Scan barcode
A review by deepkiwireader
Lifespan: Why We Age--And Why We Don't Have to by David A. Sinclair, Matthew D. Laplante
5.0
Brilliantly written book, advanced topics of biology, biochemistry, genetics, bioinformatics, data science being well interpreted, anyone able to read should be able to get the message which is that....
Aging can be prevented and perhaps reversed. Far too long have we seen aging as an inevitable part of life, yet we allow medical interventions to prolonge life and willingly extend suffering. There is nothing natural about it, as the superior beings on this planet we have gained power over nature, we can prevent disease, bring people back from the dead, modifying our environment to benefit us - what part of this sounds natural? Where have we put the limit in terms of ethics? What do we consider as natural anymore?
That brings us to the point of this book which is that aging is a disease and we could prevent it, the science is promising and the natural world has no rules on it. This is an exciting field that everyone should be concerned about.
Many quotes stuck with me such as:
- "the fight against aging isn’t about ending death; it’s about prolonging healthy life and giving more people the chance to meet death on far better terms" - Sinclair explains with a real life example of how people wouldn't want to become old, being old is seen as unattractive, however, if they were to retain their age, they would want to live indefinitely. It brings to the point that death is inevitable but the diseases and suffering associated with aging doesn't have to be inevitable.
-"adults who get sick stop making money and contributing to society at the same time they start costing a whole lot to keep alive" - A case against the concept of retirement, allowing people to work until they choose when not to, enabling a sense of purpose after 65 - in all honesty it's a lot of wasted potential that could further advance society.
Aging can be prevented and perhaps reversed. Far too long have we seen aging as an inevitable part of life, yet we allow medical interventions to prolonge life and willingly extend suffering. There is nothing natural about it, as the superior beings on this planet we have gained power over nature, we can prevent disease, bring people back from the dead, modifying our environment to benefit us - what part of this sounds natural? Where have we put the limit in terms of ethics? What do we consider as natural anymore?
That brings us to the point of this book which is that aging is a disease and we could prevent it, the science is promising and the natural world has no rules on it. This is an exciting field that everyone should be concerned about.
Many quotes stuck with me such as:
- "the fight against aging isn’t about ending death; it’s about prolonging healthy life and giving more people the chance to meet death on far better terms" - Sinclair explains with a real life example of how people wouldn't want to become old, being old is seen as unattractive, however, if they were to retain their age, they would want to live indefinitely. It brings to the point that death is inevitable but the diseases and suffering associated with aging doesn't have to be inevitable.
-"adults who get sick stop making money and contributing to society at the same time they start costing a whole lot to keep alive" - A case against the concept of retirement, allowing people to work until they choose when not to, enabling a sense of purpose after 65 - in all honesty it's a lot of wasted potential that could further advance society.