New Paper Forthcoming

picture:  Alex Comfort, 1920-2000

Head of UCL’s MRC’s Group of Ageing 

I was very pleased to learn that my Opinion article titled "Responsible Biology, Aging Populations and the 50^th Anniversary of the “War on Cancer” has been accepted for publication in the science journal Biogerontology.  

The catalysts for writing this paper were three-fold:  

(1) this year is the 50th anniversary of Nixon's "war on cancer" and as such the time for taking stock of the pros and cons of prioritizing "disease elimination" in medical research is apt;

(2) I recently came across a real historical gem of an article by Alex Comfort (1969, "Longer life by 1990?" New Scientist 11: 549-551) which was written before Nixon's declaration of a war on cancer, so I wanted to link Comfort's article to the debate on what the priorities of scientific research ought to be in an aging world; and

(3) I also recently came across an article by Kitcher on "responsible biology" which maintains that scientists have an obligation, individually and collectively, to reflect on the ends—not just on the means— of scientific research and that they should conceive of themselves as artisans working for the public good.  So it provided a theoretical anchor for linking Comfort's argument to the ongoing disease-elimination strategies we currently prioritize.  

My article canvasses how, in the early 20th century in the US, the fixation on identifying and mitigating the proximate causation of disease was an integral part of responsible biology.  However by the late 20th century the goal of eliminating the chronic diseases of late life (like cancer) was yielding diminishing diminishing health dividends for aging populations.  Comfort's insight that tackling rate (of aging) control and striving to improve the quality of life for older persons was, sadly, neglected.  And this neglect must  be redressed if we are to improve the human healthspan vs continue down the untenable path of extending the amount of time humans survive by managing disease, frailty and disability. 

Here is the abstract:

The 50^th Anniversary of the National Cancer Act of 1971 is the opportune time to critically reflect on the determinates of what the philosopher of science Philip Kitcher calls “responsible biology”.  Responsible biology entails that scientists have an obligation to reflect on the ends, and not just the means, of scientific research and to conceive of themselves as artisans working for the public good.  Taking stock of the successes and limits of the half a century “war on cancer” reveals the importance of attending to the most significant risk factor for cancer and other chronic diseases- aging itself.  The case is made for considering the biology of aging, and the aspiration to slow the rate of biological aging, as critical components of responsible biology in an aging world.  As growing numbers of humans survive into late life, the primacy the goal of disease elimination occupies within biomedical research must be revised, and greater effort should be directed towards the goal of increasing the human healthspan and delaying and compressing disease, frailty and disability in late life.

Cheers, 

Colin