[extropy-chat] Kurzweil and aging

[Eugen Leitl]

On Sat, Dec 10, 2005 at 06:05:54AM -0500, TC wrote:

> "When I was forty, my biological age was around thirty-eight. Although I am
> now fifty-six, a comprehensive test of my biological aging (measuring
> various sensory sensitivities, lung capacity, reaction times, memory, and
> related tests) conducted at Grossman's longevity clinic measured my
> biological age at forty. Although there is not yet a consensus on how to
> measure biological age, my scores on these tests matched population norms
> for this age. So, according to this set of tests, I have not aged very much
> in the last sixteen years, which is confirmed by the many blood tests I
> take, as well as the way I feel."
> 
> What?  Taking that at face value would imply he'd live to a good 350 or so,

He doesn't claim that. He claims that he hasn't aged, according to a set
of metrics, in the last sixteen years. There's no value statement about how much
these metrics are worth, nor what's going to happen when he's approaching
centenarian country.

> and I have a hard time believing that's what he's saying here.  And if not,
> what relevance at all does that "biological age" hold?  Anyone have a
> clarification?

To clear your confusion, head straight to http://www.grg.org/

-- 
Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820            http://www.ativel.com
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20051210/ea830130/attachment.bin>