Technology Review - Published By MIT
Log in to My.TechnologyReview.com | Register
Advertisement
[1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next »

February 2005

Do You Want to Live Forever?

Aubrey de Grey thinks he knows how to defeat aging. He's brilliant, but is he nuts?

By Sherwin Nuland

smaller text tool iconmedium text tool iconlarger text tool icon

Wandering through the quadrangles and medieval bastions of learning at the University of Cambridge one overcast Sunday afternoon a few months ago, I found myself ruminating on how this venerable place had been a crucible for the scientific revolution that changed humankind's perceptions of itself and of the world. The notion of Cambridge as a source of grand transformative concepts was very much on my mind that day, because I had traveled to England to meet a contemporary Cantabrigian who aspires to a historical role similar to those enjoyed by Francis Bacon, Isaac Newton, and William Harvey. Aubrey David Nicholas Jasper de Grey is convinced that he has formulated the theoretical means by which human beings might live thousands of years -- indefinitely, in fact.

Perhaps theoretical is too small a word. De Grey has mapped out his proposed course in such detail that he believes it may be possible for his objective to be achieved within as short a period as 25 years, in time for many readers of Technology Review to avail themselves of its formulations -- and, not incidentally, in time for his 41-year-old self as well. Like Bacon, de Grey has never stationed himself at a laboratory bench to attempt a ­single hands-on experiment, at least not in human biology. He is without qualifications for that, and makes no pretensions to being anything other than what he is, a computer scientist who has taught himself natural science. Aubrey de Grey is a man of ideas, and he has set himself toward the goal of transforming the basis of what it means to be human.

For reasons that his memory cannot now retrieve, de Grey has been convinced since childhood that aging is, in his words, "something we need to fix." Having become interested in biology after marrying a geneticist in 1991, he began poring over texts, and autodidacted until he had mastered the subject. The more he learned, the more he became convinced that the postponement of death was a problem that could very well have real solutions and that he might be just the person to find them. As he reviewed the possible reasons why so little progress had been made in spite of the remarkable molecular and cellular discoveries of recent decades, he came to the conclusion that the problem might be far less difficult to solve than some thought; it seemed to him related to a factor too often brushed under the table when the motivations of scientists are discussed, namely the small likelihood of achieving promising results within the ­period required for academic advancement -- careerism, in a word. As he puts it, "High-risk fields are not the most conducive to getting promoted quickly."

De Grey began reading the relevant literature in late 1995 and after only a few months had learned so much that he was able to explain previously unidentified ­influences affecting mutations in mitochondria, the intracellular structures that release energy from certain chemical processes necessary to cell function. Having contacted an expert in this area of research who told him that he had indeed made a new discovery, he published his first biological research paper in 1997, in the peer-reviewed journal BioEssays ("A Proposed Refinement of the Mitochondrial Free Radical Theory of Aging," de Grey, ADNJ, BioEssays 19(2)161-166, 1997). By July 2000, further assiduous application had brought him to what some have called his "eureka moment," the insight he speaks of as his realization that "aging could be ­described as a reasonably small set of accumulating and eventually pathogenic molecular and cellular changes in our bodies, each of which is potentially amenable to repair." This concept became the theme of all the theoretical investigation he would do from that moment on; it became the leitmotif of his life. He determined to approach longevity as what can only be called a problem in engineering. If it is possible to know all the components of the variety of processes that cause animal tissues to age, he reasoned, it might also be possible to design remedies for each of them.

All along the way, de Grey would be continually surprised at the relative ease with which the necessary knowledge could be mastered -- or at least, the ease with which he himself could master it. Here I must issue a caveat, a variant of those seen in television commercials featuring daredevilish stunts: "Do not attempt this on your own. It is extremely hazardous and requires special abilities." For if you can take a single impression away from spending even a modicum of time with Aubrey de Grey, it is that he is the possessor of special abilities.

As he surveyed the literature, de Grey reached the conclusion that there are seven distinct ingredients in the aging process, and that emerging understanding of molecular biology shows promise of one day providing appropriate technologies by which each of them might be manipulated -- "perturbed," in the jargon of biologists. He bases his certainty that there are only seven such factors on the fact that no new factor has been discovered in some twenty years, despite the flourishing state of research in the field known as biogeron­tology, the science of aging; his certainty that he is the man to lead the crusade for endless life is based on his conception that the qualification needed to accomplish it is the mindset he brings to the problem: the goal-driven orientation of an engineer rather than the curiosity-driven orientation of the basic scientists who have made and will continue to make the laboratory discoveries that he intends to employ. He sees himself as the applied scientist who will bring the benisons of molecular bi­ology to practical use. In the analogous terminology often used by historians of medicine, he is the clinician who will bring the laboratory to the bedside.

And so, in order to achieve his goal of transforming our society, de Grey has transformed himself. His "day job," as he calls it, is relatively modest; he is the computer support for a genetics research team, and his entire official working space occupies a corner of its small lab. And yet he has achieved international renown and more than a little notoriety in the field of aging, not only for the boldness of his theo­ries, but also because of the forcefulness of his proselytizing on their behalf. His stature has become such that he is a factor to be dealt with in any serious discussion of the topic. De Grey has documented his contributions in the scientific literature, publishing scores of articles in an impressive array of journals, including those of the quality of Trends in Biotechnology and Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, as well as contributing commentary and letters to other publications like Science and Biogerontology.

[1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next »
February 2005

Would you like to read more articles from the February 2005 issue?

This article is from the February 2005 Issue of Technology Review. To read other articles from this issue simply register for My.TechnologyReview.com. It's free.

Subscribe today and save up to 41% »

Comments

  • Question about the process
    Guest (Eddie Zeng) on 11/22/2005 at 10:38 AM
    Posts:
    1
    If this would be possible, will the process leave you exactly the same as when you were treated?  For instance, if this process were applied to children, they will remain that way and if applied to the elderly, they will stay that way as well?  Or maybe there is an equilibrium age like say around 20 or something where old people just &quotgrow&quot back into their former selves?
    Rate this comment: 12345
    • m33p m33p
      Guest (gobbeldy BEEEEP!!!) on 07/05/2006 at 12:00 AM
      Posts:
      1
      Its prettty obvious. Growth and aging are two different things. The issue of the aging and weakening of the body is what is being addressed here.
      Rate this comment: 12345
  • age reversal
    Guest (Josh McNeil) on 12/06/2005 at 8:56 PM
    Posts:
    1
    hello, my nae is josh mcneil and I am a grade 10 student who is interested about learning about new information or ideas on this topic of age reversal. I was also wondering if there is any way that you can help, either by sending me emails about new information that arises about the topic or if I could some how contact Aubrey David Nicholas Jasper de Grey myself, about this because I look forward to following in his footsteps when I am of the age. I will look forward to this after my university years.

    My email adress is jhmc_07@hotmail.com

    I hope to hear from yu soon regarding this topic.

      Thank you, Sincerely yours
                                  Josh McNeil
    Rate this comment: 12345
    • stupid ending of article
      Guest (j keith) on 12/16/2005 at 10:47 PM
      Posts:
      1
      Nuland, why do you think we wont succeed?  I hope you die as you wish.  The rest of us are optimistic about living.
      Rate this comment: 12345
      • ...stupid ending of article response
        Guest (Peter Miller) on 01/19/2006 at 12:00 AM
        Posts:
        1
        I can't stand these kind of responses to articles like this.  It's almost hostile.  The conclusion made sense if you read between the lines.  We have a major problem on this planet with resourses.  What would happen if people could live forever with the current reproduction rate?  We're a greedy species at best and this is just a glorified 'cosmetic surgery'.  Until we have the brains to work together in unison, we shouldnt be allowed to live forever. 
        Rate this comment: 12345
        • Peter Miller advocates murder
          Guest (Infinity) on 01/25/2006 at 12:00 AM
          Posts:
          1
          We shouldn't be allowed to live forever? No need to read "between the lines" in Peter Miller's post. Peter Miller advocates murder.
          Rate this comment: 12345
        • response to response to stupid ending of article
          Guest (Joe) on 04/23/2006 at 12:00 AM
          Posts:
          1
          I completely agree with Peter.  You do just have to read between the lines a bit.
          Rate this comment: 12345
        • Re: ...stupid ending of article response
          thewizard on 03/08/2008 at 1:37 PM
          Posts:
          3
          YOUR RESPONSE IS NATURAL FOR A PERSON OF IGNORANCE
          (NO INSULT INTENDED). I AM 78 AND HAVE BOTH TRAINING IN THEOLOGY (MINISTER FOR 41 YEARS) AS WELL AS IN QUANTUM PHYSICS. I AM CONDUCTING A FIVE
          WEEK SEMINAR END OF MAY, WHERE I COACH PEOPLE HOW
          TO BE 10-30 YEARS YOUNGER AND EXTEND THEIR LIFE FOR 10-30 YEARS. ALL BASED ON QUANTUM PHYSICS. THOSE MEDICAL SCIENTISTS DO RESEARCH ON ANIMALS,
          I DO THE REAL THING - REJUVENATION AND LIFE EXTENSION IN YOUTHFUL EXUBERANCE NOT 20-30 YEARS
          FROM TODAY, BUT IN MAY 0F 2008,
          Karoly Fuevessy,
          fountainofyouthwizard@gmail.com
          Rate this comment: 12345
        • Re: ...stupid ending of article response
          tonyreno on 05/07/2008 at 5:13 AM
          Posts:
          4
          We don't have a major problem with resources. There's abot 3,000 miles of planet directly beneath the feet of every person, right where they stand.

          We do have a problem with people wanting things that they are unwilling to work hard enough to earn. But when people do decide to do the work there's plenty there for many more people, many many times as many people are there are there now.

          It take a little more work to get better at living renewably, but we are already far better at it than our much vaunted ancestors.

          Also keep in mind that not-dying does not add to the population. Not-dying only keeps the population the same.

          It was a stupid ending to the article.  You have to read way way way between the lines to find some reason why not dying is a bad thing.  It's like calling up, down.  Not-dying staying young is one of those things that only a person with no imagination at all could favor.

          Now if you want to extend that argument to not having children (I don't, by the way) then you might have an argument.  But there is no argument made anywhere in the article that made any sensible connection between staying young and the world somehow getting worse for that.
          Rate this comment: 12345
    • do u want to live forever...
      Guest (f.leblanc) on 01/01/2006 at 9:25 PM
      Posts:
      1
      After watching a.degrey on cbs 60 minutes tonight, a quick google search turned up ur site.  I really appreciate your assessment, but not ur conclusion. adg looks, acts, and talks like either a throwback to the 60s hippies or a man ahead of his times. time will tell. what gets done when u stir the stew is often a better mix than the status quo ante.  looks like a man to watch, in more ways than one.  wonder whos enemies list he is on?

      Thanks for ur article.  hope u followup on some of the ethical issues involved.
      Rate this comment: 12345
      • Re: do u want to live forever...
        thewizard on 03/08/2008 at 1:54 PM
        Posts:
        3
        YES, I WANT TO LIVE FOREVER AND I HAVE THE KNOWHOW
        AND IN ADDITION I AM CONDUCTING A FIVE WEEK SEMINAR ON HOW TO EXTEND YOUR LIFE 10, 20, 30 YEARS THIS COMING MAY/2008. ETHICS? WHAT DO YOU KNOW OF ETHICS ANYWAY. UNETHICAL IS TO DIE. IF YOU REALLY UNDERSTAND THE BIBLE OR TORA, YOU WOULD NOT BRING UP ETHICS.
        Karoly Fuevessy,
        fountainofyouthwizard@gmail.com
        Rate this comment: 12345
    • reversal?
      Guest (N.B.) on 05/10/2006 at 12:00 AM
      Posts:
      1
      age reversal is, scientifically impossible. Imagine the complicated chem. reactions you'd have to process in order to undo what aging has done to cells... and then how and when do you stop it? (although it would be scientifically seen highly interesting to see what happens to sb. rewinded to a state before birth and what would happen in a state even before that...)
      Anyway, not only that, but would the cells survive it? taking the simple exsample of trying to clean a stain out, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, sometimes the stain spreads and sometimes you ruin the cloth...

      so much more to say, but it would go too far... anyway, incase you want to reply, my adress is GothicDray@web.de
      Rate this comment: 12345
      • reversal
        Guest (Dave) on 05/26/2006 at 12:00 AM
        Posts:
        1
        Umm - so we do actually have very effective stain removers that don't harm - much less destroy cloth. The remover doesn't try to reverse the chemical process that created the stain. It just removes the junk as carefully as possible.
        Rate this comment: 12345
      • Re: reversal?
        thewizard on 03/08/2008 at 1:47 PM
        Posts:
        3
        YES YOU TO KNOW NITHING OF QUANTUM PHYSICS (SEE MY
        REPLY OF 03/08/08. I AM NOT A GERENTOLOGIST OR
        MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL (THEY HOPE TO ETEND LIFE IN 20-30 YEARS). THE STORY OF "THE ELEPHANT AND THE
        FIVE BLIND MEN", DESCRIBES THE MEDICAL SCIENTISTS
        WELL. I AM CONDUCTING END OF MAY A FIVE WEEK
        SEMINAR, WHERE I REJUVENATE PARTICIPANTS 10-30
        YEARS IN REAL TIME NOW, NOT IN 20-30 YEARS.
        Karoly Fuevessy,
        fountainofyouthwizard@gmail.com
        Rate this comment: 12345
      • Re: reversal?
        tonyreno on 05/07/2008 at 5:18 AM
        Posts:
        4
        It's not nearly as difficult as it sounds.

        Unlike cloths, cells have 2 big advantages over everything else.  With the exeception of brain cells, almost every other type of cell need only take an inventory, find the cells in the best shape, reproduce those, and kill off the others.

        There's nothing scientifically impossible about reversing aging. In fact, if it were impossible people would be unable to have children, or your childred would all be born with all the age damage that we have.

        It is a hard problem, but I don't think it is nearly as difficult for our technology, given de Grey's engineering approach, as it was for the 60s technology to make it to the moon.
        Rate this comment: 12345
  • age reversal
    Guest (Josh McNeil) on 12/06/2005 at 8:56 PM
    Posts:
    1
    hello, my nae is josh mcneil and I am a grade 10 student who is interested about learning about new information or ideas on this topic of age reversal. I was also wondering if there is any way that you can help, either by sending me emails about new information that arises about the topic or if I could some how contact Aubrey David Nicholas Jasper de Grey myself, about this because I look forward to following in his footsteps when I am of the age. I will look forward to this after my university years.

    My email adress is jhmc_07@hotmail.com

    I hope to hear from yu soon regarding this topic.

      Thank you, Sincerely yours
                                  Josh McNeil
    Rate this comment: 12345
  • Other methods of forever life
    Guest (J.c.) on 12/19/2005 at 4:26 AM
    Posts:
    1
    To understand what is of us you need to open your evez and listen...Iam 21 male and will live forever until Iam ready to go.....The ideas I have are very real.  To success this will cost billons, but will make trillions.  I need the help of my self first to further my studies of forever life before I get sponsers.  You will see way before a 100 years in this life time it will happen.........Good day.
    Rate this comment: 12345
  • Computers, Quantum Mechanics, Rocket Science
    Guest (Craig Bruce) on 01/18/2006 at 12:00 AM
    Posts:
    1
    A very interesting read. However i believe it would be perilous to deny the possibilities of developing such technologies. In terms of the history of man (say 2 million years) science is in its infancy, a hundred years ago space travel, quantum mechanics, micro-surgery and machines (computer technology) that can beat humans in chess would seem ludicrous. Perhaps the next 100 or 200 years will yield the "fountain of youth"?? At the very least, organ replacement and some cell regeneration....
    Rate this comment: 12345
    • Support.
      Guest (Eric) on 01/31/2006 at 12:00 AM
      Posts:
      1
      If anyone is persuing these goals, I am a Programmer greatly interested in helping the cause.  eric.leschinski@dualitystudios.com
      Rate this comment: 12345
  • Do you  have any  papers  in   Technology of Taught
    Guest (Dr.keyvan Abasi , M.D. / Ph.D.) on 02/04/2006 at 12:00 AM
    Posts:
    1
    would  you please send me  some abstract of articles in
    " Technology of Taught "
    if  you have  please ?
    i'm keen interested in this case
    if you can  help me to get more information then i'd appreciate you
    yours faithfully  Dr keiyvan
    Rate this comment: 12345
    • my email !
      Guest ( Dr keiyvan) on 02/04/2006 at 12:00 AM
      Posts:
      1
      please send me every lectures in
      " Technology of Taught "
      by email to :
      NJ_SHAH14@YAHOO.COM
      Rate this comment: 12345
  • live forever
    Guest (patrick) on 02/05/2006 at 12:00 AM
    Posts:
    1
    after these seven wonders of the world are perfected., i think it will still be necessary to partake of the manna. i.e. Gold and silver excetera broken down into its monoatomic element and injested with pure water. creating no resistance to lifes energy force in the human body.
    Rate this comment: 12345
  • ignorance or malvolance?
    Guest (Mel) on 02/06/2006 at 12:00 AM
    Posts:
    1
    so basically one should not propose and support any scientifical breakthrough unless the same one has ready solved any potential risks associated with the realization of such breakthrough. this article is manipulative and stating issues of seemingly common sense like pointing out some unclear problems to which it doesn't even nearly try to give an explanation or even deny a solution. seems to me an argumentation as emotionally driven as claimed to be in de grey's discours.
    point out all potential risks and that is good, assume failure in managing such risks and that is ignorance or, in case of informed people, plain malvolance.
    Rate this comment: 12345
  • Living forever?
    Guest (Jim G) on 04/15/2006 at 12:00 AM
    Posts:
    1
    The question isn't whether we can live forever, but rather how we live each day of our lives!  Given the quality of life we often see around us, and the way people waste their lives, that is the greater challenge - for the overall human population anyway.
    Rate this comment: 12345
  • Long winded about De
    Guest on 05/05/2006 at 12:00 AM
    Posts:
    1
    Rate this comment: 12345
  • What a conclusion???
    Guest (Jairo Barbosa) on 05/11/2006 at 12:00 AM
    Posts:
    1
    I am rather flabbergasted by Sherwin Nuland's conclusion... As a doctor - a specialist - he is not the right to be so closedminded.
    Rate this comment: 12345
    • Questionable, opinionated conclusion...
      Guest (Kathy Rusniak) on 05/19/2006 at 12:00 AM
      Posts:
      1
      Not only close-minded, but surprisingly emotional.  A completely unexpected conclusion that I think highly deviated from the main focus of the story, which I took in the beginning to be an anecdotal interview of a 'controversial' scientist. 
      Rate this comment: 12345
      • where is the confidence and faith in humanity?
        Guest (Markus) on 06/09/2006 at 12:00 AM
        Posts:
        1
        I was surprised by the conclusion as well; why is the inability of the human race to handle immortality such a forgone conclusion?  And why in such a publication as Technology Review is there an article so very pessimistic about technology?

        We have and always will create technological monsters with horrible potential, but they don't outweigh all the good solutions that we have created as well.

        Progress will continue and indeed I believe one thing that makes us human is our hope that we can improve ourselves and our surroundings.
        Rate this comment: 12345
        • --
          Guest (David J) on 06/13/2006 at 12:00 AM
          Posts:
          1
          Rate this comment: 12345
    • Strange Conclusion
      Guest (Jeff) on 06/20/2006 at 12:00 AM
      Posts:
      1
      Nuland, while I respect your right to voice your opinion, those last two paragraphs were a cancer on an otherwise beautifully articulated article.  Your opinion is overwhelmingly cynical and close minded.   It is regrettable that it co-exists with such an otherwise well-written article. Even reading between the lines, going back to the points you raised that if immortality became a reality there would be negative consequences.  The nature of survival is such that the species always adapts to change and I am convinced that humanity will adapt to immortality.  It simply has to.
      Rate this comment: 12345
  • Maybe not forever but...
    Guest (Frank Smith) on 06/10/2006 at 12:00 AM
    Posts:
    1
    I want to live until I am ready to die.  Who has the right to deny me that?  Certainly not Sherwin Nuland.
    Rate this comment: 12345
  • Living Forever, Eternal Life
    Guest (Yossi) on 06/12/2006 at 12:00 AM
    Posts:
    1
    Yes.
    This is what G-d originally and always intended for all humankind: So that He could "dwell", so to say, in this physical world, together with us. We need to show Him (and also, perhaps mainly ourselves) that we are really, truly worthy of His wonderful GIFT of life, that He continually grants us and the entire Universe every instant.  All that He wants from us that we should be eternally grateful and show a little respect for ourselves and creation.
    Let all Creation please thank the Only One True G-d Almighty for every single breath...
    Rate this comment: 12345
    • sppookky
      Guest (me) on 07/05/2006 at 12:00 AM
      Posts:
      1
      He's right you know. My advice is to stop looking at everything from your ideological narrow-minded social perspective.
      Rate this comment: 12345
  • true and evident
    Guest (Reaon) on 07/28/2006 at 12:00 AM
    Posts:
    1
    For every second we live and with our own very step, we continuiously enter unsuitable condisions for the essence of life to thrive, grow and evolve. The world of our own creation deteriates ower mind, spirit and bodys. With every new generation our minds are farbeyond that of the last generation. We are a spicies of beauty and perfection, and we have the capability of growing phsically and mentaly past everyones dreams, unfortunetly the conditions,process and dedication that we would have to be endured is to hard to instantly be put to play but fortunetly we are aloud faith in this to help lead our generations to the fullest of human potential. who knows what ower spicies will grow to form into. oh wait, were saposed to put ower beliefs straight to the bible.
    Email ReaonIam@hotmail.com for discussion, but not about religion.
    thanx
    Rate this comment: 12345
  • Resources are not excuses
    Guest (jmviggi) on 08/07/2006 at 12:00 AM
    Posts:
    1
    With the coming revolution of nanotechnology, the possibilities of reproducing resources will become more than graspable. I believe that humanity should be more than optimistic and open about the technologies and new inventions that could perpetuate and enhance our existence. Living forever is the long-held dream of ancient myths, science fiction, futurists, and even religion. I, myself, want to extend and expand my life infinitely.

    PEACE
    Rate this comment: 12345
  • immortality, adaptability and progress
    jak177 on 08/17/2006 at 9:03 AM
    Posts:
    1
    While I enjoyed reading an exceptionally well written article I found the ending excessively cynical and pessimistic. Progress will come whether we like it or not. If history has taught us anything, it is that if something can be done it will be done by someone somewhere. Out of all the time the human species has had on our world, it is really in the last couple hundred years that great progress has been made. However our science is still in its infancy. If all the technical aspects with regard to immortality are finally resolved, I believe human kind will not only adapt to immortality but such an achievement will provide the catalyst to spur even greater progress. Just think if individuals of the likes of Isaac Newton could have lived for 400 years, surely more physics could be understood to enable mankind to get off this world, go and populate other worlds and thus solve the issue of overpopulation. The problem now is just by the time an individual has mastered his field and is just about ready to really start applying his hard won knowledge to higher goals, he is already in decline. Immortality  will still not protect an individual from external causes such as distructive weapons but I for one am all for as many people as possible working toward making the human species immortal. Even though is appears that De Grey has not wholly grasped the enormity of the challenges involved in the vision that he proposes, it would be foolish to dismiss him. His MPrize initiative is just the type of incentive needed for breakthroughs to be made. Just as the XPrize has spurred progress and interest in space travel, so will the MPrize and other such initiatives further progress in the challenges toward the goal of immortality. People like De Gray provide the focus that humankind needs to work toward a clear goal. More optimism in the future is needed ... please !

    MKM
    Rate this comment: 12345
  • responsibility
    lazur on 10/31/2006 at 3:26 AM
    Posts:
    1
    Death occurrs from more causes than science is dealing with, such as the accumulation of injuries which aren't necessarily physical: Deals and relationships gone bad, financial and personal mistakes, disappointments with the behaviors of loved ones and associates, and the  feeling,(often correct), that the world has moved on to things that are of no interest to you, and is not interested in what you care about, all kill us as much as cells not replicating properly. We'll need a entirely new branch of psychology to deal with an  large population of  'healthy' people with virually nowhere to go......The financial structure will also require changing: Unlimited retirement is not feasable, and if people are regularly living to 120, they'll have to work until 90. Will they be -that- fit? They'll have to be... After all is said and done, the personal responsibility for one's own welfare will be greater than ever. Those as young as their mid-60s with no outside interests or a sour attitude will  commit suicide-by-refusal-of-treatment just to get out of this life, same as they ever did. Don't just sit there and watch the scientists. If you plan on living forever, start planning now what you're going to do with all that time on your hands. If you're 120, that means there are also more 100, 80, and 60 year olds than ever before. The world won't have the resources to entertain  all  of you in the style you're accustomed. You're going to have to create a lifestyle for yourself from scratch, because the only thing that's going to be handed to you is assisted living.  I wouldn't mind being one of a few members of my generation to continue a vital active life among the next three, four, five or six generations, but if  10's of thousands of 150-year-olds are running around, they better be competitive with 28-year-olds, or we'll soon have legal murder to keep costs down, (unless star-based power comes a lot sooner it appears to be coming). Our ducks are  not in a row; we should be using our abilities to make a cleaner world a pleasure to live in for the current duration. 
    Rate this comment: 12345
  • De Grey has forgotten one vital element
    tonygrant on 02/03/2007 at 3:54 PM
    Posts:
    1
    The element one has to always consider is that 99% of the problems suffered by the body start as a negative emotion.  The emotion then manifests itself into the physical. For example  arthritis in most normal people is the result of surpressed anger, it causes  damage and/or deterioration to cartilage.. Remove the anger and the deterioration ceases. Therefore if one is to replace components with the same, one should remove ones negative emotions as one goes, or take the other choice and relace with non biological parts. Incidentally it would appear that De Grey, in common with most people has many negative emotions, and should consider removing them. Without his negativity his outl