aging process will also increase the maximum lifespan so that a few individuals will live to, say 110 to 120 years.

Establishment and adequate funding of the proposed National Institute of Gerontology would significantly increase the level of biomedical aging research, presently only about $4 million per year, by drawing the attention of the scientific community to this important basic biologic problem. It is a very reasonable possibility that pursuit of the leads we already have regarding the nature of the aging process will result in significant increases in average life expectancy with concomitant increase in the years of useful healthy life.

In addition to funding unsolicited biomedical aging research applications, an important function of the proposed Institute should be to actively expand current and future research ideas that show promise of leading to practical means of increasing the healthy lifespan of man. Attention should also be given to measuring the effectiveness of proposed antiaging measures in man. This Institute-directed work would in essence accomplish the purposes for which S. 1925 has been introduced.

Irrespective of any future advances in our ability to control the aging process and the degenerative disease, most individuals will eventually join the ranks of the aged. The major problem in the aged is the maintenance of functional capability-both mental and physicalto the maximum practical extent so as to make life worth living for as long as possible.

This is a complex medical, social-psychological problem to which the proposed Institute should devote significant, continuous attention.

In summary, aging is a major biological process. It is this process that now nullifies our efforts to increase the average lifespan. The proposed Institute of Gerontology should:

(a) Significantly increase our knowledge of aging, and, quite likely, result in practical means of increasing our years of health life, and (b) Aid in making the declining years of life happier and more worthwhile.

Senator EAGLETON. Thank you, Doctor.

I think your presentation, although brief, is a very, very fitting analysis of summary of almost the entire testimony of today.

Dr. HARMAN. I would like to emphasize a couple of points. Aging might be looked upon as a prime example of built-in obsolescence. Mother Nature has determined that each species will live a certain amount of time.

We need to know what determines the rate of aging. The process is apparently the same in all mammalian species. To understand the nature of the so-called biological clock and how to control its rate should be a major focus of biomedical aging research. If we can slow up the clock we can get more years of healthy life.

I think it is worth pointing out that if we could eliminate today all the usual causes of death, such as cancer or cardiovascular diseases, we would gain at the most about 15 years of life. If we could eliminate cancer, we would gain about 22 years of average life expectancy while the corresponding figure for cardiovascular diseases is around 10 years. If we could eliminate everything, a facet 15 years. In other words, our life potential maximum average expectancy vears more than that which we enjoy right now.

is e

Senator EAGLETON. You don't think we are ever going to get to the point of the 2,000-year-old man?

Dr. HARMON. I think there is a lot of wishful thinking.

I would like to also point out that we have been focusing on the visible problems on the aged, the end result of the aging process, on cardiovascular diseases and cancer, all problems made visible by the aging process.

All the interest and effort has been going into these visible problems; it is something like trying to eliminate an iceberg by breaking off the top and ignoring the far greater mass below the surface.

It is almost certain that future significant increases in life expectancy will only be achieved by slowing up the aging process.

We have researched leads today in the field of aging which need to be pursued. We need to work out methods of measuring the rate of aging in ourselves.

I should also point out that I have been talking not just about physical aging, but mental aging as well; this is basically a reflection of the changes taking place in the cells of the central nervous system.

Senator EAGLETON. Doctor, are you familiar at all with the project that Dr. Eisdorfer talked about that is possibly going to be canceled? Dr. HARMAN. You mean the longitudinal study. Yes. I think it should be most unfortunate to have that study canceled. This has provided us an excellent study. I would hate very much to see that project terminated.

Senator EAGLETON. Could you describe for the record what the American Aging Association is? It is abbreviated as AGE.

Dr. HARMAN. The reason it came out that way was we couldn't make age come out

Senator EAGLETON. That would be the American Automobile Association.

Dr. HARMAN. So we figured in time AGE would become synonymous with American Aging Association.

This association basically had its organization 10 to 15 years ago. People in the Gerontology Society, particularly in the biological sciences section, had become increasingly concerned with the need for more research in the field of biological aging and about a year and a half ago it was decided to try to do something about it. The American Aging Association was formed last fall as a lay scientific organization with three purposes in mind:

First, to promote biomedical aging research; second, to promote among the public a knowledge of preventive medicine and keep them informed of the progress of biomedical aging research; and, third, concern for the health care of the aged because we are concerned as a group with the overall problem of increasing our years of healthy life.

Senator EAGLETON. Thank you very much for your testimony and your observations, and my thanks to all the witnesses who have appeared today and for the interested individuals in the audience.

We will have a hearing once again tomorrow in the same room, room 4232, at 9:30 a.m.

At this point I order printed for the record all statements and other material from interested persons who were unable to be with us today. (The following was subsequently supplied for the record :)

1-2.

Statement on a Bill to Create an Institute of Gerontology

at the

National Institutes of Health

and

On a Bill to Create a Commission on Aging Research

by

Bernard L. Strehler*

Professor of Biology

University of Southern California

Los Angeles 90007

June 1, 1971

*Ph.D. 1950, the Johns Hopkins University (under W. D. McElroy, Director of the National Science Foundation); Director of Biology Training and Research on Aging at the University of Southern California, Gerontology Center; Author of ca 100 research publications mostly on the molecular biology of the aging process and a text "Time, Cells and Aging, Academic Press, 1962; Executive Chairman of the Association for the Advancement of Aging Research; Chairman of the Board, Southern California Aging Association (a branch of AGE--American Aging Association--a lay-scientific foundation devoted to the sponsorship of research in this area); Editor of "Advances in Gerontological Research," Academic Press, New York; Editor-in-Chief of "Mechanisms of Aging and Development," Elsevier Publishing Company (1972); Vice Chairman, California White House Conference Task Force on Research and Demonstration.

3.

I am pleased to respond to your request for a statement

on pending legislation affecting research on aging, specifically the bills introduced by Senator Williams and by Senator Eagleton. No two bills are of more vital importance in improving the prospects for the health and well-being of each American as he approaches the last third of his or her life.

Why are the benefits in human terms implicit in these bills so enormous? Essentially, because there is no single

feature of the human situation which produces more universal loss and suffering, both physical and mental, than the up-tonow inevitable process of aging.

For this reason, I, and the organizations I am priviledged to speak for, heartily endorse both the intent and content of these bills and urge, in the strongest possible terms that they be enacted into law. As was pointed out in the report of the California White House Conference on Aging Task Force on Research and Demonstration, "the potentialities (implicit in this legislation) surpass and outweigh any partisan advantages or parochial opportunities. The issue is the maximization of

the physical, mental and spiritual well-being of every American now living."

The Opportunity Represented By the Pending Legislation

From the point of view of the research community

dedicated to the understanding of the aging process and

thereby to the moderation of its effects in the near future,

4.

the history of the last decade can be summarized as one of lost opportunity and heartbreaking neglect by the government. At the same time that man was placing his machines and emissaries on the moon, he all but ignored the most universal of all natural processes that affect him adversely--aging. While hundreds of billions were spent in possibly bringing the opportunity for a free-life to a few million people in strange and distant lands, a few tens of millions were spent on research which will benefit every human being now alive. During a period in which 12 billion is spent per year on cigarette consumption, less than 1/3000th of that amount is spent per annum in developing an understanding of the source of that deterioration with time and age that sets the stage for degenerative diseases; while local and federal budgets are drowned in self-perpetuating and spiraling expenditures--largely for children whose parents are unwilling to support them, the children of yesterday, the present aged,-who built this country are suffering from degenerative diseases that prudent research investment could have ameliorated or prevented. In short, while almost all

immediate needs are given attention and frequently disproportionate funding, our species seems less and less interested in providing for its future, particularly the health of each of us in later life.

I believe the evidence is clear that a minimum investment now in the proposed National Institute of Gerontology and in the development and implementation of an overall plan for research to unravel the mystery of aging and control it to the extent possible is one of the very best investments our