Science fact and the SENS agenda

In an article published in the EMBO reports Special Issue on Time and Ageing, Aubrey D.N.J. de Grey criticizes biogerontologists for what he sees as their generally pessimistic view of the possibilities for intervening in the ageing process (de Grey, 2005). In his view, “resistance [of biogerontologists] to debate on how to postpone ageing is delaying progress and costing lives.” de Grey believes he has formulated a research plan that, in his words, will “stop people from getting frailer and more prone to life‐threatening diseases as they get older, and moreover [will] restore the already frail to youthful vitality”. Similar to vintage cars maintained by careful mechanics, individuals will then retain this happy state “indefinitely … even at ages many times what we reach today”. In de Grey's opinion, “the failure of most biogerontologists to maintain an open mind concerning the scientific options … [has] the result that much longer healthy lives are being denied those who will die before ’real anti‐aging medicine' arrives.” In the words of the great American journalist H.L. Mencken, “for every complex problem, there is a simple solution, and it is wrong.” de Grey's research programme, which he terms ’strategies for engineered negligible senescence' (SENS), involves a combination of preventative and therapeutic interventions (de Grey, 2003). To solve the problem of apoptosis in senescent cells, one simply uses “senescence marker‐tagged toxins”. To cure cancer, one just calls on “total telomerase deletion plus cell therapy”. To prop up the failing immune system, one can turn on “IL‐7 mediated thymopoiesis”. To reverse mitochondrial mutations, one need only use “allotopic [mitochondrial]‐coded proteins” of the type favoured by algae. Cell replacement can be accomplished by “stem cell therapy and growth factors”, whereas retooling the endocrine system relies on “genetically engineered muscle”. Cleavage of glycosylation crosslinks will involve periodic exposure …