This is very old news for anyone who participates in the aging research community, but a significant fraction of the leading researchers of recent generations are either not interested in or actively opposed to efforts to extend human life. Leonard Hayflick, for whom the Hayflick limit is named, is in this camp. This is one of the contributing factors in the story of how research and funding institutions spent decades working to suppress any inclination among their members to try to treat aging as a medical condition. It is arguably the case that we could be much further ahead than we are today on the road to human rejuvenation – even given the lesser technological capabilities twenty and thirty years ago, meaningful progress towards, for example, senolytic drugs might have been made in a world in which treating aging was considered seriously by those who steered research strategy.
The potential for undying tyrants or tyrannical bodies is one reason Leonard Hayflick, one of the world’s preeminent experts on aging, is against slowing down or eliminating the aging process. He has other reasons, too. “To slow, or even arrest, the aging
Article originally posted at