When a scientist says something can be done, believe him or her and add about 15 years to the timeline they give you for completion. But when a scientist says something cannot be done--they are (so far) almost always wrong.
So when Massachussetts Institute of Technology writes that it is 'absurd' to think that aging can be 'cured' in the way a disease might be cured, you don't have to be convinced just by their stellar reputation. Although they are probably right, science has a way of getting in through the back door when the front door is locked, and may find a way to prolong lifespans without finding a cure.
What MIT offers as a consolation prize is almost equally as welcome--and startling. Current research is on the way to treatments and technologies that will 'compress morbidity'--that is, shorten the amount of time people are unhealthy prior to their deaths. Or as MIT put it,
"While it is highly unlikely that aging can be permanently halted at the cellular level, antiaging science might allow doctors to "compress the morbidity" of their patients: that is, reduce the amount of time geriatric patients suffer from the chronic diseases of old age like heart disease, macular degeneration, senile diabetes, or dementia. Such therapies would also extend human life -- at least a little bit, anyway. Human beings could live beyond the age of 80 or 90, and in relatively good health. And while that's not immortality, it offers something like happiness on a reasonable, human scale."
That's a second prize I can live with--at least for now.
Comments