One of the many important points made by the advocacy community for rejuvenation research is that participants in the mainstream of medical science and medical regulation are not imbued with a great enough sense of urgency. We are all dying, and yet with each passing year the regulatory process moves ever more slowly, rejects an ever greater number of prospective therapies, becomes ever more expensive. The number of new therapies reaching the clinic falls. Regulators continue to reject the idea that treating aging is an acceptable goal in medicine. We live in an age of revolutionary progress in the capabilities of biotechnology, and yet patients must accept that new medicines are rare, and that fifteen years might pass between lab and clinic. This is not an industry moved by any sense of urgency.
Naturally, those who do see the urgency and are frustrated by the present state of medical development reach for different options. Some of those options are bad: cherry-picking research; testing interventions without evidence; self-experimentation without data or consideration of risk; building an industry to deliver supplements and other products that don’t perform as advertised. Some of those options are sound: responsible development
Article originally posted at