THE CASE FOR PARADIGM SHIFT
Thomas Kuhn used the term “paradigm” to describe the set of preconceptions that is assumed to represent objective reality in a particular field of science. It’s what “everyone knows” to be true about a subject without even thinking about it. Among the preconceptions that everyone knows to be true about aging are that the progressive loss of functionality suffered by organisms with advancing chronological age is the defining characteristic of an inevitable, irreversible, genetically inherited aging process. That set of preconceptions that we all believe to be true aboutwithout event thinking about them is the current aging paradigm. The section of this website entitled “The Current Paradigm” discusses the preconceptions, and demonstrates how, once one does actually think about them, they are inconsistent with objective reality. But from a scientific perspective, the most significant flaw in the current paradigm is that its fundamental preconception – that progressive loss of functionality is a genetically inherited trait – directly contradicts the principles of natural selection.
Assuming that one accepts the notion that the current paradigm is fatally flawed, what would be required in order for the scientific establishment to consider the proposed New Paradigm? This section of the website will make the case for a paradigm shift.
Kuhn identified three prerequisites for paradigm shift:
- The first prerequisite is dissatisfaction with the current paradigm.
- The second prerequisite is an accumulation of critical anomalies that cannot be explained within the current paradigm.
- The final prerequisite is the proposal of a new paradigm that explains the relevant anomalies and improves upon the conceptual framework.
Dissatisfaction with the Current Paradigm
The obvious scientific/theoretical reason to be dissatisfied with the current paradigm is that it is inconsistent with both empirical data and the scientific reality established by the Theory of Evolution. Those inconsistencies make it impossible to develop any scientific theories that would explain any of the phenomena that are purported to make up the aging phenomena. You can’t develop a scientific theory that explains why the earth is flat unless the earth is flat. Similarly, you can’t develop a theory that explains why the progressive loss of functionality suffered by organisms with advancing chronological age is a genetically inherited trait if it’s not. In the absence of scientific theories that explain why phenomena occur, it’s very difficult for scientists and medial practitioners to predict with any certainty what will happen to particular individuals as they undergo chronological aging.
The theoretical reasons why the current paradigm is flawed (and thus there should be dissatisfaction with the paradigm) were discussed in the section of the website entitled “The Current Paradigm.” This section includes two essays that discuss why we should be dissatisfied with the current aging paradigm from a practical standpoint.
The flaws in the current paradigm undermine the efforts of normal scientists to solve age-associated “puzzles.” The most intransigent age-associated puzzle is of course the declines in health suffered by the typical human with advancing chronological age. The practical ramifications of the inability of science to address age-associated disorders are appalling. Worse, as the population continues to age with no apparent hope for a solution to the FDS pandemic, the ramifications will significantly worsen. If the scientific and medical establishments continue to turn a blind eye to the need for a paradigm shift, the long-term consequences threaten to be calamitous.
The medical establishment does predictions about age-associated phenomena. But those predictions are based on statistical probabilities as opposed to cause and effect mandated by a scientific theory. Thus, such predictions tend to be accurate as a statistical matter for large cohorts of subjects, but are far less accurate when dealing with individual cases.
Age-Associated Degenerative Disorders
Aside from the horrific physical and emotional toll that the age-associated diseases take upon the inflicted subjects and their caregivers (especially the families and friends who provide informal caregiving services), the inability of the current paradigm to explain why humans suffer progressive physiological deterioration with advancing chronological age threatens to bankrupt our medical system. Despite all of our advances in medical technology, the medical establishment has had almost no success in addressing age-associated chronic degenerative diseases. Diseases such as osteoporosis, most cardiovascular disorders and dementia are recognized as clinical events only when an organ or system becomes critically dysfunctional. But that dysfunctionality is a symptom of FDS – it results from decades of accumulated damage in the affected organ or system. Under the current paradigm, that accumulated damage, and thus the resulting chronic degenerative disease, is presumed to be the natural result of the inevitable infirmities caused by the aging process. Thus in order to effectively address chronic degenerative disease, one must address aging. Since aging is presumed to be a genetically inherited trait, there is no solution to the problem of age-associated degenerative disease short of altering our DNA.
Since the paradigm is flawed, and offers no means of attacking the actual cause of the age-associated degenerative diseases (FDS), the medical establishment tends to use the same approach to age-associated degenerative disorders as it does to infectious diseases. But the approach to infectious diseases is successful because it is based on a scientific theory – the germ theory. That theory tells us that the cause of all infectious disorders is that a pathogen is attacking the organism. Thus creating vaccines and antibodies that assist the immune system in warding off or destroying the invading pathogen is an effective approach. The problem with using that same approach with respect to age-associated degenerative diseases is that there is no invading pathogen to attack.
The host of problems that arise from medical profession’s inability to formulate a coherent approach to preventing or curing age-associated degenerative disorders are discussed in the essay entitled “The Current Paradigm and Age-Associated Degenerative Disorders.”
Pharmaceutical Interventions
The pharmaceutical industry has been very successful in addressing infectious diseases. Their ability to apply modern technology to the scientific knowledge derived from the germ theory of disease has enabled them to achieve almost miraculous results. By working with the immune system to ward off invading pathogens, vaccines can help prevent disease. By working with the immune system to kill off pathogens that have invaded the body, antibiotics and similar pharmaceutical interventions can help cure diseases.
But with age-associated degenerative diseases there is no pathogen to ward off or vanquish. And under the current aging paradigm, there is no known cause for the age-associated degenerative diseases other than aging itself, which is assumed to be an inevitable and natural process. So instead of developing drugs that might prevent or cure the diseases, the pharmaceutical companies develop drugs that target risk factors or biomarkers for diseases. Those interventions frequently interfere with natural physiological processes, thus resulting in adverse side effects. Since the drugs don’t prevent or cure any disease, they are typically prescribed for years or decades.
Developing drugs is risky, expensive and time-consuming process, and those factors are taken into account when the developer prices the drugs. Thus drugs tend to be very expensive. If the drug results in preventing or curing the disease, as is typically the case with drugs for infectious diseases, the drug confers a net financial benefit on the medical system. However, where, as is the case with drugs developed for age-associated degenerative diseases, the drugs merely slow the progress of the disease or ameliorate some of the symptoms, there is no reduction in the other costs associated with the disease. The expensive new drug is just an added financial burden. With the ever-expanding number of elderly people in the country, the costs of treating age-associated disorders threatens to overwhelm the system.
These issues are discussed in the essay entitled “Pharmaceutical Interventions for Age-Associated Diseases.”
Anomalies
Kuhn’s second prerequisite for a paradigm shift is the existence of anomalies. Anomalies are phenomena that are inconsistent what is expected to be observed under the then-current paradigm. The classic example is planets. Under the Ptolemaic paradigm, all of the points of light that are visible in the night sky are assumed to be stars that are affixed to a slowly rotating dome around the stationary earth. Planets moved in a way that was inconsistent with them being affixed to a rotating dome. Thus they were an anomaly.
Each of the ways in which one of the preconceptions of the current aging paradigm is inconsistent with objective reality is an anomaly. In addition to the misconceptions discussed in the essay entitled “Misconceptions Embodied in the Aging Paradigm,” there are a number of other phenomena that are inconsistent with what the aging paradigm would predict. For example, under the current paradigm it is typically presumed that intrinsic damage is caused by wear and tear, or entropy. Thus one would expect that increased physical activity would increase the rate at which intrinsic damage is incurred, thus accelerating the rate at which the symptoms of FDS appear. But the reality is that increased physical activity typically slows the progress of most symptoms of FDS. On the other hand, environmental conditions that would tend to reduce wear and tear, such as bed rest and the absence of gravity, can greatly accelerate the progression of the symptoms of FDS.
The essay entitled “Anomalies” discusses a number of unexplainable anomalies. Adherents to the aging paradigm ignore these anomalies, deflect them, or accept rationales for them. But ignoring the anomalies or accepting rationales does not eliminate the existence of the anomalies. The fact that the existing paradigm predicts results that science has established to be contrary to objective reality alone is sufficient to suggest that an alternative paradigm must be considered. “When persistent efforts by the best researchers fail to resolve the anomalies, the community begins to lose confidence in the paradigm and a crisis period ensues in which serious alternatives can now be entertained.”[i]
[i] Nickles, T. (2017). Scientific Revolutions. In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Aging in Other Species
A fundamental preconception of the current paradigm is that all species are subject to a similar biological aging process. Thus the current paradigm predicts that one should observe signs of diminished functionality in members of other species at a relatively young age. The stunning anomaly is that for over 75 years, aging theorists have been aware of the empirical fact that, in their evolutionary environment, no species other than homo sapiens ever evidences any age-associated diminution in functionality. That’s because they all die as the result of non-age-associated causes (starvation, predators, etc.) before showing any signs of functional decline.
The reason that we observe age-associated diminutions in functionality in domesticated animals is that the maintenance systems of all species have a chronological limitation, with that limitation being a function of the natural lifespan of the species. The natural lifespan of a species is the length of time until substantially all members of the species necessarily die as the result of non-aging related causes in the evolutionary environment.
In its evolutionary environment no animal species ever experiences the progressive loss of functionality that is the defining characteristic of human biological aging. But the typical human evidences diminishing functionality early in the third decade of life. That would not be possible if animal aging and human aging were the same phenomenon. Moreover, since intrinsic damage is an inexorable force, the empirical fact that animal species show no signs of aging during their natural lifespans proves that fully effective maintenance systems are not only possible, but are the norm.
These concepts are discussed in the essay entitled “Aging in Other Species.”
New Paradigm
Kuhn’s final prerequisite for paradigm shift is the proposal of a new paradigm that explains the relevant anomalies and improves upon the conceptual framework. The Institute created this website in order to introduce just such a paradigm. The proposed New Paradigm is consistent both with all empirical observations and with the principles of natural selection. It offers simple explanations for all of the anomalies that the current paradigm is unable to explain, and creates an improved conceptual framework that will usher in a scientific revolution. The New Paradigm is discussed in the section of this website entitled “The New Paradigm.”
This essay is a summary of the concepts discussed in the four essays that comprise this section of the website. Set forth below are links that will take you to each of the more detailed essays.