A Struggle for Legitimacy

Anti-Aging Medicine and Research: A Realm of Conflict and Profound Societal Implications
http://biomed.gerontologyjournals.org/cgi/reprint/59/6/B523


In his 2004 article Anti-Aging Medicine and Research: A Realm of Conflict and Profound Societal Implications, published in the Journal of Gerontology, Robert H. Binstock explained the war on anti-aging medicine and its fight to gain legitimacy. One of the most interesting things about all the discredits toward anti-aging medicine is that they come from its core supporters and researchers.
The reasons behind these campaigns against anti-aging are merely efforts for the true facts and research to gain legitimacy, and to educate the public on fraudulent or misleading anti-aging claims. Multiple conferences to focus on these fraudulent marketing tactics and editorial denunciations have been made by major leaders in world of anti-aging medicine such as the U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging and the editor-in-chief of Experimental Gerontology.
Anti-aging medicinal practices have not yet been perfected and gerontological researchers want to warn the public of possible serious adverse effects such as diabetes, glucose intolerance, cancer, dementia, coronary heart disease, stroke and pulmonary embolism. Researchers believe that keeping the public from engaging in these ineffective practices will prevent them from opting out of future practices that will actually be safe and effective.
The fight to gain this legitimacy is a smart one. Gerontological researchers know that they need the optimism to keep their current political and scientific legitimacy as well as maintain funding and support for a successful future. Binstock explains that gerontologists are merely trying to separate themselves from the mythical hunters of the “Fountain of Youth,” but rather be viewed as established biological and medical researchers.