On a philosophical level I quite agree with you. There are some in the aging-science community like Aubry de Grey who think aging is programmed through maturity and then becomes a stochastic process responding to random damage such as due to oxidation. I think it is a programmed lifelong process that is modifiable by environmental factors, lifestyle and diet, but only in a limited manner. The program increases the susceptibilities to processes and diseases of old age exponentially as you approach an advanced age until one gets you and you die. I do think it is possible to postpone the processes of the program for 10 or even 20 years but so far the program seems to be inexorable.
Vince

I’m a fan of Occam’s Razor. It has always seemed to me that the simplest explanation for the aging process is that it happens for the same reason that we change as we grow up. It would make sense to me that the same clock (mechanism) that triggers children to grow a second set of teeth right around age 5, grow pubic hair as they enter their teen years, or stop getting taller in their latter teens, is the same clock that triggers a decline in other cellular functions later in life. Of course, many things in science are not as straight forward as I might think.

I am afraid that “the best medical technology” of today might add an average of 5 years but won’t generally get people up much above their 100s. Applying available interventions based on the best scientific knowledge of aging today (most of which is not practiced in medicine) might add an average of about 10 years to lives. This is a lot when you think about it. However, I think that in 5 years more or so, the available knowledge might add an average of 15 years more. So, if people can keep alive and healthy for a time, even old people like me, they might have a chance to live a lot longer.
See my blog posts Giuliano’s Law: Prospects for breaking through the 122 year human age limit at http://anti-agingfirewalls.com/2009/03/26/giuliano%e2%80%99s-law-prospects-for-breaking-through-the-122-year-human-age-limit/ and also More on Giuliano’s Law; calculating my longevity prospects at http://anti-agingfirewalls.com/2009/03/28/more-on-giuliano%e2%80%99s-law-calculating-my-longevity-prospects/

And thanks for your feedback on the site. I will be doing my best.
Vince

Here is someone who may make it to 110+,
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/19/at-108-still-pulsing-with-vigor/
I always wondered if you could take a cohort of people in their 90s, 100s & 110s and apply the best medical technology today (and the future) would they break the 120s and beyond.

And add your Firewall Plan. 30-40 years is min-century and a lot will probably happen with medical technology. Good site and I’ll have to go and study.

I am doing my best to keep going, and, yes, there is a strong need for an interdisciplinary viewpoint if any sense is to be made of all the various theories of aging. My treatise http://www.vincegiuliano.name/Antiagingfirewalls.htm
and this blog are my own attempts to contribute to an overall systems viewpoint of aging that is not stuck in any particular discipline.

I will have a look at the links you suggest and get back here about that.
Vince

Your going strong with your research. I think I might have to buy some textbooks on genetics, stems cells, etc. just to catch up. I have also noticed a need for more cross-disciplinary awareness among researchers in my readings.

For current men job one is to be a four-percenter:
http://www.grg.org/Adams/E.HTM
http://www.supercentenarian-research-foundation.org/

And hopefully in the upcoming decades that % will increase with better health through research and its application.

Possibly a routine practice will be developed in the future of storing frozen amniotic fluid cells (if they keep) when a bably is born so they can be used years later for regeneration in that individual.
Vince

we’ll probably make more progress with hESC (cord blood, amniotic cell).