Warren Buffet's 37 billion $ donation, and not 1 cent for anti-aging research !

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

adjuster@myway.com - 30 Jun 2006 01:23 GMT

With the industrialized countries facing a rapidly aging
population, 37 billion dollars

is given away with no money at all going to anti-aging or de-aging
research. There is a

wonderfull effort to deal with these problems, it just needs the
funding support such a

thing deserves by its universal nature; everyone that survives will get
old sooner or later.

See:
http://www.mprize.org/
or
http://www.sens.org/

A tiny, tiny fraction of one percent of this 37 billion, would
increase anti-aging

funding enormously.

Reply to this Message

Messalina - 30 Jun 2006 03:08 GMT

> With the industrialized countries facing a rapidly aging
> population, 37 billion dollars
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
>
> funding enormously.

What do you care? Its obviously too late to help you.

Mez

Reply to this Message

Agent Smith - 30 Jun 2006 18:06 GMT

adjuster@myway.com wrote in news:1151627023.741634.260430
@d56g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:

> With the industrialized countries facing a rapidly aging
> population, 37 billion dollars
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> A tiny, tiny fraction of one percent of this 37 billion, would
> increase anti-aging funding enormously.

Nah, Buffet is smart enough to believe in *real* science.

Reply to this Message

Fire Chief - 06 Jul 2006 01:44 GMT

> A tiny, tiny fraction of one percent of this 37 billion, would
> increase anti-aging funding enormously.

We all age and we're all gonna go someday.

... My mind is fine but my forgetter is better.

Reply to this Message

Mary_Gordon@tvo.org - 06 Jul 2006 17:09 GMT

I know we see aging as a huge big deal in the west, but in the bigger
picture, the world is full of people who never have the priviledge of
living to old age due to disease.

I can't disagree with setting priorities on research spending - first
deal with the diseases and problems that kill or disable younger people
in their most productive years throughout so much of the world. Once
those problems are licked, you can deal with extending lives in our
relatively healthy western world from old to even older.

M.

Reply to this Message

ladylove77 - 06 Jul 2006 20:27 GMT

I agree with you Mary, and from a personal viewpoint. I am 77, live alone,
drive my car, look after myself, and go when I want to go (or feel like
it!). But--I have heart disease, lung disease, osteoarthritis, hypothyroid,
border-line kidney problems, etc, etc. Some days (but rarely) I feel really
good, but most days I just feel so-so, if not bad. I've had a hip
replacement, thumb joint replacement, two surgeries on right foot, 10
surgeries altogether, and don't feel that this body deserves research money
spent on it rather than on diseases that affect children and young families.
I have outlived my husband of 54 years, and my grandchildren are 17 & 19,
and two older and married. I have had a full life and can't complain at all
if God calls me home in the next few minutes. Younger people have so much
ahead of them, and if research can help them to stay healthier and therefore
happier, then by all means spend the money on research for them. JMHO.
Gwen

>I know we see aging as a huge big deal in the west, but in the bigger
> picture, the world is full of people who never have the priviledge of
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> M.

Reply to this Message