The research noted by Newswise here does not strike me as the future of longevity science: "Aspirin didn't pan out. Neither did two other potential anti-aging agents. But a synthetic derivative of a pungent desert shrub is now a front-runner in ongoing animal experiments to find out if certain chemicals, known to inhibit inflammation, cancer and other destructive processes, can boost the odds of living longer. ... scientist Richard A. Miller reports early results from a mouse study his lab and two others are conducting for the National Institute on Aging. The study, now in its fourth year, will test as many as two dozen possible anti-aging agents in animals in the next five years." Discovering potentially interesting mechanisms in metabolism by testing ingestion of various chemicals is an inefficient journey along an inefficient path. We can do better than this, both in our methodology for identifying interesting mechanisms, and in the methods by which we attempt to extend healthy life span. Crude manipulations with chemicals from the environment can never hold a candle to the directed use of biotechnology to identify and repair the damage of aging. Which would you prefer scientists worked on for the next couple of decades?

View the Article Under Discussion: http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/530544/
Read More Longevity Meme Commentary: http://www.longevitymeme.org/news/