Some things tend not to work so well for science - things that rely on substantial written contributions by key experts are a case in point - but even there I tend to keep an open mind, because it may just be a case of finding the right formula.

Ageing is, simply and clearly, the accumulation of damage in the body. That's all that ageing is.

There is no difference between saving lives and extending lives, because in both cases we are giving people the chance of more life.

Theres nothing wrong with making the best of ones declining years, but what does annoy me is the fatalism. Now that were seriously in range of finding therapies that actually work against ageing, this apathy, of course, becomes an enormous part of the problem.

The aim is to postpone frailty, postpone degenerative disease, debilitation and so on and thereby shorten the period at the end of life, which is passed in a decrepit or disabled state, while extending life as a whole.

It's not just about life, of course; it's about healthy life. Getting frail and miserable and dependent is no fun, whether or not dying may be fun.

If you look at winners of the Nobel Prize in biology, you'll find a fair smattering of people who don't know how to work a pipette.