story of the Sybil as it appears and is a part of his textual weaving in many of his works -

            Time present and time past
           Are both perhaps present in time future,
           And time future contained in time past.
            In my beginning is my end.

As we grow older, the world becomes stranger, the pattern more complicated, Of dead and living. Not the intense moment, Isolated, with no before and after, But a lifetime burning in every moment.

And this to me seems to carry the essence of the comparison to the Cumaean Sybil forever trapped in infinite “aging” – in a cage – and the message of The Waste Land – and Four Quartets – of being lost without a compass or map – as we engage in our journey of life in the modern (and post-modern) era. But there is the lesson to be learned – with hope after all – for us, in this regard.

            Time the destroyer is time the preserver.

            We shall not cease from exploration
            And the end of all our exploring
            Will be to arrive where we started
             And know the place for the first time.

[Weft] >>>> And another cross-cutting theme for the aging process is the “journey of life” as noted in
Thomas R. Cole’s book: The Journey of Life: A Cultural History of Aging in America
or the painter Thomas Cole and the Voyage of Life (see The Voyage of Life Old Age, Oil on canvas, 133.4 × 196.2 cm (52 ½ × 77 ¼ inches);
and the book The Human Odyssey by Thomas Armstrong (2007)
which relates to metaphor of the ship on a voyage – visualizing like T.S. Eliot verse, >>>>

Old men ought to be explorers
Here and there does not matter
We must be still and still moving
Into another intensity
For a further union, a deeper communion
Through the dark cold and empty desolation
The wave cry, the wind cry, the vast waters
Of the petrel and the porpoise. In my end is my beginning.

>>>>> which relates to Homer’s The Odyssey and the journey of Odysseus –
and his travels back to home –
to arrive at the place where he (we) started, and know the place {Ithaca} for the first time. <<<<<<<

                                        v

                                        v

                                        v

                                        v

                                        v

            [Warp] and we are back to TIME. And speaking of time – and dust – like the Cumaean Sybil – of which both notions run rampant throughout Eliot’s Four Quartets –

Time past and time future, Allow but a little consciousness.

Ash on an old man’s sleeves
Is all the ash the burnt roses leave.
Dust in the air suspended
Marks the place where the story ended.

                              v

                              v

                              v

                              v

                              v

But not yet. The story goes on for a bit longer.

And TIME weaves through to Jorge Luis Borges who also takes the warp and weft of previous threads discussed – and creates the tapestry with his verse and makes reference to the sand and dust as mirrors of the aging experience,

                            

Just so, but time discovered in the deserts
Another substance, smooth and of some weight,
That seemed to have been specifically imagined
For measuring out the ages of the dead (from The Hourglass)

Perhaps in death when the dust
Is dust, we will be forever
This undecipherable root,
From which will grow forever,
serene or horrible,
our solitary heaven or hell (from Someone)

I am not even dust. I am a dream
That weaves itself in sleep and wakefulness (from I Am Not even Dust)

                                                      v

                                                      v

                                                      v

What is longevity? It is the horror of existing in a human body whose faculties are in decline. It is insomnia measured by decades and not by metal hands. It is carrying the weight of seas and pyramids, of ancient libraries and dynasties, of the dawns that Adam saw. It is being well aware that I bound to my flesh, to a voice I detest, to my name, to routinely remembering, to Castilian, over which I have no control, to feeling nostalgic for the Latin I do not know. It is trying to sink into death and being unable to sink into death. It is being and continuing to be.

(From Jorge Luis Borges (2000) Collected Poems. Edited by Alexander Coleman. Penguin Edition. New York).

                                                        v

                                                        v

                                                        v

Reading this passage from Borges was a strange experience of déjà vu – and to me – it was though he had channeled the voice and the steam of consciousness of the Cumaean Sybil – who had to forever live (but forever aging) out the years as counted by dust and sand (as much as a hand could hold) – but forever aging – and then wanting to die – “to sink into death.” Oblivion.

The dusty Waste Land of Human Longevity.

                                                        v

                                                        v

                                                        v

                                                        v

{Warp} Which brings us to the last (at least for now – the thread can keep going, I’m sure) segment, but strangely enough – full circle and back to Michelangelo. It is an article by S. Jay Olshanksy (2003) – From Michelangelo to Darwin: The Evolution of Human Longevity (IMAJ 2003;5:00±00). This article discusses the prospects for human longevity for us in the decades to come. The irony is that Olshanksy’s perspective (using an evolutionary biological framework) will complement the mythology and the stories that surround the notion of living longer – or forever – as something “we” in our new world of biotechnology – will not have the benefit (or curse ?) of knowing.

            Olshanksy (2003) starts of his commentary talking about the artist in our initial thread “at the beginning” of this post and the moves forward to the perspectives of Charles Darwin,

“When Michelangelo painted the Creation on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel in Rome in the 16th century, he portrayed the Renaissance view of mankind as having been molded by the hand of its creator, in his image, as a ‘perfect’ physical specimen.”

[Weft] >>>> For a more in-depth look at Michelangelo and the Sistine Chapel and for some intriguing commentary on the controversial issues surrounding the painting of all the sibyls – and in particular – the prophetess: Cumaea,
please see pp170-174 in Ross King’s book (2003), Michelangelo & the Pope’s Ceiling. Walker & Co. New York.>>>>>> 

                                                 v

                                                 v

                                                 v

Olshanksy (2003) continues,

“When Charles Darwin was drafting his theory of evolution in the late 19th century, it was ironically the imperfections in the anatomic structures and functions of humans and other living things that were presented as the strongest evidence for his theory [12]. Based on theoretic and empiric evidence from modern evolution biology and biogerontology, it now appears that both Michelangelo and Darwin were right.

“The artistic-like perfection of the human body is exemplified by the near flawless maintenance and perpetuation of the immortal germ line through sexual reproduction. However, the price paid for this form of immortality is a suite of anatomic structures and functions that, when used beyond what may be thought of as their biological or Darwinian warranty period inevitably lead to many of the diseases and disorders now commonly associated with aging or senescence. The divergent but intimately linked views of Michelangelo and Darwin exemplify the importance of a biological perspective on aging, the diseases that accompany it, and ultimately the forces that influence and limit the duration of life of individuals and populations.

“In effect, we are inappropriately held responsible for many of the diseases and disorders that we experience as we age, and more importantly, are led to believe that aging and the diseases that accompany it are largely avoidable. An evolutionary view leads to the realization that even though aging, disease, and death are not programmed into our genes, once the engine of life is switched on at conception, our destiny as an aging animal is written in stone. Our bodies fail over time not because they were designed to fall victim to aging and disease at a predetermined age [22], or because of the acquisition of decadent lifestyles, but because they were not designed for extended use.

“Although it may eventually become possible to alter the biological processes that contribute to aging, that day has not yet dawned.”

                                                                v

                                                                v

We shall see.

                                                               v

In the mean time, we began with the drawings of Michelangelo and “aging faces” and threaded to the Cumaean Sybil and the to T.S. Eliot and The Waste Land and then Jorge Luis Borges which then brought us to Olshansky’s journal article addressing the prospects of human longevity from Michelangelo and Darwin. Along the way there were a host of potential [weft] related diversions (in a positive sense), but for this blog the focus was the rich and diverse threads that intersect in biology and the humanities – with an enhanced of examination of the aging experience – as the resulting tapestry – both sides offering illumination and understanding.

From dust to dust …..

                                                           v

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    Thanks, Scott D. Wright    <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

                                                          v

Here is Something to Gnaw On: Naked Mole Rats May Hold Clues to Successful Aging (No One Said Gerontology was Pretty)

Want to live long?  Go naked in the dirt –

wait a second…..what?

I came across this fascinating (ok, maybe that’s a bit too hyperbolic) – I came across this interesting article from the last week’s issue of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) – March 3, 2009. Now, don’t let the title of the article scare you away, because there is some good stuff in there!

Protein stability and resistance to oxidative stress are determinants of longevity in the longest-living rodent, the naked mole-rat (by Pereza et al).

WTF? – Mole Rats? Longest-living rodent? Oh great, just what we need. Hell, I got a Rattus norvegicus – Brown Rat – family living in my backyard, and I have tried everything to end their lifespan sooner (than later) and nothing works. Maybe I will try playing some Guns and Roses music real loud right near their little hidey-hole; if that don’t work, then I will try some Barry Manilow.

Ok, what was I talking about?… Oh yeah, rats. But in this case – Mole Rats. Now, a naked mole rat is walking and breathing nightmare of creature; that is, if you don’t like a rodent that was obviously created by Stephen King. But these creatures are quite the gerontological oddity – and it begs the question why being naked (Ok, there is some wispy hair – but that it only makes it worse!) and living underground in the dirt can pay dividends for living longer. Let’s take a closer look ( I dare you) at these cute and cuddly beasts.

(From Newswire): “Naked mole rats might not win any beauty contests, but they may hold the secret to successful aging. Naked mole rats resemble pink, wrinkly, saber-toothed sausages and would never win a beauty contest, even among other rodents. But these natives of East Africa are the champs for longevity among rodents, living nine times longer than similar-sized mice. Not only do they have an extraordinarily long lifespan, but they maintain good health for most of it and show remarkable resistance to cancer.”

Sounds good? Exactly. How do they do it? I am glad you asked. Here is the abstract of the article from PNAS:

ABSTRACT: The widely accepted oxidative stress theory of aging postulates that aging results from accumulation of oxidative damage. Surprisingly, data from the longest-living rodent known, naked mole-rats [MRs; mass 35 g; maximum lifespan (MLSP) > 28.3 years], when compared with mice (MLSP 3.5 years) exhibit higher levels of lipid peroxidation, protein carbonylation, and DNA oxidative damage even at a young age. We hypothesize that age-related changes in protein structural stability, oxidation, and degradation are abrogated over the lifespan of the MR. We performed a comprehensive study of oxidation states of protein cysteines [both reversible (sulfenic, disulfide) and indirectly irreversible (sulfinic/sulfonic acids)] in liver from young and old C57BL/6 mice (6 and 28 months) and MRs (2 and >24 years). Furthermore, we compared interspecific differences in urea-induced protein unfolding and ubiquitination and proteasomal activity. Compared with data from young mice, young MRs have 1.6 times as much free protein thiol groups and similar amounts of reversible oxidative damage to cysteine. In addition, they show less urea-induced protein unfolding, less protein ubiquitination, and higher proteasome activity. Mice show a significant age-related increase in cysteine oxidation and higher levels of ubiquitination. In contrast, none of these parameters were significantly altered over 2 decades in MRs. Clearly MRs have markedly attenuated age-related accrual of oxidation damage to thiol groups and age-associated up-regulation of homeostatic proteolytic activity. These pivotal mechanistic interspecies differences may contribute to the divergent aging profiles and strongly implicate maintenance of protein stability and integrity in successful aging.

http://www.pnas.org/content/106/9/3059.abstract?sid=0d70d373-6ee2-4777-b3ea-702474b829e8

Ok, can you put that in English?

(From Newswise): Researchers at The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio have found that naked mole rat tissues are remarkably efficient at discarding damaged proteins. “Understanding how naked mole rats better control protein quality may yield important insights for how we as humans can sustain good health,” Dr. Buffenstein said. “We might also learn something about treating age-associated degenerative diseases. The naked mole rats clearly hold the clues to successful aging.”

http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/549734/#imagetop

Ok, that’s better. So, next time you see a Naked Mole Rat on a nature show- or hold one in your hand – and marvel at the bizarreness, be sure to thank the rodent that is leads the way in longevity.

Life is long – go naked in the dirt.

       Thanks, Scott D. Wright 

Fools Gold for the Silver-haired: Red Wine and the War on Aging

Still Searching for the Holy Grail in the Land of Rattus, Mus and Pan -
or – still wineing [sic] about the aging process

  

Men dig tons of earth
To find an ounce of gold –
              Heraclitus (Fragments)

Sure thing, man. I used to be a laboratory myself once.
              Keith Richards (when asked to autograph a fan’s school chemistry book)

There are many people among us who see aging as one of the (last?) great barriers to achieving a greater (higher?) level of human existence; it is seen as “the enemy” that has to be eradicated so that Homo sapiens can finally emerge from its chrysalis and then transform into something magnificent – into a fully-potentialed butterfly that lives forever. Aging is weakness, disability, decline, pain, and suffering. And of course many still equate “it” with the portal – the gateway – to death (which is the ultimate barrier). The linear flow of thought runs like this: aging = morbidity = mortality. Thus, to find a “cure” for aging would break the chain of cause and effect – and perhaps – no maybe, most certainly we would have achieved immortality. And there it is – the Holy Grail of it all. From ancient Chinese Taoism, to medieval alchemy, to the labs of modern science, we are still searching; we are still on the quest to find the elusive and mysterious answer to the riddle that even the Sphinx would ponder and find enigmatic and the core of existence.

And what would be the cure? What elixir would become the magic bullet? What potion would break the chain of mortality?  What pill would offset the “mortal coil”? Who can deliver the “fountain of youth” to our doorstep and into our mailbox so that we could experience life unlimited? It could be in the form of some herbal remedy, some mineral compound, perhaps it’s the sweat of virgins, or the testicles of the ox, or perhaps it could be caffeine, or wait, it’s gotta be this synthetic hormone, no wait, it’s this! – Red Wine. Holy sour grapes Batman, wine, of course- and not just the crappy Merlot, get me some of that Pinot Noir. And in our quest for the magic bullet, we test, we alter, we experiment, we measure, we observe the outcomes in our DNA brethren who are manipulated and endure injections, and surgery to solve the riddle.

My purpose in this blog posting is not to debate or contest the use of animals in laboratory research (generally) or in research on aging (specifically). Readers who wish to further pursue this topic may go to (as examples): http://www.apa.org/science/animal2.html or http://www.onlineethics.org/CMS/research/modindex/animalres.aspx or
http://ethics.iit.edu/resources/scientific.html#animal

Rather, my goal in this blog is highlight the way in research on aging “news” is released to the public (and packaged as a “news release”) with sensational headlines but often times very important issues are lost or overlooked or simply denied in all of the publicity and marketing tactics. The science is often perfectly sound and the results credible and the conclusions are typically modest and then balanced with a healthy dose of “limitations.”

Yet, something happens between the presentation at the conference, or the published proceedings, or the publication in the flagship journal – and the delivery of the “news” at various media outlets. I have covered this transformation process before in a previous blog posting, “Lost In Translation: From Neurology to “Party on, Wayne.”
{see http://uofugeron.wordpress.com/2009/01/21/lost-in-translation-from-neurology-to-party-on-wayne/}.

But in this posting I want to reexamine the issue within the context of latest elixir to be promoted as the Holy Grail for an anti-aging “magic bullet” – RESVERATROL

Resveratrol has become volcanic on the “hit parade” in web searches, especially after the 60 Minutes segment that aired on Jan. 26^th, 2009 where researchers told Morley Safer that a RED WINE substance (Resveratrol) could one day lengthen lives {see http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/01/25/60minutes/main4752082.shtml?source=mostpop_story}. Not only can you see the video segment there, but I have discovered that almost every company “selling” some variation of Resveratrol had the same video embedded in their internet page(s) where they were advertising their products with disclaimers —- usually posted at the very bottom of the pages like this

“Note: Science is still determining the most effective dosage of resveratrol for humans.”

Or

“Cancers Inhibited by Resveratrol According to Published Research†”

and what does the symbol “†” represent ?

† = In rodents and/or cell culture

And of course there are the convenient “buttons” that will bring you right to the online shopping cart where you can purchase the “magic bullets.”

The actual video segment is interesting not so much for the stunning acknowledgment that a human would have to consume about 1,000 bottles of red wine per day to get the optimal benefits of resveratrol (which certainly sounds like a French Paradox to me – and I would enjoy a good Pinot Noir as well as the next person, but all that massive wine consumption would even make Dionysus think twice)-

 But what was interesting to me was the “rat race” – with two mice running on a treadmill and the one with resveratrol getting ready for the Rodent Olympics, while the other one looked like it had run out of gas.

I do not know about you, but I was caught up in the moment (too – like you?), I had just seen the smoking gun! Rat A was kicking the ass of Rat B on the treadmill – now where can I get some of that good stuff. In fact, this new elixir might just help me break my habit of mixing Mountain Dew with Red Bull and Jolt in order to win the “rat race” at work (just kidding – right?)

The other interesting feature within the segment was the portrayals of “skinny” monkeys and “chunky” monkeys in context of caloric restriction diets and that effect on the aging process.  Now, I happen to find the caloric restriction strategy to make sense for living life in long lane – the science is there; but excuse me – when the segment then went to a party with the “skinnys”- people who were into hypermode with caloric restriction – I was initially shocked at the appearance of the party-goers. At first, I thought they accidentally slipped in a video clip for adult manifestations of Anorexia nervosa. I was on the verge of walking out to my truck and heading down to KFC and tanking up on some mashed taters with extra gravy – and throw is some more biscuits will ya?

But one thing we might have missed in the video segments: It’s all (still) research results on and from Rattus, Mus, and Pan, and the leap to Homo sapiens is still just that – a leap. The GENERALIZABILITY OF RESULTS is a huge factor here. But too late – the gates have opened up and the media has taken off chasing the rabbit – once again. The “news” that the results were limited to animals – and that it will be years before “empirical evidence” using scientific controls and studies on humans – can once and for all prove that we have the magic bullet in hand. And in any case, we are still back to this:

So, by reducing caloric-intake and popping some capsules of resveratrol, I can live longer? Okay, then what? What do I do with the longer amount of time?
More shopping? More golf?  

And therein lies the true riddle of the Sphinx – or better yet the strangeness of Zeno’s paradox: “In a race, the quickest runner can never overtake the slowest, since the pursuer must first reach the point whence the pursued started, so that the slower must always hold a lead.” Here is my question and concern as it relates to the quest for conquering the aging process:

                    If you were to live ten more years than expected –then what?
                    If you were live twenty-five years more than expected – then what?
                    If you were t live another hundred years than expected – then what?

What does change then? – if not for the fact that you have extended time. Well, there is more possibility and potential – and experience – and avoid, if at all possible – oblivion or what Shakespeare (via Hamlet) would refer to as “the undiscovered country” – the great unknown, which has been graphically “known” by others such as Dante via The Divine Comedy. But to think and know and feel that it would all be washed away as an antiquated event of the past – to what was in the “old days” to what is now possible: A new beginning, a fresh new frontier on the horizon where both aging and death are dispatched to the history books. Go science – go! Deliver us from all pain and suffering. Where do I sign up?

But really, truthfully, what changes? If one’s life was simply more of the same – only extended out further –and then forever, with the same “Groundhog Day” effect, for many this would soon resemble some Kafka novel where the blessing would twist into a curse, and the promise of paradise soon would become a living hell. Thus, my concern that the pursuit of the number – the increased age – the longevity addiction – the immortality quest – is what simply fogs up the counterweight of the PRESENT – and the MOMENT – and the experience that is the quintessence of life – which is no matter how long you live, what matter is the life – you give to life – for one minute or for a day or a year in a lifetime. In the eternal pursuit of the philosopher’s stone upon this earth, we have become distracted from quality of the moment – and to what makes the difference whether we live in some specified block of time deemed to be “short” “enough” “exceptional” – whether that is 25 years or 250 years.

In the book, Meditations – from the emperor/philosopher Marcus Aurelius, there is the blunt wisdom that makes one reflect upon the search and the struggle for wanting to overcome aging and mortality –

Our lifetime is so brief. And to live it out in these circumstances, among these people, in this body? Nothing to get excited about. Consider the abyss of time past, the infinite future. Three days of life or three generations, what’s the difference?

But that advice, that wisdom, is all but lost in our modern WAR ON AGING. Yes, a war on aging – and the first shot is directed against the philosophy of Marcus Aurelius because he lived in the Roman era of a short life span and thus, the Meditations are seen as “fossil-like”- interesting aphorisms trapped in amber. But my colleagues in the domain of bio-gerontology missed the point and the crux of his sayings.

On one level I am in agreement with my colleagues in this regard:

Why We Need a War on Aging
Based on presentation given at 2009 World Economic Forum in the Live Long and Prosper session, January 28, 2009 by Professor Julian Savulescu.
{http://www.practicalethicsnews.com/practicalethics/2009/01/why-we-need-a-war-on-aging.html}

“The goal should be to extend the HEALTHY, PRODUCTIVE lifespan, not to just keep people alive longer on respirators or in old people’s homes. This is embodied in the concept not of life span but “health span”.  The easiest way to do this is to prolong healthy life not attempt to compress morbidity.”

And my colleagues do address the “objections” to everyone living longer (within our finite ecological system, known as “earth”). I respect their points, but do not necessarily agree with their logic – or examples:

“We have an obligation to die and turn the world over to the next generation.”

“How long each generation should live raises deep questions about intergenerational relations, quality of life and burden of care. However healthy and able older people may be economically productive, self supporting and a source of knowledge, experience and care for younger generations, liberating younger people to work. The answers are not clear, especially when life extension is coupled with life enhancement. At any rate, since few of us believe there is a positive moral obligation to have children, that is to create future people, the obligation to create new generations must be weak.”

Meaning in Life? – “Many people fear that a longer life would result in boredom and a gradual loss of meaning. This would be more likely if one was a solitary Methuselah. But in a world where many of those close to us also lived longer, the greatest source of human well-being – deep human relations – would remain intact and arguably grow richer as that network expanded across generations.

“There is little empirical support that longer good life loses meaning. Research shows that life-satisfaction remains relatively stable into old age. One survey of 60,000 adults from 40 nations discovered a slight upward trend in life-satisfaction from the 20s to the 80s in age. With the advent of human enhancement– enhancement of cognitive powers, physical abilities and control of mood – this is likely to be even less of a problem.

“The challenge is to create longer and better life. But that too is within our grasp. We should aim for drugs to prevent normal memory decline, interventions to keep us physically and mentally active. Viagra is a good example. It deals with one effect normal human aging. 20 million men in the US find it of benefit and it no doubt contributes to meaning in their lives in some way.

And surely it is up to individuals to decide whether their lives come to lack meaning. For our part, we would take the longer life. Our goal should be more, much more, longer and better life. We need a war on aging.”

Where I disagree – or take issue – is this dimension:

While I appreciate their focus on the balance of outcomes = “longer and better” and “healthspan” versus “lifespan” – I remain skeptical about the so-called balanced focus in this quest. I see more about emphasis on “longer”(quantitative) than the “better” (qualitative) – and it is does not increase my confidence level any when the proponents of the war on aging simply shrug their shoulders with the caveat of “it is up to individuals to decide their lives come to lack to meaning.”

This is a classic example of science creating a firewall with its goals (and research) while hoping that other aspect of humanity (culture, religion, art, humanities, philosophy) will rush in to fill the void of “meaning.” Guess what? for many people (and or better or for worse) science is the “religion.” And if Viagra is an example of what science can do to “give meaning” to our lives (or is that only for men?) – then I propose we have allowed Erectile Dysfunction (ED) to trump Existential Dysfunction (ED) into the later years of life.

Terms like “human enhancement” sound too vague and ambiguous to me, especially with the notion of the “control of mood.” This almost sounds like that the answer to the “meaning of it all” is to be found in the daily dosage of SSRIs – or have we not read this in a Hollywood script for a movie once before?  I am very much for the medical and psycho-therapeutic treatment of clinical depression and anxiety disorders, but to put all of our stock into drugs (see Keith Richards pun-intended line at the beginning of this blog) as the key toward “fulfillment” with longer years of life sounds remarkably hollow and about as authentic as saccharin in my coffee – hyper-sweetness with a troubling aftertaste – and doubly ironic as saccharin has an interesting history with lab rats in terms of “causing” certain cancers (notice the “non-connection” to humans).

So, while we seek the Holy Grail of the aging process within animal models, I hope that in our quest (and focused determination) of the one thing (living longer) we do not leave it up to chance or accident or individual “choice” to acquire the other thing (living better).

            “Living better” is not something to be bought or created in the lab or ingested like Skittles candy –
               Living “better” may not even be the other side of the coin. Better than what? Better from what?

            I am convinced that if we – as a society – do not address these issue of the morality and ethics and the purpose and the duties and the responsibilities in a more in depth way in the context of living longer, we will inherit The Waste Land –

We will have defeated the CHRONOS – and perhaps will have lost the KAIROS.

Perhaps with our Pyrrhic victory, we will then see and learn from the way that it was – in the past, in the old days, when death instilled meaning by having us LIVE each moment as though it were the last. Living forever – the infinite – is not exactly a soothing thought to contemplate, just thinking about it stretches the mind – like Tom Stoppard’s quip with Infinity a  “…a terrible thought…where’s it all going to end?” (Stoppard, Tom, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead, Act 2, Faber, London, 1967).

Some have taken the bet – better to live longer and perhaps forever. The logic might be that one has “forever” to figure it all out” – and so what’s the rush? Foreverness is the answer and procrastination is the question.

If I had forever, would I have even written this blog posting contemplating the “it”?

Or did the fact that you took the chance to read my blog posting and made it this far – give you the impression that my writings seem like the “forever?”
             (just a little blogging humor to end with….

 – or does my desire to blog

never

end?…………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Now, if they figure out that a cold Modelo and some Sauza Tres Generaciones Anejo (tequila) can help you live longer – I’m there –

 thanks – Scott D. Wright

———————————————————————————————————

Detailed Postscript (very optional)

First, let me say the biological logic of continuity for using “animal models” for research on aging has its rational merits; yet what I am most skeptical about – are the huge leaps in to the premature generalizations to Homo sapiens from the results/outcomes. I want to give the scientisits that benefit of the doubt that they qualify their results and state the limitations, but that does not stop the “publicity machines” form wanting something more. I can almost hear the writers in the marketing division saying ,”Yeah, yeah, yeah, nice, but what does it all mean? Rats and mice don’t read newspapers or web sites; what about our readers (human)? and potential donors? – and of course, the general public? They want to know we aren’t just screwing around over here. Give me something to work with here. What about this? “Red Wine – Just what the Doctor Ordered” or “Those crazy French were right after all”. We all need to read the fine print with both research and with the “shopping cart” before we hand over our money and our critical thinking.

Other sources and info -

Michela Gallagher, and Peter R. Rapp published an informative piece in the Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 48: 339-370 (Volume publication date February 1997) – THE USE OF ANIMAL MODELS TO STUDY THE EFFECTS OF AGING ON COGNITION – and they addressed the importance of animal models for understanding the effects of normal aging on the brain and cognitive functions; 1) studies of laboratory animals can help to distinguish between healthy aging and pathological conditions that may contribute to cognitive decline late in life; 2) research on individual differences in aging, a theme of interest in studies of elderly human beings, can be advanced by the experimental control afforded in the use of animal models.

Richard L. Sprott and Israel Ramirez (1997) in the LAR Journal V38(3) – Animal Models of Aging Research: Current Inbred and Hybrid Rat and Mouse Models, have offered these justifications:

Animal models are commonly used in aging research because they allow researchers to obtain data that are difficult or impossible to obtain from humans. Some studies that can, in principle, be done in humans are much easier to do in animals because of their shorter life spans. For example, measurements of changes over entire life spans, which would take many decades to complete in humans, can be accomplished in rodents in 2 to 3 years. Other kinds of experiments cannot, even in principle, be done with humans. Using rodents, researchers can manipulate breeding, extract tissues, administer bioactive agents, control diets, and perform surgical manipulations–procedures that would be unethical or excessively hazardous using humans.

And then this from another web site: http://websites.afar.org/site/PageServer?pagename=IA_expert_Austad

“The question remains, however, whether human aging can ever be fully understood by studying organisms that (1) are not long-lived to begin with and (2) are several hundred generations removed from life in normal wild conditions. It is this question that inspires Steven Austad, a professor at the Barshop Institute for Longevity and Aging Studies and the Department of Cellular and Structural Biology, University of Texas Health Science Center, to include a variety of non-traditional animals in his research into the aging process.

Dr. Austad participated recently in the Why We Age scientist-luncheon series organized by the American Federation for Aging Research. His presentation at the event focused on what the natural world can teach us about improving health and extending life. Here, Dr. Austad talks to Infoaging in more detail about this theme and what the near future of aging research may reveal.

Infoaging: Due to practical, clinical or regulatory issues, non-primate animal models have become one of the most important tools of aging researchers. What animals are traditionally used in aging research? Why are they chosen?

Dr. Austad: “The main animals that are used include Caenorhabditis elegans, a roundworm found in soil, fruit flies, and mice. They account for more than 95 percent of papers on aging research, mainly because we know so much about their genetics and how they develop. They are also very short-lived, even for the group that they’re in. Caenorhabditis elegans, for example, is short-lived by worm standards. And fruit flies are short-lived by fly standards, and mice are short-lived by mammalian standards. This is important because in a certain type of aging research, scientists follow an animal through its whole lifetime to discover clues about the aging process.”

Interestingly, the prevalence of mice in aging research is really a historical accident. In the 1920s, the fancy mice kept by hobbyists were discovered to get lots and lots of cancers, which made them ideal subjects for cancer research. As they got used more and more in biomedical research, they became extremely well characterized. Eventually, they supplanted rats as the mammal of choice in aging research. Rats were useful because they had bigger organs — bigger hearts and bigger brains — that were easier to manipulate in certain laboratory techniques. We’re now so successful at miniaturization that it’s no longer necessary to start with large tissue samples.”

The Rise of Supercentenarians: Kairos, Not Chronos

The Rise of Supercentenarians: Kairos, Not Chronos

Altogether the interval is small between birth and death…look to the immensity of time behind thee, and to the time which is before thee, another boundless space. In this infinity then what is the difference between him who lives three days and him who lives three generations? 
Marcus Aurelius (175 AD)

By definition, you live with longevity for a very long time.
Aubrey de Grey (2005 AD)

Longevity is not a zero-sum game.
Michael Kinsley (2008 AD)

On November 26, 2008, Edna Scott Parker died in Shelbyville, Indiana.

And on that day many more people had ceased to exist on the same day due to various “causes of death.” And the next day – and the next. We see the daily reminders in the obituaries, in the headlines of newspapers, and across the multitude of web sites. And once again, we are reminded of what Dante (and T.S. Eliot) had alluded to with their chilling lines, “I had not thought death had undone so many.” Death is the great reminder about our fate and as the inevitable outcome of living. But Edna Scott Parker – as one of the many – was also someone special. She was the longest living person…alive…on the planet – as of November 26, 2008. She had lived a remarkable 115 years and 220 days. And now (as of this posting on Dec. 13, 2008) the record (verified) belongs to Maria de Jesus dos Santos (born September 10, 1893).

The rise of the supercentenarians has also run parallel with the increase in interest and in publications of “living longer” and as a result, written works on aging are no longer the exclusive province of scientific journals and massive academic tomes as the sheer number of books found on the shelves of both national chain and local bookstores that address the physical, social, and psychological dimensions of life in the long lane. Whether it is about Blue Zones, or about medical tourism, or retirement “hot spots,” both scientists and lay people alike still appear to be in search of the Holy Grail and the fountain of youth – and hopefully both at the same site.

Where to begin to understand our obsession with living longer? Where did the path begin? And where is the wisdom for our aging experience and for our time regardless if life be measured in three days or three generations? (See the epigram of Marcus Aurelius at the beginning of this article).

We could begin with mythological characters, The Three Fates, who have their respective appointed duties to perform where life is woven by Clotho, measured by Lachesis and Atropos cuts the thread of life. Given our contemporary situation, it appears that Lachesis is in need of having her job description upgraded. Or we could begin with one of the plays of Sophocles, Oedipus at Colonus.Or move forward the writings of Marcus Aurelius in his “Meditations” where one will find an interesting array of insights about the processes of aging embedded in a philosophical stance of Stoicism.  In Meditations is the sense of proportion to life regardless of years alive or time spent and it offers solace to those who question the significance of less or more time in life.

We could also find historical nuggets in Tim Parkin’s book, Old Age in the Roman World: A Cultural and Social History or Moog and Schäfer’s article, “Joannes Stobaios, ‘On Old Age’: An Important Source for the History of Gerontology” which also examines Cicero’s well-known text “On Old Age” (Cato maior de senectute) as well.

Leap frogging ahead in time, there was the curious 1921 publication by Sanford Bennett Dodd, Old Age: Its Cause and Prevention which appears to be a provocative precursor to the Jack LaLanne school for living well into the later years. Dodd, who at the age of fifty, claimed to have physically completely broken down but then “reversed” his aging process through a regimen of exercise and diet, which matched the fabled miracle of Faust by changing an old body into a new one. It relates to another story of reversing aging by Mircea Eliade, Youth Without Youth, ^recently made into a movie by Francis Ford Coppola (see my other blog posting on this topic).

But back to senescence in the other direction. There was G. Stanley Hall’s (1922) Senescence: The Last Half of Life and another book, titled Old Age: The Major Involution: The Physiology and Pathology of the Aging Process (1930).

Or we could consult Carl Jung’s (1933) wonderful chapter, “The Stages of Life” in Modern Man In Search of Soul. Moving forward along the path, we could also seek guidance in Ageing, the Biology of Senescence by Alex Comfort (1964) or the deeper reflections of Simon de Beauvoir, (1972) in her book, The Coming of Age Old Age.

We could then move onward to the book, Aging and Mental Health: Positive Psychosocial Approaches (1973) by Robert N. Butler and Myrna I. Lewis, and marvel at cover of that book where the great Russian novelist Leo Tolsoi is pictured telling stories to his grandchildren. We could explore the textured dimensions of aging captured in The Psychology of Adult Development and Aging (1973) edited by Carl Eisdorfer and M. Powell Lawton and then continue on to rediscover the vade mecum of aging (and Pulitzer Prize winning book) by Robert Butler, Why Survive? Being Old in America (1975).

 In the following year, A Good Age by Alex Comfort (1976).  Then into the 1980s with the edited book by Alan Pifer and Lydia Bronte (1986), Our Aging Society: Paradox and Promise that was a gold mine of collected writings capturing both the benefits and challenges of an increasing life expectancy. Then into the 1990s with a flurry of distinct publications such as Thomas R. Cole’s 1992, The Journey of Life: A Cultural History of Aging in America. Another lighthouse beacon along the way was The New Aging: Politics and Change in America (1992) by Fernando Torres-Gil. Traveling along the chronological grey line again to Betty Friedan’s (1993) The Fountain of Age who offered a revolutionary interpretation of based on her personal aging experiences and with other’s insights from gerontological research to engage in some effective myth busting. And then along the journey again with Leonard Hayflick’s (1994) How and Why We Age who wisely suggested that many ethical dilemmas would have to be addressed before engaging in lofty scientific goals and tampering with the clocks that govern aging. The hourglass as half empty was further advanced with Jean Amery’s (1994) unbearable-heaviness-of-being publication, On Aging: Revolt and Resignation, who summarized it all thusly: “aging is an incurable sickness.”

And the pendulum would swing back to the unending colorful birthday balloons of Gail Sheehy’s (1995) New Passages: Mapping Your Life Across Time. Then there was the force field of integration economics combined with the findings of cognitive psychology and evolutionary biology of Richard Posner’s, Aging and Old Age. The decade closed with a book by Theodore Roszak (1998)“America the Wise: the Longevity Revolution and the True Wealth of Nations” and then later expanded and revised to be published again in 2001 under the title of Longevity Revolution: As Boomers Become Elders.

But wait five minutes and the weather changes to overcast skies with Peter G. Peterson’s (1999) Gray Dawn: How the Coming Age Wave Will Transform America and the World.  But it is springtime again with the optimistic Age Power: How the 21st Century Will Be Ruled by the New Old (1999) by Ken Dychtwald.  And then there is the buzz-kill-but-needed-pragmatics of The Quest for Immortality: Science at the Frontiers of Aging (2001) by S. Jay Olshansky and Bruce Carnes. Then to the various levels of exploration on longevity into the 21^st century such as landmark research of George Vaillant and captured in his book, Aging Well: Surprising Guideposts to a Happier Life and Longevity: The Biology and Demography of Life Span by J. R. Carey. The cognitive and psychological perspectives of Positive Aging (2005) by Robert D. Hill and then Aging: The Paradox of Life by Robin Holliday (2007). Then outward to the macro-level with Challenges of an Aging Society: Ethical Dilemmas, Political Issues edited by Rachel A. Pruchno and Michael A. Smyer (2007).

As we draw near to much needed rest area on our journey, we can learn from a medical doctors sage advice with Sherwin B. Nuland’s (2007) The Art of Aging: A Doctor’s Prescription for Well-being or learn about the never-ending story, Ending Aging:  The Rejuvenation Breakthroughs That Could Reverse Human Aging in Our Lifetime by Aubrey de Grey and Michael Rae (2007) (and see my blog posting on 2008 Aging Book of the Year Awards). We could review the most up-to-date theoretical perspectives on human longevity with The Biology of Human Longevity: Inflammation, Nutrition, and Aging in the Evolution of the Life Spans by Caleb Finch (2007) or take in the complete vista at the overlook, a four-volume set, titled appropriately enough, Ageing, compiled by Susan A. McDaniel. And we can top it all of with Robert Butler’s (2008), The Longevity Revolution (who offers an interesting term of “shortgevity”).

But I wonder if all the attention to longevity has eclipsed the focus on how to live better with the years that we have – or hope for. While the thread of life may keep getting longer for most of us, what do all of the threads mean? Do they all come together to create something significant – or meaningful? I think Michael Kinsley has come close to examining my concern via a recent issue of The New Yorker. There he considered that the extending of life expectancy (“Mine is Longer than Yours”) and the resulting (and looming?) promise of increased longevity is fast becoming the last big sweepstakes (not counting the escaping of death itself) for the largest generation in history. Kinsley quipped that life offers several rounds to go through and there are many who are successful in midlife but were losers in the high school years. But the last chapter of life (the third round) may be bonanza or disaster as well, but yet while some people may win both rounds, or even all three, all of us will cross that “invisible line at some point.”

And if we all get to look forward to a longer life, there are some who worry that we are not seeing the bad news in the “careful what you wish for” side of the coin.  For example, Charles Mann wrote a provocative piece in the The Atlantic, “The Coming Death Shortage”, whose view is that increased longevity is akin to a cruel joke with blowback and negative consequences for subsequent generations, thus the subtitle, “Why the longevity boom will make us sorry to be alive.” The message in Mann’s article helps to keep us honest in our candy-coated dreams in the era of longevity. Between the pendulum swinging from doom and gloom to prosperity and fulfillment with aging baby boomers, I do hope there is also the middle path.

It’s not so much that we should modify the Hippocratic aphorism of “Ars longa, vita brevis” to “Ars longa, vita longa” rather; we should focus less on calibrating the chronos, and try more to cultivate the kairos.

Where is the discussion of the quality of life in the increasing number of years of life?

To be continued…for a long time.

Iconoclastically yours, 

Scott D. Wright

The 2008 Rogue Scholarship on Aging – Cicero Book Awards (and they go to…)

The 2008 Rogue Scholarship on Aging – Cicero Book Awards

Books that have generated both heat and light on the topic of aging -
scholarly and yet just enough roguishness to challenge the received view and stir up the status quo - 

Non-Fiction

* Ending Aging: The Rejuvenation Breakthroughs That Could Reverse Human Aging In Our Lifetime.
by Aubrey de Grey and Michael Rae (St. Martin’s Press) ISBN = 978-0312367077 (paperback -2008)

* for analysis and critique scroll down (thanks)

Fiction

Love and the Incredibly Old Man
by Lee Siegel (University of Chicago Press) ISBN = 978-0-226-75705-6

Tampico
by Toby Olson (University of Texas Press) ISBN = 978-0-292-71827-2 

Notables for 2008

Can’t Remember What I Forgot: The Good News From the Front Lines of Memory Research
by Sue Halpern (Harmony Books) ISBN = 978-0-307-40674

The Longevity Revolution: The Benefits and Challenges of Living a Long Life
by Robert N. Butler, M.D. (PublicAffairs) ISBN = 978-1-58648-553-5

Nothing to Be Frightened Of
by Julian Barnes  (Knopf) ISBN = 978-0224085236

The Art of Aging: A Doctor’s Prescription for Well-Being
by Sherwin Nuland  (Random House) ISBN = 978-1400064779

* Note: The hardback version of this title was released in 2007- the paperback in 2008. I have it as the best in non-fiction this year due to its provocative premise that “the key biomedical technology required to eliminate age-derived debilitation and death entirely – technology that would not only slow but periodically reverse age-related physiological decay, leaving us biologically young into an indefinite future – is now within reach.” This is without doubt one of the most scholarly and intriguing books on the topic on aging – in many years. “Ending Aging” is full of roguishness and I admire Dr. Aubrey de Grey’s passion and laser-focused dedication to the topic. I had a chance to hear him speak this past year at the University of Utah (Eccles Institute of Human Genetics) and he is quite the character – and he delivers the message with authority and hyper-confidence. The book has raised hell – and the level of discussion on research on aging to a greater level of heat and light.

            Yet….as I recognize “Ending Aging” as the premier example of rogue scholarship on aging – there are critiques and counterarguments to consider, as well as other benchmark studies to factor into the topic. I for one find more affinity with the theoretical perspectives of Rose (see below). I like the scientific fireworks between SENS and SENSE.

            May I suggest the following articles for a well-rounded perspective?

            Carnes, B. & Olshansky, S. J. (2007). A realist view of aging, mortality, and future longevity. Population and Development Review, 33(2), 367-                       381.
            Clegg, B. (2008). Upgrade me: Our amazing journey to human 2.0. New York: St. Martin’s Press.

            Perls et al (2007). Survival of parents and siblings of supercentenarians. Journal of Gerontology, 62A(9), 1028-1034.
            Rose, M.R. (2008). Making SENSE: Strategies for engineering negligible senescence evolutionarily. Rejuvenation Research, 11(2), 527-534.
            Terry et al (2008). Disentangling the roles of disability and morbidity in survival to exceptional old age. Archives of Internal Medicine, 168(3),                        279-282.

         Thanks – Scott D. Wright