In order to create good anti-aging material, or refer people to the best currently available material rather than bad material, it’s important to understand all sorts of different flaws anti-aging material may have.
Understanding flaws is a huge part of human learning. By criticism, we can find out what not to do, and identify opportunities to make an improvement or take a different (better) approach.
Below are some specific comments on flaws with anti-aging material. All of this material is stuff that some people thought was good as-is. I propose they were mistaken, and would have done it differently if they’d known more. And by pointing out criticism, people can learn and do better in the future.
Criticism is not a complete solution, but it’s an important step. Without knowing what’s wrong, it’s really hard to fix anything or make anything better. By carefully analyzing current efforts and their weaknesses, we can get a better understanding of where to direct future effort.
Some people regard criticism as overly negative, but it’s important to keep in mind the constructive purpose of criticism. Knowing about problems enables people the option to solve them or avoid them.
I hope that people will reply with further criticisms of this material and other material, in addition to proposed solutions or better approaches. All of that would contribute to our knowledge of how to do anti-aging advocacy.
On Dec 18, 2014, at 10:58 AM, John M. Johnny Adams, GRG Exec Director wrote:
> White paper abstract. Entire paper is available for purchase.
> Substantial Health And Economic Returns From Delayed Aging May Warrant A New Focus For Medical Research
I think it’s problematic to regard a paper as an important part of advocacy of ideas if it’s behind a nasty paywall. And the issue isn’t just your own access, a discussion needs everyone involved to have access. If you can give people a free link, it’s much easier to get discussion going.
 It’s only for rent, not purchase. So you can’t just take your time with it and refer back to it later. And a one day rental of the paper costs more than a book. I don’t think they are seriously trying to sell this to the public.
But I wonder if he meant this other paper. Regardless, I took a look at this one:
It’s a white paper from the healthspan campaign people who did the video. It’s available to the public. I think it has some flaws, I’ll talk about two to start with: