Is gerontology against progress in ageing research?
After watching the following keynote by David Sinclair presenting recent scientific findings around the prevention and possible reversing of ageing, I wondered about something: Are gerontologists against scientific discoveries preventing and delaying biological ageing?
Gerontology is the study of all aspects of ageing. I am particularly focusing on the social gerontology, that is the study of social processes around ageing. Examples of social gerontology research include the analysis of the role of older people in societies or the experience of end of life management within the healthcare system. In many ways, social gerontology is the study of the present state of ageing and looking very scarcely at potential futures of ageing.
Many researchers – including me – promote and lobby in favour of a change of popular mindset regarding ageing, whereby we would like individuals to enjoy, accept and embrace their later years, rather than dread, ignore and reject them. In this perspective, researchers working on postponing or even annihilating ageing belong to the opposite side of social gerontologists as they oppose ageing as a natural process. Quite on the contrary they work hard to obtain a breakthrough enabling human to extend their lifespans.
Is it untrue to observe this gap between those two groups of researchers? Are social gerontologists conservative to the point of opposing life extension research?
Very few healthy people are accepting their ageing and their future death. It is a natural behaviour to wish for more. However, fundamental research on ageing gives hope. It gives the hope that one day life may not end after 80 or so years. But hope is the enemy of acceptance. Isn’t it only once hope is completely gone that we can finally embrace our finitude and peacefully enter our end of life?
Is there a room for social gerontology that embraces scientific progress and fights ageing?
Ageing, Health & Society - a viewpoint 