3 ms·

>The characteristic decline in stem cell activity with age is believed to be an evolutionary adaptation that reduces cancer risk This isn't science. This is n

>The characteristic decline in stem cell activity with age is believed to be an evolutionary adaptation that reduces cancer risk This isn't science. This is not a falsifiable statement and is not backed up by any hard evidence. The Reason, with an intentional capital "R" for it could be just about anything. Biology and evolution are really complicated. There is a huge negative bias in the scientific community with regards to any science that can make significant improvements in human lifespan due to overriding concerns about overpopulation. Thus, the bias when speculating on any life extension technology is that it will have some sort of negative consequence.

reasonattlm 12y ago
Overpopulation is really not the origin of much negative bias, and where researchers publish on that topic it is to note that it isn't an issue. E.g.: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3192186/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3192186/ However: researchers don't want to be seen as being just another part of the "anti-aging" marketplace of pills and potions and lies, as it has a negative affect on their credibility and ability to raise funds for research. That is the dominant issue, and it has taken a lot of work over the past few decades to get even more adventurous and strong-willed researchers to the point of being willing to talk in public about extending healthy human life spans.