Audrey de Grey's Argument About the Process of Aging: An Evaluation - Essay Example

Analysis and Evaluation of Argument Audrey de Grey is a scientist and researcher who has put a very interesting argument upfront that aging is not a biological process, rather it is a disease. Therefore, like all other pathological processes, aging can also be “cured” and stopped in humans by seven basic steps. His argument revolves around the causes of why we should study on curing the process of aging, the reasons why humans think it is an impossible achievement and he has drawn a basic map regarding how to overcome the biological process of aging. The author initiates the presentation by discussing quite casually and realistically the basic concepts of the world about curing or stopping aging. He is of the view that aging is a barbaric process quite similar to fox hunting! Both processes kill the subjects and are indeed cruel. Aging is not a fun stage of life and it only ends up with the death of the person. He discusses that in spite of all the downfalls associated with the biological process, people are in a “global trance” that aging is inevitable and hence it cannot be avoided so it must be a good thing. It is important to realize the possibilities of the benefits which can be achieved by curing the age process. Thus, the author tries to argue that human beings are living in a misconception that aging is an inescapable process which every individual has to face. He rather tries to explain that aging is a pathological state which can be cured. Audrey proposes that treatment programs should be initiated for preventing aging. He puts forward that the initial therapies of aging should be focused on adding approximately 30 years to an individual life at an average of 55 years rather than intervening at an age of 80 years. The initial therapies would add considerable years to a person’s life so that he can live for a greater period of time and improvements in his health can be made subsequently to improve life span as well as the quality of life. He states that the therapies will never be perfect but it will be through initiation and proper measures that improvement in the treatment rates will be achieved. Audrey claims that a very efficient of way of curbing aging would be to treat every part of the human body that is involved in human aging. He explains that remedies for each of the components should be designed separately. He said in his presentation that, “[Anti-aging therapies will] never be perfect, but we’ll be able to fix the things that 200-year-olds die of before we have any 200-year-olds, and the same for 300 and 400 and so on.” Thus, he aims on increasing the life expectancy of people as well as improve their living and he also clearly states that this treatment will not be definitive and will advance and become better over time. Audrey defines aging as an inevitable mechanism. Audrey emphasizes that our body metabolism works to maintain homestasis and keeps us alive. And aging is basically a pathological process which is composed of hugely complex anti-homestatic mechanisms which kill us. The side effects of normal metabolism accumulate over the period of years, eventually culminating as the death of human cells, a part of aging. He describes that aging can be stopped by two steps. He puts forward the term “robust human rejuvenation” (RHR) as the amount of extra years a typical human being with an average age will live, after aging has been defeated. According to the “Longevity Escape Velocity” presented by Audrey, the first 1000 year old will be approximately ten years younger than the first 150 year old individual. Step One presented by Audrey focused on how we could achieve the process of reducing or preventing the process of aging. This step involved increasing the amount of years in an individual which would be a gradual and slowly evolving scientific process. The target audience, according to Audrey de Grey for the treatment is the middle aged population. Throughout his presentation, he focuses on the concept that prevention is better than cure. Hence individuals who are in their middle age should be targeted for improving their life span. Then along the further years they should be provided with better health care which would benefit them more. The management strategy for overcoming aging should therefore be broad and include early prevention followed by treatment in later years. Audrey states that “Gerontology” focuses on preventing the amount of ongoing damage caused by metabolism, whereas “geriatrics” works by treating or curing the damage which has already been done as a part of metabolism and prevents its “progression” to pathology. He introduces the concept of “Engineering” at the level of the metabolic damage in human body as a useful part of preventing aging. The damage basically comprises of cell loss, atrophy, various DNA mutations, protein cross linkage formations, mitochondrial mutations, nuclear mutations and other biological processes which create “junk inside and outside” the cell. Audrey supports his concept of engineering with evidences of therapies and progressions in human genetics and biology which can be worked on to overcome the basic causes of damage, as mentioned above. For example cell atrophy can be overcome by cell therapy, growth factors and exercise. mDNA mutations can be managed with allotropic expression of 13 proteins, extracellular junk can be cleared with transgenic microbial hydrolases and nuclear epi-mutations can be overcome with telomerase/ALT knockout along with stem cell reseeding. He suggests that if extensive and thorough work is started within due time then robust mass rejuvenation can be achieved within ten years. Audrey de Grey has structured his presentation in a way that it grasps the attention of the audience. He has supported his argument with basic general ideas such as comparing aging to a disease and then establishing the fact that both kill humans. He has induced interesting picture slides as well which add slight humour to the presentation. This keeps the attention of the audience’s intact. Moreover, he does not only focus on the steps of curing aging; rather he initiates the presentation by discussing why the cure of aging is considered to be futile or useless. He carries on his argument with eliminating the negative ideologies and the general population beliefs and moves ahead systematically. Thus, he provides an overall picture of his topic and accurately explains both sides of the argument. He then provides his stand with stronger justifications to prove his point and to convince the audience regarding the authenticity of his claims. Audrey de Grey is a researcher, bio-gerontologist and a scientist who has participated in several published journal articles regarding various biological researches. His studies regarding aging are considered controversial by many. His argument reflects his structure model quite systematically and thoroughly. He displayed through his project that the improvement of the life span of people who are still in their good health is a better option rather than focusing on those individuals who are already near the ending years of their life. He has supported his project with sufficiently convincing arguments and he has explained that the importance of his work and achievements will only be gained with the passage of time. He puts forward that his research would be able to provide life extension for mice in 10 years and with proper funding and support, this goal can be achieved in humans in 15 years. Audrey is quite consistent throughout the video regarding his argument and does not deviate from his central idea of beating the aging process in humans. However, it is evident from the video that from the initial claims of curing aging and eliminating this process from the roots, he finally indulges into only extending human life rather than completely curing the process of aging. The two theories contradict with each other in his argument. Also his argument would have further been strengthened if he would have possessed definitive experimental results to support his claim. Despite of this, his proposition of genetically engineering and repairing the components of aging are quite convincing and strongly support his argument. He has strongly emphasized on reducing the amount of damage to body systems rather than completely eradicating the signs of aging. Read More