It's a tough call on these two. OTOH, as pioneers even if they failed they should be lauded, in the early '80s there was nothing like their book, the stuff like Adele Davis that came before didn have a scientific character.

OTOH. they are not 80 and both what they looked like 20+ ya and the fact that they won't show themselves speak for themselves.

80 isn't that old and substantial numbers of people reach it in good shape with nothing more than common sense and decent genes. I understand how their financial interests and possibly pride keep them from showing themselves but it's still disappointing that they can't be truthful and forthcoming.

Pity because so much more is known now and the field of anti aging is incomparably more advanced than in their time but their character prevents them from being lauded as the pioneers they in fact were.

On Thursday, July 27, 2023 at 5:36:32 AM UTC, Juan Daugherty wrote:
> It's a tough call on these two. OTOH, as pioneers even if they failed they should be lauded, in the early '80s there was nothing like their book, the stuff like Adele Davis that came before didn have a scientific character.
>
> OTOH. they are not 80 and both what they looked like 20+ ya and the fact that they won't show themselves speak for themselves.
>
> 80 isn't that old and substantial numbers of people reach it in good shape with nothing more than common sense and decent genes. I understand how their financial interests and possibly pride keep them from showing themselves but it's still disappointing that they can't be truthful and forthcoming.
>
> Pity because so much more is known now and the field of anti aging is incomparably more advanced than in their time but their character prevents them from being lauded as the pioneers they in fact were.

*both are now 80