As discussed more extensively in the Full members section
Huber Warner, Julie Anderson, Steven Austad, Ettore Bergamini, Dale Bredesen, Robert Butler,
Bruce A.Carnes, Brian F. C. Clark,Vincent Cristofalo, John Faulkner, Leonard Guarente, David E.Harrison, Tom Kirkwood, Gordon Lithgow, George Martin, Ed Masoro, Simon Melov, Richard A.Miller, S. Jay Olshansky, Linda Partridge, Olivia Pereira-Smith, Tom Perls, Arlan Richardson, James Smith,Thomas von Zglinickik, Eugenia Wang, Jeanne Y.Wei & T.Franklin Williams
have recently (EMBO reports 2005 1006-1008) signed up to the following statement:
None of us, however, believes [sic.] that plans to ‘engineer’ the body to prevent ageing indefinitely or to turn old people young again have the remotest chance of success.
I understand that people are annoyed by De Grey "and his ilk".
I understand that people are sceptical about the SENS programme.
I understand that people are daunted by the challenge to stop aging.
But the above statement is much more fundamental. If that statement is indicative of the author's general attitude, then -from the perspective of a philosophy of science- there is some cause for concern.
A scientist who dismisses of a route of investigation entirely risks cognitive bias, which can compromise not only the interpretation of data, but also the extrapolation of scientific strategy and the peer review process.