4 ms·

From Aubrey De Grey: Short answer is it’s not all that big a deal in biomedical terms. It’s a great discovery in terms of understanding mitochondria, and it pr

by KVFinn 13y ago

From Aubrey De Grey: Short answer is it’s not all that big a deal in biomedical terms. It’s a great discovery in terms of understanding mitochondria, and it provides a new way to rejuvenate mito function, but it doesn’t tell us that rejuvenating mito function in isolation in an otherwise still-old animal is a good idea -- and there have for many years been other ways to rejuvenate mito function which have not led to longer lifespan in rodents, notably acetyl-L-carnitine combined with alpha-lipoic acid (which has been marketed as Juvenon).

Mizza 13y ago
Where are you getting this from?
- KVFinn 13y ago
  Calorie Restriction for Life Extension mailing list.
tokenadult 13y ago
Aubrey De Grey is younger than I am, but he looks old and haggard, much older than I look (and much older than my younger sister who is almost exactly his age looks). I don't know why people take anti-aging advice from Aubrey De Grey. His advice has meager uptake or support in reliable sources on human medicine. AFTER EDIT: I see the first reaction to this comment was a silent downvote, which evokes my desire to learn. Now that we've established that you disagree with me, would it be all right for me to ask what facts I should consider to change my opinion that Aubrey De Grey's anti-aging advice is not correct? What positive rationale can you provide for taking his writings on his favorite topic seriously? What evidence can you provide that he is on to something that the National Institute of Aging[1] isn't researching adequately already without him? [1] http://www.nia.nih.gov/ http://www.nia.nih.gov/ ONE MORE EDIT: Thanks for the replies. I think the most helpful to me was As far as I know, Aubrey has not claimed to have invented any working anti-aging treatments so far because I've been curious for a long time why Aubrey De Grey receives so much mention here on Hacker News whenever research on aging comes up, but so little mention in any of the extensive medical literature I read. So he is one guy with some interesting ideas (interesting to people here, at least) but perhaps just one guy among thousands working on anti-aging ideas. I wish anyone well who is devoting time and attention to reducing the harm of aging processes in human beings, but I try to cast my net searching for information more in the waters of medical reports than among people with a famous online presence as such. Thanks for the follow-up, and for letting me know what you really think about the unedited version of my comment, which still appears at the top here.
- blazespin 13y ago
  Feedback? Sure. You're doing the "appeal to surface appearance" argument. Not sure, but I don't recall that argument from Critical Thinking 101.
  - tokenadult 13y ago
    I will acknowledge that the article about him on Wikipedia has a talk page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Aubrey_de_Grey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Aubrey_de_Grey like few other biography of living person (BLP) articles I have seen in years of editing Wikipedia. Wow.
    - DennisP 13y ago
      First time I've seen Jimmy Wales jump into a discussion. In Aubrey's defense, in this case: "I am entirely unconvinced by the quite frankly bizarre claim that the credentialed experts on the board of Mr. De Gray's foundation don't 'count' towards respectability since they are 'conflicted'. Conflicted in that they endorse his work? It makes no sense. Also, be very careful that you are not edging into uncivil personal attack by hinting darkly about his bona fides as a scientist - he has a Phd from Cambridge University based on 'The Mitochondrial Free Radical Theory of Aging'!"
- DennisP 13y ago
  As far as I know, Aubrey has not claimed to have invented any working anti-aging treatments so far, so I don't see that his personal appearance is relevant. He's promoting scientific research, not marketing a cream.
- wamatt 13y ago
  Since you asked so politely, I'll attempt, albeit somewhat hesitantly, to offer some feedback. So looking back on my encounters with Aubrey, I can only say he seems perfectly content appearing old and wise. In fact he's well known to be anti-interventionist (for the meantime) and does not endorse supplementation or other strategies other than basic obvious health advice (eat well, exercise). This is in contrast to his friend Ray Kurzweil, who on the other end of the spectrum is ingesting 100+ pills daily.[1] In terms of the HN reaction, I too admit at first, to an immediate emotional desire to downvote. On the one hand, I respect your breadth of knowledge and am grateful to your usually educational summations, but on this occasion, the dismissal seems shallow. The sense one gets, is that you're not really taking him seriously as a biomedical gerontologist, as a researcher studying senescence for the last 20 years. Instead it feels (at least to me) like a dismissal more slightly more appropriate, to a salesman peddling snakeoil. So lastly, and perhaps most importantly, setting aside emotion, the dismissal was logically flawed. If a researcher produces findings and chooses not to follow them (by your implication the reason for his old and haggard appearance), it has little bearing on the validity of said findings. There may be many good (and not so good) reasons for not following the immediate implications of ones own research: Akrasia[2], lazyness, "wait and see". For example, theoretical research (eg murine models -- such as FTA) occurs long before a drug, has passed all the relevant safety tests in humans, and enters the market. hth [1] http://bigthink.com/videos/the-top-3-supplements-for-surviving-the-singularity http://bigthink.com/videos/the-top-3-supplements-for-survivi... [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akrasia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akrasia

by KVFinn 13y ago

Mizza 13y ago

Where are you getting this from?

KVFinn 13y ago
Calorie Restriction for Life Extension mailing list.

tokenadult 13y ago

Aubrey De Grey is younger than I am, but he looks old and haggard, much older than I look (and much older than my younger sister who is almost exactly his age looks). I don't know why people take anti-aging advice from Aubrey De Grey. His advice has meager uptake or support in reliable sources on human medicine. AFTER EDIT: I see the first reaction to this comment was a silent downvote, which evokes my desire to learn. Now that we've established that you disagree with me, would it be all right for me to ask what facts I should consider to change my opinion that Aubrey De Grey's anti-aging advice is not correct? What positive rationale can you provide for taking his writings on his favorite topic seriously? What evidence can you provide that he is on to something that the National Institute of Aging[1] isn't researching adequately already without him? [1] http://www.nia.nih.gov/ http://www.nia.nih.gov/ ONE MORE EDIT: Thanks for the replies. I think the most helpful to me was As far as I know, Aubrey has not claimed to have invented any working anti-aging treatments so far because I've been curious for a long time why Aubrey De Grey receives so much mention here on Hacker News whenever research on aging comes up, but so little mention in any of the extensive medical literature I read. So he is one guy with some interesting ideas (interesting to people here, at least) but perhaps just one guy among thousands working on anti-aging ideas. I wish anyone well who is devoting time and attention to reducing the harm of aging processes in human beings, but I try to cast my net searching for information more in the waters of medical reports than among people with a famous online presence as such. Thanks for the follow-up, and for letting me know what you really think about the unedited version of my comment, which still appears at the top here.

blazespin 13y ago
Feedback? Sure. You're doing the "appeal to surface appearance" argument. Not sure, but I don't recall that argument from Critical Thinking 101.
- tokenadult 13y ago
  I will acknowledge that the article about him on Wikipedia has a talk page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Aubrey_de_Grey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Aubrey_de_Grey like few other biography of living person (BLP) articles I have seen in years of editing Wikipedia. Wow.
  - DennisP 13y ago
    First time I've seen Jimmy Wales jump into a discussion. In Aubrey's defense, in this case: "I am entirely unconvinced by the quite frankly bizarre claim that the credentialed experts on the board of Mr. De Gray's foundation don't 'count' towards respectability since they are 'conflicted'. Conflicted in that they endorse his work? It makes no sense. Also, be very careful that you are not edging into uncivil personal attack by hinting darkly about his bona fides as a scientist - he has a Phd from Cambridge University based on 'The Mitochondrial Free Radical Theory of Aging'!"
DennisP 13y ago
As far as I know, Aubrey has not claimed to have invented any working anti-aging treatments so far, so I don't see that his personal appearance is relevant. He's promoting scientific research, not marketing a cream.
wamatt 13y ago
Since you asked so politely, I'll attempt, albeit somewhat hesitantly, to offer some feedback. So looking back on my encounters with Aubrey, I can only say he seems perfectly content appearing old and wise. In fact he's well known to be anti-interventionist (for the meantime) and does not endorse supplementation or other strategies other than basic obvious health advice (eat well, exercise). This is in contrast to his friend Ray Kurzweil, who on the other end of the spectrum is ingesting 100+ pills daily.[1] In terms of the HN reaction, I too admit at first, to an immediate emotional desire to downvote. On the one hand, I respect your breadth of knowledge and am grateful to your usually educational summations, but on this occasion, the dismissal seems shallow. The sense one gets, is that you're not really taking him seriously as a biomedical gerontologist, as a researcher studying senescence for the last 20 years. Instead it feels (at least to me) like a dismissal more slightly more appropriate, to a salesman peddling snakeoil. So lastly, and perhaps most importantly, setting aside emotion, the dismissal was logically flawed. If a researcher produces findings and chooses not to follow them (by your implication the reason for his old and haggard appearance), it has little bearing on the validity of said findings. There may be many good (and not so good) reasons for not following the immediate implications of ones own research: Akrasia[2], lazyness, "wait and see". For example, theoretical research (eg murine models -- such as FTA) occurs long before a drug, has passed all the relevant safety tests in humans, and enters the market. hth [1] http://bigthink.com/videos/the-top-3-supplements-for-surviving-the-singularity http://bigthink.com/videos/the-top-3-supplements-for-survivi... [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akrasia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akrasia