Dr. Ronald Klatz, anti-aging pioneer and founder of the American Longevity Research Institute (1984), challenges mainstream narratives by exposing suppressed research—like HGH’s proven benefits—while critiquing the National Institute on Aging’s retractions tied to Social Security concerns. He predicts 50% of baby boomers may live past 100, citing telomerase and environmental interventions over genetics, but warns of elite-controlled immortality risks. Speculating on British Telecom’s "Soul Catcher" (2025) and IBM’s neural chips, Klatz raises ethical alarms about digital consciousness and government surveillance, framing bodily autonomy as essential even amid potential 300-year lifespans. The episode underscores how science, ethics, and policy collide when defying nature’s reproductive limits. [Automatically generated summary]
From the high desert and the great American Southwest, I bid you all good evening or good morning, whatever may be the case in your time zone.
And there are so many stretching from the Tahitian and Hawaiian Island chain, southwest eastward to the Caribbean, the U.S. Virgin Islands, south into South America, north all the way to Santa Country at the Pole, and worldwide on the internet, thank youbroadcast.com.
This is Coast to Coast AM and I'm RBL.
Great to be here.
Involves you personally.
How would you like to live forever?
Dr. Ronald Klatz is recognized as a leading authority in the new clinical science of anti-aging medicine.
He is the founder and the president of the American Longevity Research Institute, a not-for-profit foundation established in 1984, pioneered the exploration of new therapies for the treatment and prevention of age-related degenerative diseases, president of the American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine, a scientific medical society which is exploring advances in biotechnology and preventative health care.
Dr. Klatz oversees educational programs for more than 4,300 physicians and scientists from 40 different countries.
Now, this is a man who says we are on the edge of immortality.
This is a heavyweight in his field.
Dr. Klatz is a graduate of Florida Technological University in the College of Osteopathic Medicine and Surgery, Des Moines, Iowa, and is a board-certified.
You know, I could go on and on and on like this.
His credentials are absolutely impeccable.
He's here tonight to talk about new technology.
The kind of stuff, by the way, Dr. Seed in Chicago is proceeding.
And in a very interesting way, they kind of shut him down.
Dr. Seed said, well, then fine.
I'll clone myself.
And I'll take my, I believe she's post a menstrual wife, and we'll cocate her with my seed, the seed of seed.
And there'll be a new seed like the old seed.
Anyway, this is beginning to sound like the election, so I'll be back in a moment with Dr. Klatz.
So if I were to read about Dr. Klatz's qualifications, I'd be reading for the whole hour here, so I won't do that.
Suffice it to say, Dr. Klatz, the man you're about to hear, is a heavyweight in his field.
You know, in biology, we've talked for many years about the Hayflick constant.
Leonard Hayflick out in California did some interesting research back in the 60s.
And what he showed was that, contrary to what was previously the thought at the time, that you can't keep a human cell or a mammalian cell reproducing ad infinitum.
That there was a certain preset limit to the amount of times that a cell would duplicate.
A mammalian cell would duplicate about 50 to 70 times depending on the cell.
So what that meant was that there was a built-in limit to the lifespan of the organism that was actually sent into the cell.
That's because our immune system starts to fail as we get older.
But the cell itself has certain pre-programmed limits into it.
And one's called M1, and interestingly, the second one's called M2.
And these limits of cell reproduction prevent the cell from reproducing on and on and on and on.
Interestingly, cancer cells don't have those limits.
And because of that, they can reproduce infinitely.
Now, that's why cancer kills you, because the cells don't know when to stop, and they just keep growing and growing and growing And cutting off, absorbing the blood supply and nutrients for other cells and choking out the healthy cells.
Okay, but this is something you and I talked about last time, and I said to you then and say to you now: in a way, the cancerous growth that kills us, if we could figure it out, would be what would keep us alive nearly indefinitely if we could get it under control.
That is true, and that's a very fertile area of research right now.
It has to do with telamerase or these end pieces of the DNA molecule, which apparently house at least one of the time clocks of aging.
And that these cells, as they get, you know, every time they reproduce, these telomeres at the end pieces of the DNA start to shorten a click at a time.
And after about 50 clicks or so, the cell suddenly says, oh, too many reproductions.
I'm not going to reproduce anymore.
Or I'm going to slow down my reproductive rate.
So we're getting a handle on different drugs and different ways of kind of beating the clock of the cells of our body.
And when we can do that, then we're talking about practical immortality.
Well, you know, there's a lot of different philosophy around the aspects of aging.
And I suppose the best explanation and the most prevalent explanation that's out there right now is that nature, when nature evolved man, nature really, well, forget man, when nature evolves anything, nature is really not concerned about that creature after it reaches the age of sexual reproduction.
As long as you can reproduce sexually and cast your progeny into the future, that's when nature is done with you.
And so anything after that is like bonus time.
And so man was only really designed to live to be about 20 to 25 years of age.
And if you look back in the historic record, if you believe we've been on the planet for 2.2 million years, according to the common belief, at least, of the fossil record, then for the first 2.1 million years, life expectancy was only 18 to 25 years of age.
Personally, now, if you suddenly had the opportunity to live on to, I don't know, hundreds of years or even immortality itself, a boring physical catastrophe, would you opt to do that?
But there would be potentially some downsides to it, wouldn't there?
I mean, yes, most of us, I guess, would opt to stay alive, but there might come a time when people would opt, you know, get bored with it or something.
Well, yes, and that's really what anti-aging medicine, I think, philosophically is all about.
It's about having the opportunity to live your life as fully and completely as is possible.
Many of us believe that anti-aging medicine is about freedom.
It's the ultimate freedom.
It's about the freedom to choose your destiny in the world, at least your health care destiny, and not to be sidelined by something as foolish as a cancer or a heart attack or a stroke or diabetes.
I mean, you know, these are relatively new diseases.
Our grandparents, you know, were dropping over dead from diarrhea and dysentery and tuberculosis and smallpox and polio.
And now anyone who gets that, it's kind of like it's such an anachronism, it's almost unbelievable.
It's almost unheard of.
Our children, you know, and probably even ourselves, most of the people who are listening to this, the Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine is predicting that 50% of the baby boomers who are alive today will see their 100th birthday and beyond in excellent health.
But our children certainly will think of heart disease, cancer, and diabetes and stroke as anachronisms.
So anti-aging medicine is about having that freedom to live your life free from the fears, the awful boogeymen of the major killers that we experience today, and being able to plan for a lifespan of 100, 120, 150 years of health, vitality, so that you can essentially do everything you want to do in this world.
And when your time comes to check out, well, how better to do it than at a time of your own choosing?
Healthy and good looking, who wants to go like Presley, right?
No, I understand that point of view, but what about this?
As you age, even if you make it to 100, 110, 120, whatever, there are going to be certain degenerative Processes that are going to limit your quality of life, even if you stop the major killers, the cancers, the heart disease, the strokes, the diabetes, other degenerative things begin to happen to you.
They were originally supposed to be complete, I believe, in 2007.
Now they're talking about, well, they're already over 75% complete now, and they're talking about being totally complete by 2001, which is fantastic technology because it will usher in all of the genetic engineering technologies along with it.
Okay, well right now, with 75, actually more than 75% of the human genome mapped, what we're doing is almost on a daily basis, we're finding new genetic markers for disease.
And what that's telling us is we're developing new tests to tell whether you're at risk for Alzheimer's disease, heart disease, Parkinson's disease, whatever, whatever, whatever.
That we're finding that all these diseases have a genetic component to them.
Now, the next step is to, once, the human genome is, the DNA is kind of, not kind of, is literally the software that we run on, the software that our biology runs on.
And so what we're doing is we're deciphering that software code, and we're learning where the flip switches are on the DNA molecules that turn on this protein or that protein or this cell function or that cell function.
There's an awful lot that we're learning that we can do to prevent Alzheimer's disease and all these other diseases of aging that by foresight is really almost as good as treatment.
Because once you know what the mechanism of the disease is, let's talk about Alzheimer's disease for a second.
We're beginning to understand what's causing Alzheimer's disease.
And it's an aberrant protein.
It appears that it's an aberrant protein, a beta-amyloid protein that's produced within the brain that shouldn't be there.
And this protein creates an inflammatory process within the brain, just like if you had a splinter in your arm and your arm turned red and swollen and tender.
And after a period of time, this inflammation leads to brain cell damage and then finally to brain cell death.
And so we're finding that the best way, of course, would be to prevent that amyloid protein from developing.
But some of the other things that we're developing right now are drugs that reverse that amyloid protein after it has developed and actually make it disappear.
And other things we're finding are if you give anti-inflammatories, even if you have the amyloid protein, you don't have as much inflammation.
Without as much inflammation, you don't lose the cells and your brain doesn't die.
I've heard it said that if we can just make it another 30, 35 years, if you can make it another 30, 35 years, they may actually be able to stop or even reverse the aging process.
Well, I think what Seed is doing is he's raising a good question.
Seed's merely talking about technology that's in reality right now.
I mean, if Seed doesn't do it, believe me, somebody else will.
As a matter of fact, somebody else probably already has.
Recently, there was reports of fertility clinic essentially using standard fertility techniques to fertilize a woman using essentially the same technology as we're going to use for human cloning, and it worked.
We've done human cloning in sheep, in cows, and in mice.
So three species already, and we've done the same Technology in people already, so there's no reason to believe, no reason at all to believe that human cloning won't work in people.
Maybe there were one of the problems with DALI was they had to try like 250 times in order to get an egg to work using a very technically difficult method.
unidentified
We are the first person to genetic material into that egg.
And what we're finding with cows, and this is going to be a great boon for people who are concerned about rare species of animals, is that cows produce a lot of eggs.
The eggs are very big.
They're easy to manipulate.
And what they're talking about doing is using cows' eggs to grow pandas and other endangered species, lizards, I mean, all kinds of things.
Maybe not lizards, but certainly any kind of similar animal, any mammal, in a cow egg by removing the DNA of the cow and putting in the DNA of any animal you want and using the cow as an incubator.
Well, from a practical point of view, and when I say immortality, I'm talking about lifespans of 150, 200, maybe longer.
Perhaps not immortality as an infinity, but certainly lifespans far beyond anything that we assume to be possible today.
This technology is not that far off, and I say that because the following.
I think we got off on a sidetrack with computer doubling time of 18 months and a half.
And nobody has any problem if I was to say on the radio show, you know, hey, I just came back from the Consumer Electronics Show, and I bought this supercomputer that fits on my wristwatch, and I just talk to it, and it types up my letters for me, and it shows me a satellite map of the world.
I have a video camera on the thing, and it's like Dick Tracy.
I mean, no one has even raised their eyebrow.
They just say, well, that's cool, where do I get one?
But when I talk about, or any of the doctors in the American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine, talk about the potential of lifespans of 200 years or 150 years and beyond in the next 30 to 50 years, a lot of people assume that that's an impossibility, that this is just so way out.
It's really not because medical knowledge is doubling every 3.5 years.
That means that in 20 years from now, we're going to know 64 times more about aging and how to reverse it than we do today.
Well, there are some very real technologies that are coming on stream that may make immortality, even in the wildest sense of the imagination, a very real possibility.
There's this technology called the retinal camera or the silicone eye or the soul catcher technology, which is extremely exciting and frightening at the same time.
That type of transplantation will be commonplace in the very near future.
And with the cloning technology, not only will it absolutely work, but you'll be able to have custom-made body parts that will be genetically identical to yourself, so there'll be zero chance of rejection, and you ultimately won't be able to tell the difference between the replacement part and your own part.
I think we have a lot of work to do, and that's why I'm so happy that you're bringing up this issue, because what you're talking about with this show art is you're talking about the immediate future of mankind.
And you're talking about issues that the media is afraid to talk about because, number one, they don't understand it, and number two, it's controversial, and the media doesn't like to handle the controversy.
Well, that in itself is very, very sad because of all the news that's out there on a daily basis, the kind of stuff you're talking about is so incredibly exciting compared to the drill that we get on a daily basis that I would think other media just in their own selfish interests would begin to air this.
And you've got to wonder why they don't.
I mean, there must be an agenda because the media will usually hop on something that is really interesting.
The media is looking for the 10-second soundbite, and they don't want to talk about anything that goes beyond that, with the exception of the foreign media.
It would also be possible to produce, as Dr. Seed is intent on doing, an actual clone of yourself.
Now, if you were to do that, and if we were able to, in effect, download the information in one brain to another brain, then you have one form of immortality, and you also have a terrible problem ethically with morals.
You have an incredible problem, and a problem that needs to be addressed with regard to these issues of immortality or maximally extended lifespan.
And it's for that very reason that we're going to have Dr. Seat on a panel on medical ethics at our Sixth International Congress of Anti-Aging Medicine and Biomedical Technology.
It's going to be at the Alexis Park Resort in Las Vegas December the 11th to 13th.
We're expecting about 3,000 physicians from 44 countries to attend this seminar.
You're invited, by the way, Art.
I'd love to have you on our panel as well.
We're going to have people from Harvard and maybe even someone from the Vatican to discuss these important issues of social ethics for the world.
Perhaps I could encourage you to call Dr. Seed and ask him to come on the program.
I've been asking him on his answering machine.
Every now and then I leave a message on the good doctor's answering machine, and he has yet to respond.
He probably thinks that I'll come after him, so maybe you, as a colleague, could tell him that I don't do that with my guests, and he could safely come on my show.
I know he's had some bad experiences.
You know, he's gone on some media programs, and they have just gone after him like crazy.
They can come to the conference is really for physicians and scientists, but your listeners are pretty bright people, and if they understand our conversation, they're going to understand a lot of what's going on at this conference.
The phone number for the conference is 1-800-634-6133.
That's 1-800-634-6133.
It's December the 11th to 13th in Las Vegas.
And for your listeners, Art, you know, a lot of them may not want to pay the cost of coming to the conference for members of the Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine.
It's about $300 and something dollars.
I don't have the exact number here.
But if they become a member of the Academy and they can become a member for just $60 and receive all kinds of literature and books and things like that, they can get into the exhibit hall, which is 200 exhibitors of the latest medical technology for free.
And so if they call that number, 800-634-6133, they can become a member of the Academy.
They can support the work that we're doing, and they can come visit us in Las Vegas, and maybe you'll be on the panel with us.
Okay, well, let me tell you what's going on right now.
Right now, there are 153 physicians who are board certified by the American Board of Anti-Aging Medicine who are practicing anti-aging medicine on a full-time basis right now worldwide.
And there are probably a couple of thousand docs who are doing anti-aging medicine as a part of their medical practice.
And so this technology exists right now.
And what it exists in the form of is early detection and prevention of the diseases of aging, cancer, heart disease, diabetes, stroke.
And what it exists as is hormone replacement therapy with hormones such as estrogen, testosterone, progesterone, pregnenolol, human growth hormone to replace those hormones that are missing as we grow older that we're finding are in fact the hormones of youth.
These are the pacemakers that keep us young.
And then there's also advances in optimum nutritional therapies because we're finding that vitamin A and vitamin C and vitamin E, these antioxidant vitamins, can protect us from many of the ravages of aging.
There is advances in sports medicine technology.
A lot of the original doctors in anti-aging medicine are Olympic physicians.
And our body needs basically oxygen and glucose or some kind of fuel and oxygen.
And we burn those items within the mitochondria of our cells.
And the cells within the mitochondria produce ATP, which is an energy molecule, Which is used by the cell to give life, to give the cell the energy to do the metabolic processes it needs for us to stay alive.
And that's all good, except that in the process of burning the glucose and the oxygen for fuel, we produce byproducts.
And these byproducts are largely free radicals.
And these free radicals are essentially oxygen molecules that are unstable.
They have an unpaired electron, and so they're chemically unstable.
And these unstable oxygen molecules, or free radical molecules, can do tremendous damage.
They're like biological acids.
They will damage anything they come in contact with.
When we're young, we have a lot of naturally produced free radical quenching agents or antioxidants that are naturally there to protect the cells of our body.
As we get older, we lose the ability, for some reason, to produce these natural free radical scavengers.
And so the amount of free radical damage accumulates and accumulates and accumulates and accumulates over years.
And it leads to things like damage to the cell, destruction of the DNA within the cell, which can lead to cancer, to damage of the mitochondria, which leads to fatigue and loss of energy, to damage of the cell walls, which causes the cells to die prematurely.
So these free radicals are kind of like biological acids that eat our bodies apart from the inside out slowly over a long period of time.
And so by taking supplemental free radical fighters, such as vitamin A, C, E, selenium, a host of other vitamins, we can protect our cells from the damage done by free radicals.
And what these vitamins do is they slow down that process.
They protect us.
And in the laboratory, at least, we see that when you give free radical supplementation to laboratory animals, they live about, depending on the study, anywhere from 15 to 50% longer than they would otherwise.
And in people, we're beginning to see that supplementation with vitamin E is protective against some forms of cancer, most forms of heart disease, and maybe even Alzheimer's disease as well.
And the same is true with vitamin C and vitamin A to a lesser extent, because each of the antioxidants work in different parts of the body and different parts of the cell.
So we need them all.
We can't just make do with one.
There's no one magic pill right now.
We need the whole cocktail.
But in the laboratory, we're seeing life extension in our laboratory animals quite significantly with antioxidants alone.
As I say, 15 to 50% increase in lifespan.
And when we look at the whole picture of the disease prevention and the hormone replacement and the antioxidants and optimum exercise and avoiding stress, in the laboratory, we can see increases in laboratory animals' lifespan by 100%, 200%.
Well, Dr. Ronald Plapps is, he is one of the nation's leading experts in anti-aging and eventually immortality.
He'll be back in a moment, and we've got so very, very much to talk about.
As a matter of fact, I might arm him with a moment to think, because I'm going to ask him if there is any aspect of this whole movement, the Dr. Seed business, what lies ahead that worries him or that he is uncomfortable with.
Now, this is a man who works in the arena, and if there's anything going on out there right now that he doesn't particularly like, I think that's what we'll ask next.
I understand, Dr. Klatz, that you are a proponent of anti-aging, that you feel that we're moving generally in the right direction, but there must be an area or two or so that you are not quite as comfortable with.
Is there any area at all that promotes in this whole spectrum that we've discussed that you are not comfortable with?
The bad side is, let me tell you what the bad side is and what really concerns me right now.
And I don't mean to beat up on my friends at the National Institute of Aging, but I do have a concern about intellectual honesty and fair play and being straight with the American public.
And I believe that the National Institute of Aging is not being straight with the American public.
Do you remember a couple years ago there was a lot of information in the media about this new drug, Human Growth Hormone?
Well, that came to be because of my book, Grow Young with HGH, which is all about the benefits of human growth hormone.
And the NIA's knee-jerk reaction to that was that, well, anti-aging medicine is a hoax on the American public, and it doesn't work, and we're going to have to do something about it.
And after 25 years of essentially being invisible, they decided to spend something like a million dollars of their $500 million budget on a national advisory to the American public, warning them that there was no scientific basis to any claims for any anti-aging benefits of any substances and that vitamins didn't work and nothing worked and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
Well, as soon as they came out with that press release, an interesting thing happened.
All these research papers started breaking about vitamin E and protection against heart disease and cancer and Alzheimer's disease.
So they retracted their position.
They said, well, really, we're talking about all these hormones, these dangerous hormones that are out there that are of no benefit for anti-aging purposes.
There's no basis to it.
And then there was a big report in the media about estrogen in the New England Journal of Medicine in JAMA about how estrogen not only reduced the incidence of age-related disease by 50%, that degenerative diseases of aging across the board, not just osteoporosis and heart disease, but even Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, diabetes, all these diseases of aging were down almost 50% in the women who took estrogen replacement therapy as opposed to those who did not.
Then they retracted their position once more and they said, well, we're just talking about growth hormone.
Growth hormone is unproven and da-da-da-da.
And to this day, I mean, I still get these reports from the media telling me that the NIA says that there's no basis to growth hormone, even though there have been dozens of studies that have reported it.
And so it's kind of an intellectual dishonesty.
And I have a problem with an agency of the U.S. government being deliberately how can I say it?
Now, I wondered, and I've been wondering for years, why was this?
Why was the NIA not being straight with the American public?
And why are they still not being straight with the American public, even though they spent something approaching $25 million to do an eight-center multi-center study on the beneficial or non-beneficial effects of growth hormone that were supposed to be released in 1997?
Well, in 1997, they said, well, you know, we need to re-examine the statistics because we're not really sure.
So we're going to put off this study being released until July of 1998.
July of 1998 came along and went.
Study was not released.
When they were asked why, they said, well, we have to re-examine the statistics and we have to expand the study.
We're not really sure.
But at the same time, they're saying growth hormone doesn't work.
So why are they continuing to fund this study and why are they not releasing the results if the growth hormone doesn't have a beneficial effect or hormone therapy doesn't have the beneficial effect on anti-aging medicine?
And so, frankly, I think behind the scenes, there are a lot of people at the UN and elsewhere trying to figure out how to reduce the world's population, not increase it.
And God knows with Viagra and increased age, you know, we're rabbits.
Well, it's interesting that the World Health Organization just reported that in the first world at least, the fastest growing segment of the population is 65 plus, and that 20% of all children born today will see their 100th birthday and beyond.
This is from the World Health Organization.
Let me read you a little passage.
You know, I'm kind of talking around the issue because I know you're looking for the juicy, dark heart of anti-aging.
I'm going to read you just one passage from his book.
His new book, Immortality, says basically that prepare for there to be clinically available methods to achieve virtual immortality within the next 50 years.
So I'm not alone in all this.
And this is just one passage, and it says, the more locked and the Eloy.
Suppose some government leaders decided to keep some research on life extension going in secret so that they could prolong their own lifespans and perhaps the lifespans of those near and dear to them.
We run into a science fiction scenario in which the world government or corporate leaders and their chosen lead are immortal or nearly so.
While the vast majority of the world's population live and die from one generation to the next, what might be the most likely outcome of a world in which research on life exchange is officially banned but secretly continued?
The world will divide into the immortals and the deathbound.
Very likely, the immortals will disguise their great age and they will not want the deathbound to realize that they are immortal for fear of result.
It should be relatively easy to do if the immortals have control of the world's institutions of learning and the media, as is the case today, eh?
In the 1895 plastic The Time Machine, H.G. Well portrayed a far future world in which human society had divided into the beautiful Eloi who spent their days lazily playing in the sunny gardens and the grotesque morlocks who lived in the underground with the machines that made everything the Eloi needed.
The Eloi seemed to be in paradise, except that at night the Morlock came to the surface and dragged a few Eli down below to eat them.
Well, this warning against the division between the rich and the poor that Wells saw in the late Victorian society, he prophesied in the future, in which, well, Bovo prophesied, is that in the future where immortality is available to but a few elite individuals, the world will truly be divided in this way.
Or in fact, would the public dread the discovery after all?
Ancient Egyptian society endured almost unchanged for more than 2,000 years with the common people worshiping the Pharaoh, who was regarded as a god.
The Chinese emperors lasted almost as long with interruption from only barbarian invaders.
They too were considered a god-emperor head.
Could it be that the immortal elite will not hide their longevity, but in fact will reveal it?
And no, and if I had 65 billion good reasons to want to live a long and healthy life, I would certainly be calling anyone I knew who was involved in this area of science.
But you're absolutely right, Art.
There is going to be a dark underbelly to this science.
I don't know what it is yet, because right now it's all brand new.
I'm just saying that the technology in and of itself is not so expensive or so difficult that it does only have to be had by the have-and-have-nots.
And for the same reason that cellular phones can be had by almost anyone, beepers can be had by anyone, and computers can be had by anyone, because the technology, as it springs forth into society, can be, you know, the price comes way down.
As a matter of fact, you could be on an anti-aging medicine program right now for about $2, $3 a day.
And even with the most advanced anti-aging hormonal therapy and diagnostic therapy, it's hard to spend more than about $10,000 a year doing the whole shot.
You see, a man in your position, and you're 53, we can probably turn back to the hands of time maybe 10 years.
But a man who's 63 or 73, we can turn back to the hands of time 20 years, and we do it all the time.
When I say we, I'm talking about the hundreds and thousands of doctors who are practicing anti-aging medicine right now.
So right now, with today's technology, and realize we're just in our infancy, we can extend lifespan probably in the right circumstances by as much as 20 years.
How many people do you think, CEOs, people who have lots of money, money to burn, movie stars particularly, people who want to remain young for a public image, how many people are presently doing this?
But raising your hormones to that level would not be optimum hormone replacement therapy.
Raising, you see, in anti-aging medicine, what you're trying to do is you're trying to achieve an optimum state of health from a physiologic point of view.
And that is not to replace hormones to the level of a 15-year-old.
That's replacing hormones in the 60-year-old to the level of a 45-year-old.
But it is interesting you mentioned that, Ark, because when you talk to people who are on anti-aging therapies across the board, whether it be ginseng or vitamins or exercise or human growth hormone or anything, the best barometer of whether the therapy is working or not, interestingly enough, is return of sexual function.
That is the, you know, because sex is that kind of energy, and it's probably the energy of life in many ways.
Realize, in order to function sexually, you have to have your circulatory system working for you, your endocrine system working for you, your neurological system working for you.
You have to be in the right frame of mind.
There's a lot of things going into making for a successful sexual act physiologically.
And it is the best parameter.
And when you are using an anti-aging therapy that works, that's the first and most dramatic reported side effect.
And what they're talking about is this is British Telecom.
And they have been working for the last five years on an implantable chip that would be implanted behind your eye, which would work as an electronic retina.
And that it would essentially record everything that you have seen or heard.
It would record your emotion, your blood pressure, maybe even your sense of smell for a lifetime.
And it would download this information into something on your belt about the size of a Walkman, which would be a permanent memory of every existence that you had throughout a lifetime.
And they're talking about this technology being ready on or before 2025.
As a matter of fact, the project is called Soul Catcher 2025.
Well, the belief is that in addition to having a pretty darn good billing record, if you're an attorney, I suppose, that you'd be able to essentially record more than just a video recorder.
You'd be able to record emotion, feeling, pertinent aspects of your life for a permanent Depository and eventually to download this information into a computer when supercomputers were sufficiently powerful enough that you would be able to create a virtual electronic duplicate of your psyche.
And now what I'm talking about is science fiction as opposed to science fact.
Only part of this is science fact right now.
And I'll go into that in a minute.
But let's say we lived in a future and probably not too distant in a future, maybe within 30 years.
As a matter of fact, probably within 30 years.
Where we had sufficiently powerful computing technology miniaturized to the point where you could have a computer that would be able to think and would be able to process information as well as the higher centers of your brain.
And that you would be able to program that computer with everything you said or thought or spoke or smelled or felt or blood pressure, any number of different variables on a real-time basis so that as you are living your experience, you are constantly streaming this information into your computerized double.
After a while, and if there was that connection, a two-way connection between the computer and yourself, you would have immediate information to, immediate access to all information that existed on the planet, all information that existed throughout time.
And so you wouldn't have to go to the books anymore to look up anything.
If you want someone's telephone number, you didn't have to call directory assistants.
You'd just have to think about it.
boomer would be there after a certain period of time with this data being downloaded into the computer after being filtered through your brain and your emotions and your way of thinking the computer would start It would essentially be your psyche, a duplicate of you.
It would be like having an identical twin and being telepathic.
And after a while, you would not be able to tell the difference between its thoughts and your thoughts.
And if one day your physical body was to die, your consciousness would not lose a blink.
In other words, my consciousness is a singularity.
And even if I were able to duplicate that consciousness that was running in a very fast processor with tons of storage and the size of a discmint or something, that would be also a singularity, identical perhaps.
I'll tell you what even scares me more is that I'm talking about the soul catcher technology, and that's kind of fantastic, but I'm reading about IBM having the IBM 2020 neural implant chip, which supposedly is already being tested in people.
I've gotten it off the Internet, so it's as true as the Internet can be.
But there are, in fact, technologies that are going on that are implanting computerized chips designed to implant computerized chips into people that's ostensibly for enhancement, but has a tremendous downside potential for evil.
And I talk about the ID technology that they're putting into dogs and cats now, your pets.
Well, now they're getting ready to do it in people as well.
They're saying that, gee, wouldn't it be nice if you could carry around a chip underneath your skin that has 256K?
And so you wouldn't have to pull out your wallet to make a transaction when you walked up to the airlines, or you wouldn't have to, you know, when you walked into school.
Well, and I think that there's a very legitimate concern about that.
You know, it's one thing to have this technology for the enhancement of humankind.
It's another thing when it gets into the hands of the government and is used for, quote-unquote, law enforcement and, you know, control of the population.
And what they're talking about is this DNA chip where you put one drop of blood on it, just like you would if you were a diabetic to have your blood red or one of these cholesterol readers.
And this thing will type your DNA, and you just plug that information to a computer, and it will tell you exactly what your propensity for any disease is, any time in your life.
And you know as well as I do, the popular science is rarely wrong, and they're only usually a few years ahead of the curve.
But some more than others, and the genetically challenged those who are going to have a heart attack at an early age or contracting cancer or whatever.
You see, genetic testing can be a problem for insurance and for the individual, and I'm very much against this being in the hands of the insurance companies.
I believe that this is very private information.
It should be specifically in the hands of the individual.
But the bright side is if you know what your genetic endowment is, you can beat your genes.
I was born with the genes to have a heart attack by the time I was 42.
And I was able to beat it through very reasonable interventions.
My dad has first heart attack at age 42.
I have type 4 hypertriglyceridemia, and that's a fancy name for very high cholesterol, very high triglycerides, and very low HDL, which essentially is a heart attack waiting to happen.
I don't recommend it to people who are not masochistic at heart.
But anyway, medicine is a great profession.
I don't mean to mudge it at all, but it's a very hard one.
You have to really be dedicated to put in all the time.
But I found out about this when I was 25, and I took steps.
I started taking thyroid, which can lower cholesterol.
I started taking cholesterol-lowering agents, things as simple as additional fiber, vitamin C and vitamin E. I started exercising a little bit more, and my arteries today are whistle-clean.
And they should be clogged as heck, but they're not.
Well, that's why I'm inviting you to come to the world's largest anti-aging expo and get the straight story from the people who are doing the research rather than from your media answer men who give you the story of the moment.
I don't mean to be glib there, Art.
I'm just trying to put in a plug for the Academy of Anti-Aging.
Unless you have sources of information, unless you have at least three or four independent sources that are truly independent, that are not being paid by the manufacturer of a drug or of a product to say nice things about it, you have no idea what the research means.
And when the media reports a study, they don't look at all the studies out there.
Do you remember last year when the media was saying that vitamin E might be bad for us?
And then they said that vitamin E is good for us, and it's bad for us.
What they're doing is there are 4,000 published studies on vitamin E. Last time I looked, actually there's more than that, but let's just say there's 4,000.
Well, somebody comes along with a new study that is sensational, and the media will jump all over that as if that's the one and the only study that exists.
You have to look at the entire landscape, and the media is really guilty of sensationalism beyond any limits and not having a studied view of the issue.
It's really a disservice to the American public because the public can't sit there and read the 4,000 reports, but the media does have access to people who understand and have the long view, but they don't want to report on the long view.
They just want to report on the news of the moment.
Well, it's a million-dollar idea, that's for sure, if not more.
I mean, we're a place where this information could be dispensed, discussed, debated, and generally you could go and get the real stuff because the Associated Press Blesser Harts and Reuters and all the rest of them, they just report the flavor of the day.
a a a spiritual immortal soul do i believe in that yes i personally believe in that from a from a personal point of view from a scientific point of view i see no evidence of no evidence of it if the soul catcher technology that we talked about a little while ago were to come to fruition, we would, if, just in case you're wrong, and there is actually an immortal soul,
we would then surely be tampering in God's garden, seriously tampering in God's garden.
Well, they're saying that we are right at the threshold of technologies that literally tread on the creation of human life, and that our technology has gotten far ahead of our social consciousness,
and that the Vatican themselves are setting up an office to deal with some of the sociological implications of some of these technologies, not necessarily anti-aging technologies, but things that are allied with anti-aging technologies, such as the cloning technology that you address.
And frankly, that's why we're having this panel discussion at this World Conference on Anti-Aging Medicine in Las Vegas, December the 11th to 13th.
If they become a member of the American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine, we'll let them in for free to the exhibition hall with over 200 exhibitors.
And we'll give them a very special price on coming into the main conference if they want to do it.
And the 800 number is 800-634-6133.
There's going to be three days worth of conference on all aspects of anti-aging medicine, everything from testosterone replacement to Viagra to organ repair to transplant to DHEA melatonin, estrogen therapies to laser therapies.
I mean, the latest and the greatest in medicine is all there under one roof.
And we're expecting about 3,000 of the world's leaders in the field of anti-aging medicine to attend this conference.
And we hope to have a representative from the Vatican.
John Glenn, by the way, will be winning the Infiniti Award, which is the highest honor of our society, for his work that he's doing right now in space on researching human aging.
And I really hope you're going to be on this panel with Dr. Seed and with these other people from Harvard and from major universities around the world discussing these important issues, especially human cloning, issues of immortality, ways of what the social implications are of cryogenic freezing, of freezing your body for future generations.
I think that the American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine is probably one of the most forthright medical societies on the planet today.
And our membership wants to address these issues, and they want to deal with them.
And if people like yourself and myself don't come forth and raise these questions, then all we're going to be left with are the bureaucrats in Washington who either want to suppress the technology or want to turn it to their own ends.
They suppress it to the general public and they use it for themselves.
Now, you mentioned cryogenics, and a million people want to talk to you, and I've got to go to the phones here in a second.
But cryogenics, there are companies, and I've had them on the air and interviewed them, that will either, on your clinical death, freeze your body or freeze your head.
And they will do this with an eye toward cryogenically preserving you and then bringing you back in 100 years when whatever it was that was killing you or killed you can be undone.
Now, I saw the one thing on 60 Minutes, which I thought was fabulous, where it was about a 40, 45-minute operation, and the lady had a brain aneurysm that, had they operated on it, it would have burst and killed her.
With the belief that the technology will be such 100 years into the future that we'll be able to overcome almost any damage that has been caused by the ice crystals that are created by this process.
And anti-aging medicine is trying to put an end to that form of aging, and we're really trying to put gerontologists out of business by putting an end to old age.
And so it's a question, it's not a question of how old you are, it's a question of how old you feel.
And you should be alive and happy as long as you want to be.
And that the quality of life during that 300 years is good.
What about Dr. Kvorkian?
What about those who, during that 300 years, a gift from science and medicine and people like yourself, people decided they were going to or wanted to opt out.
Would you be in favor of physician-assisted suicide?
I think that people should have freedoms over their body.
I think that their body should be their own.
It should not be property of the state.
That their genetics should not be the property of the state.
And their lives should not be the property of the state.
It should be themselves.
And if we had a world where people could live a long and fruitful life and decide to check out when they were bored, that would, I think, be rather ideal.
I realize that, you know, medicine as we know it today, at least the Hippocratic or the Hippocratic model of medicine has been around probably Galen at least, since the time of Galen.
So modern medicine, or not modern medicine, but our model of medicine dates back to pre-Christian days, many hundreds of years pre-Christian days.
And it's only been very recently that physicians have not engaged in assisted suicide.
In the old days, and not so very old days, I mean, not even during World War II, but up until the 1960s, it was commonplace for the night nurse in British hospitals to walk around with an atomizer filled with pneumococcal bacteria and spray it up the nostrils of elderly patients in nursing homes to induce a pneumonia.
Oh, absolutely true medical history until the 1960s.
And induce in the older folks who were suffering, who were no longer having good quality of life being old, who were really in pain or discomfort, and essentially inducing a pneumonia that would rapidly eliminate them.
Doctors routinely used to give overdoses of morphine.
I have a very good friend who just passed away of cancer in the last year.
And frankly, the doses of morphine became greater and greater and greater.
A visiting nurse would give them.
And there, I do believe, came a point where I guess the death certificate certainly read cancer, but the direct cause of death really was an overdose of morphine.
And in indirect costs, in our government, we're spending probably more like $50 billion a year.
That something like 75% of those imprisoned in this country are imprisoned on drug-related offenses.
Physicians are so afraid to deal with narcotics or anything associated with drugs for fear of losing their license or being imprisoned themselves that they let hundreds, if not thousands, excuse me, they let thousands, if not tens of thousands, of people suffer needlessly.
Well, I think it goes back to this issue of control over our bodies.
The government wants total control over.
You know, God, I don't want to get into this art, but I'll do it for you.
And this is just my opinion.
I am not speaking for the American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine either.
So, you know, I want to be very clear in that.
But it's my opinion that we live in an age where our government Wants to control us to such an extent that they think nothing of controlling our health, controlling our education, our destiny.
And this is just an outgrowth of it.
And there are certain things, one's health certainly should be in one's own hands.
But we've relinquished that control, and that's why we suffer from all these ills of the health care system that frankly doesn't work.
Your doctor, by the way, is not working for you anymore.
Your doctor is more likely working for your insurance company because your insurance company pays his bills.
And when you stop paying your doctor for health care services, you stop having a doctor.
And the pharmacist is on computer, and the DEA can pull up your record in a moment's notice.
And state licensing boards think nothing.
As a matter of fact, they thrive on yanking the licenses of doctors who fall out of step with the quote-unquote established norms.
And so if you have a compassionate physician who writes for too many pain pills, and they could all be for completely justified and reasonable reasons, he's going to get investigated at the very best.
And I've known doctors who have had their licenses yanked for the most minor, minor irregularities or really no irregularities at all, just trying to practice medicine according to their own consciousness.
Between you and another computer, or it was recording your thoughts.
I believe that the ultimate embodiment of this technology is such that it will be able to record not just your vision and your hearing, but that it will be able to record emotion, blood pressure, maybe haptile sensation, and ultimately perhaps even states of consciousness.
I don't know whether we're anywhere near the point where you can have a device that can read your mind, but there certainly are technology out there that can read whether you're agitated, happy, sad, etc.
unidentified
Well, what I was wondering is if you can change your attitude, which can change how you feel and how you are.
So if you were consciously or subconsciously trying to do that, could that pick up inaccurate information, although it really wouldn't because that's how you are at the time?
And one horrid little answer is, if you think you liked the last movie that you went to, imagine being able to plug into somebody else's life, especially the high points or the low points.
I think that's the potential of these technologies, is to literally be able to experience someone else in a very personal and intimate way, a way that you may not want other people to experience your life.
I don't mean to sound disrespectful, Doctor, but I have a question.
If we extend the life of people by, say, 20 years, have you considered the impact on the world specifically how would we feed and house all of these people considering we cannot now, for whatever reason, seem to house and feed everyone now?
You've asked the best question, the best question that I've yet been asked, not just tonight, but overall with regard to criticism of anti-aging medicine.
The only criticism that I have heard leveled at the concept of anti-aging medicine is the potential issue with regard to world population, and this is how I answer it.
The knee-jerk response and the immediate thing that an individual might come to is, oh my goodness, we're going to have all these people alive on the planet.
There's already 6 billion of us here on the planet.
We're already getting to the point where it seems as if we're pushing the carrying capacity of this planet to its limit.
Oh, isn't that a horrible thing?
And that's true, it is a horrible thing.
But when you look at the relationship between life expectancy, Quality of life and the birth rate, an interesting thing turns up.
In the first world, you know, the United States and Western Europe, the countries that have the highest standard of living have the lowest birth rate.
The replacement rate for people is about 2.2 per couple.
You'd have to have 2.2 children or 2.3 children per couple in order just to replace yourself.
Well, in the U.S. right now, replacement rate is about 1.8, 1.7.
If you look at Italy, it's as low as 1.4.
We're actually in negative population growth.
In Germany, it's about 1.6 per couple.
So in the first world, we're not at zero population growth.
We're at negative population growth.
If it wasn't for immigration, we would actually be losing populations in the first world.
The reason why the world, the whole world, is continuing to rise in population is because of the third world.
In the third world, the more children you have, the better quality of life you have, and the more social security that you have when you grow old.
Because if you have a lot of kids, chances are one of them will be around and take care of you when you get old, and one of them will like you if you have enough of them.
In the first world, however, the more kids you have, the lower the quality of life you will have, the less things you'll have to give to your kids, et cetera, et cetera.
And so people are having less and less children.
So if you extrapolate the benefits of anti-aging medicine to the whole planet, it will come a time in the very near future when the third world will realize that the quality of their life does not improve.
It actually decreases with more children as the technologies of anti-aging medicine spread across the planet and people can look forward to an extra 20 years of lifespan in good health and not having to rely on their children to care for their social security issues.
I've got to get something on the air very quickly here.
We're toward the bottom of the hour.
This is very serious, potentially very serious.
As you know, we've been following this Pegasus signal story for the last several days.
I just will not let go of it.
And Richard Hoagland has now apparently confirmed that in Australia, a telescope, a compact array, in New South Wales, six 22-meter parabolic reflector antennas have confirmed the EQ pegasi signal.
There is a graph showing that signal.
It is a major radio astronomy facility in Australia.
You need to take a look.
We have a link on my front page now directly to Richard's page.
Thank you, Richard.
And I would like you to, quickly as you can, get to my website and take a look.
I still don't warranty this story as being accurate.
However, this is the first major observatory.
If this report is accurate, it would certainly appear to be to be confirming this signal.
This is very serious information.
You'll see a link now on my website at www.heartbell.com.
This is some world we live in, isn't it?
From the high desert, I beseech you stay right where you are.
You know, I don't know how you would do it short of something like Jurassic Park.
I'll tell you what's kind of interesting that I've seen is there is a computer program out, I think, Carnegie Mellon University, did this.
And what they did was they came up with actors that would play famous people over history, such as Albert Einstein or Newton or Thomas Edison or people such as this Thomas Jefferson.
And they had these people essentially read passages that were attributed to these individuals.
This was put into a computer and the computer, an artificial intelligence program, and what you could do was go back and discuss issues with these individuals.
And if it happened to be within the repertoire of the computer, you would get answers almost as if the person themselves was speaking it.
Now, with regard to resurrecting the dead, you know, when you're dead, you're kind of gone.
And what we consider your humanity resides in your memory, your personality, things of this nature.
So while it might be physically possible, a la Jurassic Park, to take some cells from your, you know, corpse and, you know, and through some mystical science, magical science that we don't have yet just yet, but I mean, it's conceivable that we could actually clone up an entity, a clone that would be genetically identical to an individual, say, of Elvis.
But that person would never have Elvis' personality, thoughts, feelings, or experience.
Now, say 50 years in the future, if the soul catcher works and we have the recorded existence of an individual from day one to the last day, then maybe this resurrection concept might be more than just science fiction.
Well, you know, Art, I have a very hard time, and I like to think I have a good imagination.
Certainly, I've read enough comic books when I was a kid to kind of give me a good basis in fantasy.
But I have a hard time imagining the world 20 years from now.
I mean, from a purely hardcore scientific point of view, that's how fantastic the developments are coming and how fast and furious they're coming.
Once we are able to have a digital cerebral interface where you can somehow have input directly from the computer into your consciousness and back, then we evolve into another state of existence altogether because to forget the keyboards,
forget TV or computer screens, there will be instantaneous transfer of information between the computer and us and the creation of artificial worlds that make virtual reality look like a Guerreype.
What I would do if I were you, sir, is there is a pump my conference, but the A4M conference, the Academy of Anti-Aging Conference in Las Vegas in December, is going to focus the entire first day on the early detection, prevention, and reversal of cancer.
You need to be a world's expert in Gardner's syndrome.
And you need to find out what there is out there in the way of technology that can prevent you from suffering the fate of other members of your family.
If there is a new technology that will address that, the chances are good that it will be at the World Congress of Anti-Aging Medicine in Las Vegas.
And it's pH paper, and you can either put a little drop of saliva or a drop of urine on the test paper, hopefully maybe even both, and you can determine what your body pH is, and there's a certain norms that you run within.
And if you're either too acid or too alkaline, then you may not be in the picture of health.
Well, with your body, you can adjust it basically with your foods, the foods that you eat.
If you eat green leafy vegetables, these things tend to be more alkalinizing.
And most people run more acid than they do alkaline.
And so the point is, either through nutritional products, which are basically condensed food, or through your altering your diet, you can add more alkaline to your diet to change the pH of your body.