Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Feb. 3, 2000 - Art Bell

02:42:38

Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell - Anti-Aging - Dr. Ronald Klatz

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Welcome to Art Bell, somewhere in time.
	Tonight featuring Coast to Coast AM from February 3rd, 2000.
	From the high desert and the great American Southwest, I bid you all good evening and or good morning wherever you may be across this great land of ours and welcome to another edition.
	The Best in Talk Radio, late night talk radio from coast to coast and well beyond.
	The Tahitian and Hawaiian Islands in the west, eastward to the Caribbean, and the U.S.
	Virgin Islands south into South America.
	North to the Pole and worldwide on the Internet.
	This, in fact, is Coast to Coast AM and I'm Mark Bell.
	Coming up in a moment is Richard C. Hoagland.
	And for a variety of very good reasons.
	We're going to do an hour with Richard.
	You know, there's a new movie coming out, Mission to Mars.
	And there's quite a story involved with that.
	And of course, Richard and NASA.
	And we're going to get Richard to comment on what's going on with Cause and Peter Gersten and Court on Monday.
	It's just getting pretty wild out there.
	So, all of that coming up in a moment.
	For the moment, stay right where you are.
	Don't budge.
	Alright, coming up in just a moment, Richard C. Hoagland.
	Now, as many of you know, Whatever you may think of Richard, one way or the other, he has been years and years, a decade, deep into Cydonia and Mars.
	There is a movie coming up called Mission to Mars.
	It's a big budget, big time, no doubt, I've heard, really downtown movie.
	Matter of fact, the producers of that movie have contacted me to do something here on the air.
	And it seems logical, and no doubt I will end up doing that.
	But I got this fax last night from Peter in Milwaukee, and so let me read you in part what he said.
	Art, last night I wrote you a fax griping about the mission to Mars website.
	All movies these days, of course, have websites.
	And it's a list of Mars sites, all belonging to NASA, that completely ignored the one site especially that should be there, Richard Hoagland's Enterprise mission.
	Since he, more than anyone else, has popularized the Cydonia area of Mars, which happens to be the theme of the movie, well, guess what?
	It gets worse.
	This morning, I went back to the site and found, once you access Flash, or No Flash, whatever that means, after you scroll down, three sites prominently displayed.
	They are the Planetary Society, the National Space Society, and the Mars Polar Lander site.
	And this really is insulting, if you consider the following.
	The Planetary Society is headed by Louis Friedman, the successor, heir apparent Carl Sagan.
	Who is Friedman?
	He is the fellow mentioned by Richard Hoagland in his book, The Monuments of Mars, who, during a meeting in Washington, D.C., at which Viking images of Cydonia were shown, he, Friedman, refused to look at the pictures at one point putting his hands over his eyes.
	Sagan, who was also there, did look at the photographs.
	So the fellow who refused to look at the pictures of Cydonia gets his Planetary Society listed as a primary website for a movie based on Cydonia, where the researcher who spent years of his life researching the area And turning out books and videos on the area isn't even listed.
	As I said, Art, last night, what the hell is going on here?
	Peter in Milwaukee.
	Richard, good morning.
	Good morning, Art.
	There.
	Sounds like business as usual to me.
	Well, over the last 15, 20 years that I've been doing this, there have been times when people have pointed a finger at me and said, You're a conspiracy theorist.
	Well, you are.
	You're paranoid.
	You think they're out to get rid of you and your information and the research you and your colleagues have done.
	Well, that is you, but of course you might be right.
	Exactly!
	And one of the things that I made in an article that I am going to be offering on this subject myself is the very point that Peter makes, which is when you go to the Mars website, the Mission to Mars website at Touchstone, And you scan down, the first thing that strikes anybody is that all the sites are NASA.
	No.
	There are no dissident sites.
	Now, there have been a lot of serious scientific investigations of Cydonia outside NASA over their kicking and screaming and throwing themselves over the cliff over the last 20 years.
	You know, there's Dr. Mark Carlotto who worked with us.
	There was Errol Tarr in the defense mapping.
	Oh, sure.
	There was Stan McDaniel in his independent assessment.
	Oh, on and on, Richard.
	I mean, there's a long list.
	I know.
	Nobody is invited into this party except the people who are spinning behind the scenes in this film.
	How long ago did you write The Monuments of Mars?
	What year was that?
	You know, it's funny because I've been on your show, oh, a gazillion times, and I can't remember the last time I mentioned my book.
	I can't either.
	For those people who claim they're only in this for the money, I have probably done a dozen or two dozen shows on your show without mentioning that I've authored a book on this, and it's fourth printing.
	It's a best-seller.
	It's the real story, going back to the very beginning when these photographs were taken, you know, almost 25 years ago now.
	And it was written back in, well, it took me five years to write the initial draft.
	It was published in 1987.
	And it's now in its fourth printing, and I'm in the process of upgrading it one more time with feeling, because things are now moving very rapidly.
	But again, the original date?
	1987.
	1987.
	And I've been at this since 83.
	So it's more than, let's see, that's 13 years ago.
	That's when it was published.
	I've been at this for 17 years.
	Almost 20 years.
	It's frightening when I look back.
	All the while, NASA hissing and holding their hands in front of their eyes.
	You know where that story came from?
	I mean, just in case people think that's apocryphal, that is an actual bona fide story.
	It came to me from Dr. David Webb, who was a friend and colleague and a member of President Reagan's Space Commission in the mid-1980s.
	He was at a meeting on the Hill for joint Mars missions at which Sagan And Friedman and some others were going to be testifying in front of Senator Matsunaga at one of the committee sessions.
	And during the break, Tom Rautenberg, who was one of our colleagues from the University of California, had the pictures with him because, you know, we never went anywhere without these big 11x14 glossies of the Sedonia imagery.
	Sure.
	And Webb, you know, Beck and Carl, and Friedman to come over and meet with Rautenberg, who was with a very prestigious university, all very academia, very up and up.
	And as soon as Friedman saw what Tom wanted to show Sagan, he went over and sat in the back of the chamber, and Carl kept saying, come on over and take a look at these.
	That was interesting in and of itself.
	And Friedman refused.
	He would not look at the pictures.
	This is the guy whose website now is one of the major links to the movie The Mars, which is the story, the NASA story, of Sedonia.
	The ironies are veritably dripping from this thing.
	Well, they really are.
	And my understanding is, and I could be wrong, but my understanding is that NASA was the agency consulted for the making of the movie, yes?
	Not only were they consulted, but there were several key scientists, who we're going to name prominently on the Enterprise website, who have been doing missions to Mars for the last several years, who got hired as advisors to this film.
	Story Musgrave.
	Uh, who is now the former astronaut.
	Well, that would make sense.
	He's also, has also been involved.
	There has been heavy involvement of equipment, of expertise, of scientific talent.
	Um, and what's really astonishing is if anybody saw the Super Bowl, um, you know, a few days ago, there was a commercial that ran during the Super Bowl.
	So I heard.
	One of these two, three million dollar a minute Commercials?
	Yes.
	It is a promo for Mission to Mars, the Touchstone movie.
	Right.
	At the end of this promo, lo and behold, a face on Mars emerges from the reddened Martian sand.
	Now... So there's no doubt, unequivocally, boys and girls, this is a movie, a $120 million dollar movie, which by the way is very tetrahedral, about Cydonia.
	Except, no one picked up the phone and said to those of us who labored in the vineyards, What do you think we ought to stick in this thing?
	Because it's, of course, only fiction.
	Well, look, I can understand they might make a movie without consulting you.
	I understand that.
	But I can't understand, once the movie is made, that those who are putting down links and references to people with respect to Sedonia and Mars.
	Mars, in particular, and Sedonia specifically.
	There's no way they could overlook your name unless they did so intentionally.
	Well, this is a NASA production.
	You know, you're seeing not Touchstone, not Disney.
	Yes, but NASA, which held its hands over its eyes for so long and spit and hissed, are the very ones that are going to Consult on a movie that, oh my God, is about Cydonia?
	Well, it's obvious what this game is.
	It is, and I said a few days ago on the show with Steve and Peter and others, this is the year of disclosure.
	This is the year that we roll out propaganda red carpet and we get the official government-slash-NASA view of what's waiting for us on those Martian sands.
	And the last people they want in the party are people who will have a different point of view Perhaps a real point of view, because they've been doing the research, as opposed to the propaganda we're going to be force-fed on the wide screen of the tune of $120 million.
	Well, when the people making this great big expensive motion picture went to NASA, and they were consulting with NASA, and they said they were going to make folks a movie on Cydonia, NASA should have, to be consistent, said, Cydonia?
	That's nothing but a trick of light and shadow!
	Why would you want to do that?
	Well, we'll take you over here and you can do the story on the really interesting part of Mars.
	We know about that because we have the mapper up there going round and round.
	We found this really interesting area.
	You can do the story about that, but you're doing it about, no, Cydonia, where the face is.
	Now, the face is interesting because it's not the famous, infamous face on Mars.
	In a few days, we're going to post on Enterprise a very detailed comparison of this film and the real data we've been working on for 20 years, based primarily on my book, The Monuments of Mars, and I would like to give a couple of plugs tonight.
	If you want to get this book, go to Amazon.com.
	If you want to see and read the real story of the last 20 years, that you're not going to get from this film, go and read the book, or order the videos that we have also over at Amazon, which I've given Presentations to NASA over the years, at their invitation, several times to the United Nations, to various universities.
	I mean, there's a huge database that I and my colleagues have put on the table, and NASA has consistently said, it's all nonsense, folks, don't waste your time.
	Yeah, I know.
	Suddenly, they back a major film, and of course, as I looked at the trailer, it was obvious to me, from one of those images, the image of the face itself that they're putting forward, what the agenda is.
	Because the face that they're putting forward is not the face on Mars, which has a hominid feline aspect.
	That means, you know, apes and lions.
	You're right, you're sure.
	It has a grey aspect.
	It is a grey alien, folks, that they're going to palm off on us as the progenitor of the face on Mars.
	Well, it's a movie.
	What's the political nature of this so-called series of revelations?
	Because you know what's going to happen, right?
	It's already happening here.
	This is going to be the occasion for the most extraordinarily interesting discussion of what's really there.
	And suddenly those of us who have been out in the cold all these years, claiming that we were doing science and NASA claiming we were doing nothing, are going to have a day in the sun, because there's a huge body politic of people covering film in Hollywood, and people covering film in Washington and New York, Other places.
	Yeah, in most ways.
	They're going to be introduced to the Sedonia controversy for the very first time.
	But Richard, all in all, you should be very, very happy, even overjoyed that this movie is coming out.
	And I think, you know, to be fair, it's probably going to be a really good movie.
	That's what I've been hearing.
	Oh, the special effects are dynamite.
	Let me tell you the unsung backstory on this and the reason why it really is incredibly ironic that no one picked up the phone.
	For about 10 years, Brian De Palma, who is the director, the extraordinarily gifted director of this film, never done science fiction before, this is his first sci-fi effort.
	Brian De Palma had a brother that no one knows about, except those of us that worked with him.
	His name was Dr. Bruce De Palma.
	You and I talked with Bruce on your show back in 96, just before he died.
	It was Bruce De Palma's experiments in extraordinary physics Starting at MIT and then going on to other institutions and eventually to his own lab, that we then married together with my hyper-dimensional physics theory, when we finally met, which was in 1989, that led to some extraordinarily successful advances and predictions on the model based on Cydonia for what we could do with physics and engineering to benefit the people here on Earth.
	The special effects in this film art, which are a tour de force Most of the 120 million is going to those special effects.
	They are hyper-dimensional physics special effects.
	So I have a lot of reasons tonight to feel pretty, pretty proud.
	Sure.
	Except for one teensy-weensy little problem.
	I'm not going to get any royalty checks from this.
	No, you're not.
	No, you're not.
	Nor are you going to even, apparently up until now, get any recognition for this.
	Well, I'm glad to see there are people in your audience that remember.
	Obviously there are.
	Of course there are.
	Whatever anybody may or may not think of you, Richard, in any respect, nobody, nobody can deny you were the first guy out of the chute with Cydonia, with the face, with all the rest of it, now, what, 13 years ago.
	So come on, folks.
	Send a message to the people over there on that website, and let them know one link that they didn't get up, whether you got to consult or not.
	It should be mandatory that there would be a link to your site, Richard.
	Well, if this is an even-handed process, if this is strictly just a film designed to lay for people some interesting possibilities in an entertaining fashion, and to involve the American people in basically buying tickets to go to a film, They'd be crazy not to include links to Enterprise, because frankly, we have a very large and very vocal constituency, and that constituency, through your program, was what got us the pictures of Cydonia after twenty-some years a couple years ago.
	But I don't think it's a level playing field.
	I think it will be a cold day on Mars before they link, and frankly, I don't care, because we have some other interesting things planned, and there is some real news that may be eclipsing Even the political momentum of this film in the next few days.
	Well, and we'll get to that in a moment.
	I think that I know what you are referring to.
	But I'll tell you something.
	That link ought to be up on that site.
	What is it?
	MissionToMars.com or something like that?
	MissionToMars.com.
	You have to actually go to Touchstone Pictures.
	Because the Mission to Mars site itself is under construction.
	There's nothing there.
	Okay.
	So you go to Touchstone Pictures and you'll find the Mission to Mars link there.
	Kind of like the movie without the special effects in yet.
	Yes.
	All right.
	Thank you very much.
	All right.
	So, you know, then, folks, go to Touchstone Pictures, owned, I might add, by ABC, and say, hey, You know, as you develop this site over there, let's have some links to the guy who was out front on all of this 13 years ago.
	Richard C. Hoagland.
	I mean, don't you wonder a little bit, after NASA's attitude about Cydonia, how the consultants could walk onto that movie set with their heads in the air.
	You know, they should have gone in sort of hanging them down a little bit.
	Under the circumstances.
	But who knows how they went in.
	All I know is, you ought to send them a message.
	Go to the TouchTone site and do that.
	I'm Art Bell.
	You're listening to Art Bell, somewhere in time, on Premier Radio Networks.
	Tonight, an encore presentation of Coast to Coast AM, from February 3rd, 2000.
	I met birds anew, and tried to break them free.
	When I was caught in a dreadless mood You were moving out tonight
	The shadows of the dreams appear And it's the lantern light These are the dreams of the night The sun and time are the
	same Love is burning, we're free, we're gone together
	Love is burning, we're free, we're gone together Love is burning, we're free, we're gone together
	The inside is saying...
	There's a smell, a touch, there's something inside that we need so much.
	The sight of a touch, or the scent of a sand, or the strength of an oak when it's deep in the ground.
	The wonder of flowers to be covered and then to burst up through tarmac into the sun again.
	Or to fly to the sun without burning a wing?
	To lie in a meadow and hear the grass sing?
	To have all these things in our memories?
	Or can we use them to help us to fly?
	Why, why would you go, take his place, on this trip, just for me?
	Why? She could be right, she's a prince, I've seen it all, it's all a dream
	I've worked my way to here, worked so hard just to win my fears
	I've ruined my life and all my friends, but by now, by now I'm a shaman
	I've ruined my life and all my friends, but by now I'm a shaman Those of you with a sense of justice, and those of you that
	have a computer We'll go over to the Touchstone site and reach out and touch somebody at Touchstone.
	That's what I think about all this.
	anyway uh... back to richard c hogeland in a moment because there's
	a lot more going on
	this open the show last night and i want to get it out there on again tonight
	Judge gives UFO group its day in court.
	In a stunning and surprising defeat for the government and its proponents of secrecy, a U.S.
	District Court judge in Phoenix, Arizona rebuked a Department of Defense attempt to deny a group of UFO activists the opportunity to argue its case in court.
	In the federal lawsuit, citizens against UFO secrecy cause, Peter Gersten, i.e., The Department of Defense Judge Stephen McNamee, ignoring the government's plea to dismiss the case outright, set February 7th at 10am, that's coming Monday, for arguments on the adequacy of the government's search for information about an unusual aerial object.
	Through cause, which had brought the lawsuit under the Freedom of Information Act in 1999, submitted numerous affidavits from witnesses One of them being mine and my wife's, who had observed the aerial object, the triangle.
	The Department of Defense continues to maintain that it could find no information confirming the existence of this object.
	The aerial object, seen at treetop level by many of the eyewitnesses, is a triangularly shaped and virtually soundless.
	The hearing Is open to the public.
	There you go, Richard.
	You know, I think this is another part of the year that we're in, which is, quote, disclosure on someone's terms.
	I mean, there were 10,000 people that saw this thing.
	We've done some calculations.
	I got some good data from Jim Dilettoso and his folks over at Village Labs when we were in Phoenix several years ago.
	And one of the most remarkable things to me, and again, people are going to say, oh, there he goes again.
	Um, is that it appeared over Phoenix at about 8 o'clock, if my memory serves, but with Mars at exactly 19.5 degrees above the western horizon.
	There he goes again.
	So, there is a pattern here.
	Now, the fact that this judge, I think a Phoenix resident, would like to know what's been going on, Well, you should know, and this is true, Richard, that though the Phoenix Lights, or what are called the Phoenix Lights, the early ones, not the late ones, it probably were flares, but the early ones and the Triangle, this lawsuit seeks information
	Much more broadly, on the kind of thing that I saw, Richard, I know you know what I saw, and what so many millions of other Americans, and for that matter, multinationals, have seen, that craft is, in fact, in our skies.
	Period.
	I mean, that's all there is to it.
	I could have thrown a damn rock at the thing, so I know it's there.
	And the government came back and said, we have no information on any such configuration of craft.
	And this judge has come back and said, now wait a minute.
	I'm not going to dismiss this arbitrarily.
	I'm going to hear arguments.
	Well, on the occasion of the Phoenix flights, we know that there were jets scrambled from Luke Air Force Base, which is there outside Phoenix, that went up and confronted this thing.
	You mean all those pilots developed amnesia and didn't write reports and didn't file... Or the recent incident in Texas, Richard.
	I had the pilots on the air.
	Yes, I heard that show.
	A triangle.
	Do you remember that?
	Yes, of course.
	Or the police officers that I just had on.
	From Illinois.
	From Illinois.
	And several police departments which all saw it.
	So, you know, the government damn well does have information on it.
	And if they don't, then we better wonder what's wrong with our government.
	Well, we've been wondering that for a long time.
	I mean, NASA being a very major case in point.
	But this, this is a real feather in Peter's cap.
	And it will be fascinating to see how things progress on Monday.
	And whether, you know, Peter and Clause are allowed to make a substantive case, you know, file discovery motions, get access to documents.
	I'm encouraged because the judge, if he was inclined to think it was all nonsense, Could have easily sided with the government Monday.
	And the fact that he did not means, you know, federal judges are not given to dog and pony shows.
	They've got very busy calendars.
	Oh, I know.
	They're very serious people.
	And you put on those black robes and you suddenly, you know, are addressed with a whole new perspective on the human condition.
	So I think, you know, we can be very encouraged that finally this subject, this crucial subject of secrecy, black projects, who knows what, And at what level will get its day in court?
	And my hat is off to Peter.
	I feel the same way.
	And I hope that a lot of people show up in that courtroom and around that courtroom as this hearing occurs.
	So in a way, the judge's decision is supported.
	Well, you know, people can let let them know, look, we support what you did.
	Go ahead.
	Go.
	Well, think of the backdrop to this, because at the same time that this is progressing in downtown Phoenix, A Phoenix Sun is running for the presidency two to three thousand miles away in the state of South Carolina.
	Rather effectively, too.
	Very effectively.
	The extraordinary bump from New Hampshire is very encouraging for those of us who think John McCain should really be given a shot here.
	Here, here.
	And the fact that he will be supported by a federal case.
	You know, we're going to make a federal case out of this, as people used to say.
	is timed excruciatingly well because it means that when people all the people in the Bell audience to go to these town meetings and ask you know Governor Bush and ask John McCain and you know Bill Bradley and Al Gore and and the others these questions which are so crucial that are on the website they can point to the fact that this is now in federal court As an adjudicated problem to be decided by review of legal documents and evidence.
	That's going to be quite a hearing.
	That's all I know.
	That's going to be quite a hearing.
	I would simply advise people, you know, leave your antennas and your ears at home and make it very serious.
	Otherwise, there'll be a lot of media there, local media.
	What you might want to do is if people do ask you the question, you know, you might connect to the McCain candidacy, and simply say that it is time for elected officials at all levels, from the Congress through the President, to address this question which has now pained us for 50 years, over half a century.
	We have been embroiled in this enigma.
	What is really going on?
	And why won't our elected and appointed officials tell us the truth?
	And I think that if people, you know, respond with serious answers to the questions of the media at this hearing, That some very interesting things can cascade in our favor.
	Well, what can the government do when you think about it?
	And it's worth a little consideration.
	In other words, on the one hand, I guess they could come back and say, uh, this is nothing that they can say national security, but that carries a problem with it too.
	So They can say they know of no such object in our atmosphere, operated by themselves or anybody else, but that would be a problem for them, too, with all the witnesses.
	So what do they do?
	What do they do, Richard?
	Well, I don't know what they do.
	I mean, if you look at the Area 51 case, the environmental case that was filed by Jonathan Turley some years ago, that was slapped down vigorously by the administration.
	In this case, you have a different scenario.
	You may have the visible effect of the subliminal war that we have been postulating has been going on between what we call the hangout crowd and the cover-up crowd, and that this is an opportunity for the hangout crowd who understand the public policy has got to get in sync with the citizenry at some point in a republic such as ours.
	This may be the foil and the mechanism they're going to use to actually open the door to their version of events.
	Because, remember, there is no such thing as, quote, disclosure, either on the ruins of Cydonia, or on UFOs, or black technology, or secret weapons, or, you know, the weird radar stuff, or the chemtrails.
	It is always going to be someone's version of the truth, and the advantage of a legal process is you can get people under oath Under pain of perjury, to try to tell you the truth.
	Whereas in the political arena, you are much more dependent on the honor of men and women... Couldn't they be pushed only to the point of saying it's a matter of national security?
	End of story.
	If they were to admit that.
	Yes.
	Then you have the extraordinary eyewitness accounts of experts and non-experts such as you and me.
	Well, they're admitting something when they say that, but not telling us.
	There's an extraordinary technology.
	Yes.
	Present.
	Yes.
	Because you don't plant national security on a non-problem.
	Oh, look, this is a giant story no matter what they say.
	It's a giant story either way.
	way i have step forward and i am very encouraged by the judge because if he
	was predisposed to take this was silly and nonsense he could have dismissed
	with total uh... backing on monday
	and he did not not being familiar with the legal process
	if the judge decides their is
	ample evidence to
	question the government's answer to the apple i a request rest.
	What is he capable of ordering?
	Well, previous federal judges have come up against national security from the NSA, from the CIA, they've been briefed in camera on documents in Washington over past years, but that was then and this is now.
	Art, I really feel that we're in a different political regime.
	I think there is such restiveness in the body politic as exemplified by the extraordinary success that John McCain is having.
	That there would be all hell to pay if this judge summarily shut down a process before there was some kind of discovery process.
	But again, what are his options?
	You mentioned that they've been taken into confidence in Cameron and so forth, I'm sure that's... That was during the height of the Cold War!
	But I mean, would that result, for example, in a judge coming back out, stern-faced, and accepting a national security kind of answer?
	If that were to happen, and again, I'm obviously not a legal expert here, and we really should be asking Peter these questions.
	I think it's going to depend on the case he makes on Monday morning.
	And we know there are 10,000 plus witnesses.
	Heck, the head of the Republican committee there in Phoenix, when Frances Barwood was on her campaign to become Secretary of State, Stood up at an open meeting when she was discussing the issue and admitted that he had seen it.
	Oh, there's no lack of witnesses.
	So the fact that this is a Phoenix judge in a town where something two miles wide casually cruised over the city, you know, one of the seventh largest city in the United States.
	Yes.
	In full display with extraordinary arrogance with jets and fighters and pursuit craft from Luke Air Force Base able to do nothing.
	Not showing up on radar, but visually photographed and eyewitnessed by, as I said, tens of thousands of people.
	This is something that you can't easily sweep under the rug, and I have a feeling that we're going to get some nice surprises on Monday.
	Well, it's sure going to be interesting to see.
	I guess he could order the government to go back and conduct a more thorough search Which would give them, then, the opportunity to say, Oh!
	Oh!
	We didn't know that was there in File 37, back there on Aisle 70, and we just happened to find this, and so here's the story.
	Well, look, in every legal case, which, of course, is built on opposition, you know?
	Yes.
	Oil and counterfeit.
	Yes, of course.
	The opposition always tries to go for what's called summary judgment.
	Dismisses because there's no case.
	You know, to throw it out, judge, that these folks don't have a leg to stand on.
	When that hurdle is passed, the next step is a full discovery process to, you know, accrue evidence to build your case and to take the guilty to task.
	That's the hurdle, you know, that's the burden of proof that Peter has to show that there is a prima facie case, that the government is hiding something, and that with the proper discovery, Peter and his colleagues can find out what it is.
	Well, in my mind, If they came back with a national security answer, which, you know, yeah, maybe they've got secret aircraft and it's okay that they've got secret aircraft.
	I understand my government is doing things to protect me and the whole country that it doesn't advertise and are top secret.
	Fine.
	But at least tell us that it's a matter of national security.
	No, but wait a minute.
	There's also kind of a common sense thing here.
	If you have a secret aircraft, you do not parade it above 10,000 people a thousand feet up for several hours over the seventh largest city in the United States.
	You do it at Edwards.
	You do it at Area 51.
	You do it in the middle of the desert.
	You do it down in Australia.
	I'm with you.
	You don't do it with lots and lots and lots of eyewitnesses.
	Now you're talking about the other possibility.
	The other possibility.
	Exactly.
	I agree with you.
	So either way, it's... Remember, this was also the same night that William Jefferson Clinton had a major medical problem 2,000 miles away at exactly the same time in Florida.
	The only trip during Ten Star's entire tirade that he ever tried to subpoena in terms of witnesses and videotapes from local media, etc.
	So if something very large showed up Over Phoenix that night that was not ours?
	Yes.
	That was theirs?
	Yes.
	We have enough evidence, circumstantial evidence, that it put the command and control authority into an absolute tizzy fit, ranging up to the President of the United States and something bizarre physically happened to him at exactly the same time to go into court and say, we need to know more!
	It's going to be a really interesting week.
	Yep.
	That's what I would say.
	Uh, in other words, as I look at where this can go, any direction at all is going to be really interesting.
	And we haven't even gotten to the headline of the New York Times, which is what I wanted to talk about tonight.
	Oh, really?
	What does that say?
	Well, on Tuesday, remember I was on a week ago, last Wednesday, discussing the That's right, yes.
	Oh, yes.
	Stanford had thought they had detected, after months of analysis, from the missing Mars
	polar lander.
	That's right, yes.
	On Tuesday of this week, for those folks who don't get the New York Times out there in
	the hinterlands of America, William J. Broad, who is a hell of a science writer at the New
	York Times, wrote the following story under this headline, Evidence builds that Mars lander is source of mystery
	signal.
	Now we don't have time, we've got what, two minutes left?
	i guess i have to go back on an update your heart are you know that i mean
	We'll have you back on next week, obviously.
	Okay.
	We'll tackle that.
	One last thing.
	You know, I'm going to plug this viciously from now on.
	Go out and buy the damn book.
	If you want to know what's really been going on with your government and NASA and Cydonia, go to the movie by all means.
	I'm going to go five or six times myself.
	But get the book and find out what's really been going on.
	And if you do all that, then when our motion picture ...comes to the theaters, and we can discuss that in more detail next week.
	You'll have a balanced view, or as Paul Harvey used to say, one of your esteemed colleagues, Art... The rest of the story.
	The rest of the story.
	The Monuments of Mars, the definitive work.
	Gee, 13 years ago.
	Richard, thank you!
	You're welcome, Art.
	Good night.
	Talk to you next week.
	That's Richard C. Hoagland.
	And there's simply no question about it.
	He wrote the book.
	And he did it 13 years ago.
	Somehow, don't you imagine, over on that website, building now, and on the Touchstone site, there ought to be a link to Richard C. Hoagland's site.
	I mean, really, no matter what you think, even the slightest sense of fair, and Americans are fair, I think, demand that that occur.
	I'm Art Bell, and if you stick around, you'll find out Perhaps not.
	How not to get old?
	You're listening to Art Bell, somewhere in time.
	Tonight featuring a replay of Coaster Coast AM from February 3rd, 2000.
	Not without a home, not without a star.
	Free, only want to be free.
	Be part of the close.
	Go, ride by the wind.
	Throw down in a spin.
	I dare you love, I dare you love.
	Have made it to the top I gave you all I have to give Why did it have to stop?
	You've blown it all sky high By telling me a lie Without a reason why You've blown it all sky high How long do you want to live?
	Our love had wings to fly. We could have touched the sky.
	You blow the night away.
	Premier Radio Networks presents Art Bell's Somewhere in Time.
	Tonight's program originally aired February 3rd, 2000.
	How long do you want to live? How old would you like to be?
	If you could choose not to pass away in your 70th, 80th, or 90th year,
	and actually the averages are somewhat lower than that high figure,
	how long would you choose to live?
	If you were given the opportunity for eternal life, would you take it?
	Tonight, you're going to be hearing from the world's foremost expert in anti-aging, Dr. Ronald Klatz.
	You're also going to hear from Dr. Vernon Howard, who's got a PhD in the philosophy of science and a very special interest in the role of values in science, and he's going to address the social aspects of what would happen if we all began to live a lot longer.
	And it's really not such an academic discussion we're going to have, because it's looming right on the horizon.
	In fact, shortly we'll tell you How close it really is.
	Alright, I don't want to take forever reading very long backgrounds.
	Suffice to say, Dr. Klatz is recognized as a leading authority in the new clinical science of anti-aging medicine.
	He has pioneered the exploration of new therapies for the treatment and prevention of age-related disease.
	President, founder of the American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine, a scientific medical society which is exploring advances in biotechnology and preventative healthcare.
	Dr. Klatz oversees educational programs for more than 8,000 other doctors and scientists from 55 different countries.
	So this man obviously knows what he's talking about.
	He's been on the show before.
	Coming tonight with him is Dr. Vernon A. Howard, who's got a doctorate in the philosophy of science and has a special interest in the role of values in science.
	You can see why he's going to be here tonight.
	Experienced also in the arts, education, and social sciences, he's the author of eight books and many articles on a variety of topics, including learning and performance in the arts and in sports.
	Since 1996, he has been Education Special Advisor to the American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine.
	And you can imagine why.
	Gentlemen, welcome to the program.
	Thank you very much.
	Since this is not television, and we cannot pan back and forth so the audience knows who they're listening to, Dr. Klatz, say something.
	Hi, Dr. Klatz here.
	Good to be on your show again, Art.
	It's always a pleasure.
	And now, for voice identification purposes, Dr. Howard.
	Yes, hello.
	It's a great adventure, I would say.
	I'll wait to see if it's a pleasure.
	Coming on the show is an adventure, that's right.
	It definitely is, and I don't know about Pleasure Bar.
	We'll find out.
	Right.
	Dr. Klatz, I think it appropriate to begin by setting the stage for the audience by telling them Where anti-aging medicine is right now and where we're going and when we're going to get there and what to expect.
	Well thank you Art, yes.
	I think in order to explain where anti-aging medicine is right now we have to talk about where anti-aging medicine was ten years ago.
	Ten years ago anti-aging medicine was science fiction.
	Wishful thinking at the very best.
	Found-the-view stuff.
	Exactly, found-the-view stuff.
	And my colleagues in the medical profession were none too shy in reminding me of this fact up until just two years ago that this was unscientific balderdash and this would not happen in our lifetime or our children's lifetime or possibly in our grandchildren's lifetime.
	And so, with the creation of the American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine, the first medical society, by the way, to take the position that aging is not inevitable, in 1993, we began the society with just 12 doctors at that time.
	From that time, since 1993, the American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine has grown to an international medical society with now 8,500 Physicians and scientists as members in 55 different countries around the world and anyone who's read the news over the last year or two realizes that anti-aging medicine has become mainstream rather rapidly.
	And what the public is now beginning to understand because of the educational effort on the part of the media is that the technology that the Academy has been espousing and that The people that I've had the pleasure of working with since 1981 have been espousing the biomedical revolution that is upon us, and it will make the computer revolution look like a ho-hum dull day at the park.
	Really?
	In comparison, yes, absolutely.
	I mean, realize that average life expectancy in the United States and the U.S.
	had the highest life expectancy on the planet in the year 1900.
	Yes.
	was only 46, 47 years of age. Today it's 77 years of age.
	So we've gained about 30 years of life expectancy in just the last 100 years.
	Have we made an equivalent gain or a parallel gain in the quality of life?
	Oh yes, I think so. Actually, I'm convinced of it. When I started getting involved in
	medicine, I was involved in medicine at a very early age, and I was involved in intensive
	care medicine. I was a physician, and I was involved in intensive care medicine.
	I used to work intensive care units in emergency rooms and things like that as a medical technician.
	Sure.
	This was about 25 years ago, and it was not uncommon 25 years ago to find the intensive care units filled with people who were in their 50s and 60s.
	In fact, even a few 40-year-olds with heart disease, stroke, cancers, lung diseases were quite prominent.
	I lived in the East Coast, and there was still coal miners' lung and coal miner inhalation problems.
	You know, at that time.
	Today, if you go into most intensive care units, it's rare to find people in there who are under the age of 60.
	Most of the intensive care unit occupants are in their 70s and their 80s today.
	A few in their 60s, but not a lot.
	And so what we're seeing is we're seeing this ratcheting upward of the diseases of aging.
	And I think it's very important that we understand that, because when the American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine began its message, To the public, the message was that aging was not inevitable, that what we consider to be natural aging may in fact simply be a constellation of degenerative diseases that ultimately lead, or degenerative metabolic function that ultimately lead to disease and finally to death.
	And when we start talking that way, I mean, we raised the hairs on the back of a lot of Sorry to the colleague's neck, it took a lot of heat from the media.
	This is where I have a hard time understanding this.
	I know that we have conquered many diseases.
	We probably have a cleaner environment in which to live, he says in one way.
	In other words, we have vitamins, we do things that we didn't do way back then.
	Things that We have extended our lives to the point you just mentioned a moment ago, the average lifespan.
	Right.
	But have we really opened the door, really opened the door, to anti-aging?
	You told us where it is.
	We know where it is now.
	How far ahead is the door to the first big step?
	And by that I mean, I don't know, doubling the lifespan, for example, of a human being.
	Tripling it or some gigantic step in the lifespan business here?
	You know, we need to have a historic view of man, which really none of us have because we were so much exposed to here and now thanks to the media that surrounds us, which is good in some ways and perhaps not so good in others.
	Realize that if you subscribe to the fossil record Man in one form or another has walked this planet for 3.1, 3.2 million years, yes?
	Some in the audience said yes, some said no, just about 13,000 years, but anyway, I'll go with you.
	Just follow me for a second.
	The popularly held notion in this fossil record that man in one form or another has been around for 3.2 million years.
	Well, for 3.1 million of those years, life expectancy for mankind was only about 20 years of age.
	Our cousins, the Neanderthals and cavemen and the early man, rarely lived beyond the age of 25 or 26.
	As a matter of fact, the oldest bones that have been excavated from Neanderthal graveyards was a woman at age 46.
	Okay, but they were exposed to the elements.
	They killed each other.
	I mean, there's a million reasons why they died early.
	Here's what I'm trying to ask, Doctor.
	I understand the great advances in the protection of human beings, maybe an overall word, protection, from men.
	Until now.
	But when we really start talking about anti-aging, we're talking about, I don't know, genetic research that may turn off a switch and cause cells to begin no longer dying.
	I was told once, we begin dying when we're born.
	At some point shortly thereafter, more cells are dying than are being generated at some point anyway.
	Well, we're certainly catabolic by the age of 25.
	In most cases, we're catabolic at some cell lines, or we start dying, as you say, as soon as we're born.
	I think I understand what you're saying, is one of the great breakthroughs is going to happen, where we're going to start living prodigious lifespans of 120 and beyond.
	We're not far away.
	Maybe 20, 25 years, 35 years, 50 years to the absolute outside.
	The American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine is predicting, and this prediction has been mirrored by the World Health Organization, that 50% of the baby boomers who are alive and healthy today will see their 100th birthday and beyond.
	In the laboratory right now, it is no big deal at all to extend the healthy, youthful lifespans of laboratory animals with simple interventions, as simple as antioxidant supplements or vitamin supplements, by as much as 30%, which would equate to a life expectancy for people of about 120 to 160 years.
	120 to 160 years.
	Tell us about telomeres.
	Well, telomeres are the end caps of DNA.
	And telomeres are exciting areas of research because they appear to be one of several clocks within the
	body that wind down as we get older
	and inhibit the cells from reproducing themselves.
	And what we're finding is that these telomeres ...are immortalized in cancer cells, and that's why cancers don't stop growing.
	They just keep on going and going and going until they finally eat us alive.
	Yeah, they're actually the exception to the rule.
	They're out of control growth of cells, right?
	Exactly.
	Double, double, double, again, double, again, double, again.
	They don't know when to quit.
	They don't know when to quit.
	But our cells, in an undiseased human being, they know when to quit.
	They're told when to quit.
	That's right.
	But the cancer cells have lost the ability to control their growth.
	And one of the controls that is lost, there are several control mechanisms, but one of them is that cancer cells produce telomerase, which is an enzyme that keeps these telomeres growing and growing and growing so they don't stop the process of cellular growth.
	Now, there are some other cells within the body that produce telomerase.
	Sperm cells are some.
	uh... some others some other cells of the uh... got are mortalized
	uh... but most of ourselves have a finite amount of of of this telomere
	that as it shortens and shortens and shortens it stops the growth
	it's it stops the ability of of cells to reproduce however as exciting as that is this interesting as that is
	nobody has died yet because they run out of telomeres so it's a complex
	saying no doubt uh...
	We're in the middle of unraveling the human genome.
	I think they're due to be done with it, I don't know, in the next few years or... 2001, they originally planned on 2003, but they're way ahead of schedule.
	So they're going to unravel the human genome.
	They will then be able to diagnose much disease and much behavior and all sorts of things about us.
	Well, it's going to be catecha, that's absolutely for sure.
	Everything that was in that movie will come to pass.
	But, then when they take the next step, And they begin to be able to manipulate that which they now understand, then all kinds of things would begin to be possible.
	Ordering your body, for example, to grow a new limb?
	Yes.
	A new liver?
	Yes.
	You could actually order your body to change your eye color, if you like, or your hair color.
	Or your facial features.
	If this discovery was made and implemented before those of us in our fifties now finally die, what about even the far out possibility of ordering our bodies to get younger?
	Not far out at all, Art.
	There are at least five technologies that are on the horizon right now, some of them closer than others.
	Yes.
	Any one of which could lead to virtual human immortality.
	What are they?
	Well, you mentioned the Human Genome Project.
	Yes.
	It's interesting, a team of Italian scientists just reported that by changing just one gene, by repositioning just one gene, this was in Nature November 18, that they could change the oxidative stress, the ability of the cells to
	deal with oxidative products, which is one of the reasons why we take vitamins
	to fight oxidation.
	And in laboratory mice extend their maximum lifespan by 30% with just
	the change of one gene. This is incredibly exciting because we thought
	in medicine and the science of aging, we thought that aging was an
	incredibly complex problem and it was going to require massive changes within
	in the cells of our body.
	It may turn out that aging is controlled by just a few or just a handful of genes, and if that's the case, genetic engineering may very well be one of the technologies that leads to virtual human immortality.
	Doctor, would all of us, would we collectively receive a totality of benefits or would we have a body that's young and a brain that's aging?
	I mean, now human beings tend toward mental difficulties in their 70s and 80s.
	I think the numbers for Alzheimer's begin to rise dramatically at about that age.
	So in other words, would those changes affect the brain as well?
	Hold on to that answer.
	We're at the bottom of the hour.
	We have yet to hear from Dr. Howard, but you can see why we're going to hear from him, because, just try and imagine the implications of what we're talking about.
	You're listening to ArcBell, somewhere in time, on Premier Radio Networks.
	Tonight, an encore presentation of Coast to Coast AM, from February 3rd, 2000.
	Right back to where we started from.
	Do you remember that day?
	When you first came my way?
	When you first came my way I said no one could take your place
	And if you get hurt By the little things I say
	I can put my back on your love, baby When it's all right and it's coming through
	We gotta get right back to where we started from And it's good, good, good
	With just a hundred pounds of clay He made my life worth living
	And I will thank him every day For every kiss you're giving
	And I'll thank him every night For the arms that are holding me tight
	time and the.
	You're listening to Arc Bell, somewhere in time, on Premier Radio Networks.
	Tonight, an encore presentation of Coast to Coast AM, from February 3rd, 2000.
	And tonight, you are blessed with the presence of Dr. Ronald Klatz, who's probably the world's expert in anti-aging right now, and I hope you're listening carefully to what he's saying.
	And of course, Dr. Vernon Howard, Who's going to address the really big questions that Dr. Klatz is raising.
	It's really the perfect team for what we're talking about tonight.
	How about you?
	How long do you want to live?
	Alright, once again, as we set this up, back briefly to Dr. Klatz.
	Doctor, so that if the rest of anti-aging and any of these areas that you've just spoken about should uh... get lucky in effect and uh... as the human genome product uh... the process goes on uh... unraveling it that is uh... it's it's only happening faster than we thought it would if the rest of it happens faster then there is at least a slim chance of people of my age or younger uh... or even a little older might in their lifetimes have an opportunity to begin to roll it is that is that
	That's absolutely correct, Art.
	As a matter of fact, there's every reason to believe.
	I don't even think you have to get very lucky.
	I think that you just have to be able to hang out for another 30 years or so, 35 years, in reasonably good health.
	And the technology has advanced at such a rapid rate.
	That biomedical knowledge is increasing at a rate that's doubling every 3.5 years.
	That means that in 20 years we're going to know 64 times more about how and why we age and how not to.
	In 23 and a half years we're going to know 128 times more.
	You know, a lot of people think that doctors like yourself think of themselves as gods.
	Do you?
	No, no, no.
	God's much greater than we are.
	I know too many doctors, let me tell you that.
	They're not as great as we'd like to think we are.
	Unfortunately, most of us know that that's quite the case.
	Most of us are pretty humble about what we do, but the most exciting thing in medicine right now It's not HMO medicine, it's not all the problems with malpractice and how the legal profession has, at least in my humble opinion, ruined the profession of medicine.
	The exciting thing is the future of medicine, which is anti-aging, which is the biomedical revolution, which is the potential for a cure for almost all Degenerative diseases that we live with and they're so prevalent that we think of them as natural, when in fact they are not natural.
	By the way, those five home runs that I talked about earlier that we didn't quite get to, those five different ways, any one of which could achieve immortality, is genetic engineering, nanotechnology, stem cell transplants or micro cell transplants, Hormone Replacement Therapy and Advanced Growth Factor Cellular Repair.
	What stem cells?
	Okay, stem cells are the progenitor cells of our body.
	They're the early cells that create the heart tissue, that create the nerve tissue, that create the GI tissue.
	Are they the cells that are located at the top of the spine, near the brain?
	Well, in the fetus it is.
	It's the early fetal cells that go on to create these organs.
	Those are what stem cells are.
	And what we just found out, which is incredibly exciting, You see, we thought these stem cells just disappeared as we got older, and they were gone.
	You know, after you were a fetus, or after you were a very young child, there were no more stem cells around.
	They did their job and... Yeah, gone.
	And so you have a number of cells you have, and that's the end of it.
	You know, just like they said, they taught us in medical school that you're born with so many brain cells, and you lose 10,000 or 200,000 brain cells a day for the rest of your life, until eventually you're a blithering idiot.
	I think I can feel mine going by the day.
	Well it turns out the really good news is that we found that there are in fact stem cells for these different organ systems lurking around inside the organs waiting there to be reactivated and waiting to reproduce that organ and to repair that organ and even stem cells for neural tissue that the brain doesn't stop Remodeling itself.
	The brain doesn't stop regrowing after a certain age.
	It grows throughout life, and it can repair itself throughout life.
	It doesn't repair itself nearly as well after the age of 8 as it did before the age of 8, but with new forms of stimulation, new drug therapies... But I guess what I was asking earlier about the brain at the bottom of the arrow, and we were going into it, I said, would, with the technology you imagine, would the brain keep up with the rest of the body's parts?
	With the technology that we are experimenting with right now, yes, absolutely.
	As a matter of fact, we're in the process right now, as human beings, of doing brain transplants.
	Microcell brain transplants, just a few hundred or a few thousand or a few million cells at a time, not a whole brain.
	Though there is a Dr. White from Case Western University who has talked about that.
	I think you've interviewed him.
	No, I want to.
	Oh, Dr. White.
	I did, in fact, interview Dr. White, of course.
	He did the monkey brain transplants.
	Absolutely.
	He's a member of the American Academy of Dental and Surgery Medicine.
	He lectured for us about three years ago.
	Fantastic lecture.
	He wants to do this in humans because that is another technology that you combine Brain transplant with cloning technology, which is the fifth on my list, and you're talking about real-time virtual immortality, and we could do it almost today.
	As a matter of fact, we could do it today.
	We could do it.
	I had a feeling.
	All right.
	Dr. Vernon Howard.
	Yes.
	Every time I've had Dr. Klatz on, we get to the point that we've just now reached, and then a million questions are begged.
	Yes.
	Immediately.
	Number one, I guess, should we do this?
	Is it a wise thing for humanity to even endeavor to do this?
	So, what do you say to that, is it?
	Well, you raise the crucial moral question.
	And already the economic, social, political implications of a grain population are being hotly debated among demographers and other social scientists.
	Whether or not we shall ever defeat death, I think that point is moot.
	I cannot speak from a clinical point of view, but I defer to Dr. Klatz on that.
	However, I think it's important to note that extended longevity as a goal espoused by a
	medical scientist refers not to mere long life, but to long, vigorous life in full possession
	of one's faculties and powers.
	Yes.
	And so that addresses the question that you raised.
	In effect, you know, will we be producing a generation of young fogies?
	That's right.
	But even if the answer, even if the answer to that is no, which it apparently is, then there's still a moral question based on all kinds of Sudden realities that... Oh, yes.
	Oh, yes.
	I mean, let's just assume, for the sake of argument here, that we're not talking about immortality, but the conditions which Dr. Clark referred to earlier of protracted life up to about 100, 120, 150 years.
	All right.
	Well, all right.
	Accordingly, we could also expect that, I would say, the successive phases of life, youth, middle and old age, to be greatly protracted.
	And each of the phases carries a different perspective, different rewards and responsibilities, and different opportunities, thus posing very challenging psychological and ethical problems for the individual and society.
	Now to mention only a few, given a greatly extended lifespan, what tasks or causes shall we devote ourselves over a vastly longer lifespan?
	What about this notion of a full adult participation in society between the
	intervals of the chronological interval of age 21 to 65 That's got to go
	Sure, I mean What adjustments in our commitments and ambitions that we
	have to make What will become of our marriages, our friendships and professional relationships?
	Our bank accounts.
	How will we accommodate to accelerating social changes and inevitable stresses attending those?
	Social security.
	Social security and retirement.
	How will we cope with intergenerational tensions?
	How will the AMA handle the loss?
	Exactly.
	And, you know, underlying a good deal of what Dr. Klatz is saying, and I fully agree with him in this, is a revolution in medical science, namely a redressing of the unbalances between the emphasis on cure and prevention.
	As I think Dr. Klatz says somewhere, anti-aging medicine is now growth of preventive medicine and sports medicine.
	It's the next step up.
	But it's also a social revolution in every way you can imagine.
	Exactly.
	And I can tell you from personal experience, as a university teacher in, what, four countries, that our higher education system is not prepared to meet this new challenge.
	You know, aside from all the things we've just mentioned, in other words, as credentialing institutions, what's it going to be like when you have someone who is 65 years old and is looking to pick up a PhD and become a professor of Romance Languages after a career in accountancy?
	Well, I see here that you co-founded and co-directed Harvard's Philosophy of Education Research Center in 1983.
	It also says that you talk to graduates on life After college?
	I mean, wouldn't that change your speech?
	That's a very good point.
	But by the time I wrote that book, I'd already become associated with A4M.
	And so I wrote that book with something of the lube of a longer lifetime in mind, suggesting to graduates that they will have to think of renewing themselves.
	Not only does the marketplace nowadays demand this, but The dim prospects of conventional retirement and extended lifespan require them to reflect on the possibility of two and three careers and constantly renewing themselves.
	Yes, but Doctor, our entire society now demands that we die.
	I mean, it's set up that way.
	Insurance companies, what would become of that?
	Everything you could talk about, everything you could imagine would change.
	Can we really Are we really prepared in the kind of time that Dr. Klatz is talking about to go through this kind of change?
	It's unimaginable!
	Art, I think that is precisely the question to ask.
	And in my own opinion, the answer is no.
	We are not prepared.
	And that's why we're having this conversation.
	Let me just add this.
	I think ageism is perhaps the last casual prejudice, rampant in the workplace and far beyond.
	And our society's preconceptions of age and aging are shaped by centuries of hardship, disease, and resignation to relative, well, let's call it short jeopardy, and the religious, artistic, and cultural expressions engendered by that condition.
	So, as a consequence, we have inherited a legacy of ageism in our personal lives, in corporate life, in education, in the media, and the popular press that must change if future, longer-lived generations are to reach their full potential as responsible, productive citizens in a democratic society.
	No, we're not ready for that.
	All right.
	When you hear that, Dr. Klatz, knowing the way the science is moving right now, and I know that you know the way it's moving, what do you say?
	I say that Dr. Vernon Howard is absolutely correct.
	I think what's really exciting, two things I think are very interesting I'd like to mention right now.
	Anti-aging medicine is serendipity.
	It's a gift.
	It was not planned for.
	It was not supported.
	The National Institute of Aging, which has a $625 million budget to explore the issues of aging and aging-related disease, by their own admission, spends about a million dollars or less on clinical anti-aging research.
	The advances that we're talking about have come out of collateral fields.
	They were not planned for.
	They just kind of spun off of other technologies.
	Research in cancer, diabetes, heart disease, genetic engineering, molecular biology.
	And we're sitting on the cusp of a new age that's looming before us.
	The ageless society.
	And it's happening in spite of the efforts of government and industry, not because of... Imagine how much faster it would go!
	If we were to redirect some of our financial efforts... Well, you've been faster is the answer, and if you... I just listened to Dr. Howard, and really, shouldn't you be slowing down?
	No, I don't think so, because the benefits of the Ageless Society are so incredible.
	Look, I'm a doctor, Art, and I'm pledged to help save lives, and to fight disease, and to prevent, you know, degeneration.
	And I think that anti-aging is a great thing.
	I mean, I don't like to... You know, Alzheimer's disease bothers me personally.
	There are... The Parkinson's disease doesn't look too good in my eyes.
	No, of course not.
	But there are six billion people on the planet right now, Dr. Klatz.
	You put your finger on it.
	And if... Do you... First, answer this for me.
	Do you honestly believe the world's population is prepared with a longer lifespan, significantly longer lifespan, To stop reproducing at present rates.
	That's a good question.
	I am not sure, but I'll tell you what has happened in the first world countries.
	Well, you better be sure before you start handing out the pills.
	Well, let's just hope that it is up to me who gets the pills, all right?
	Well, that's a whole separate discussion.
	That's another argument altogether.
	Yeah.
	But what has happened in the first world countries that You know, the population growth...
	It's not a problem in the first world countries.
	The U.S., Germany, Italy, Britain, Scandinavia, the first world nations have zero population growth.
	They actually have negative population growth.
	I believe the reproductive rate in Italy right now is like 1.4 per couple.
	In the U.S.
	it's something like 1.8 per couple.
	Yeah, that's for natives.
	But we have a positive population growth because of immigration.
	That's because of all those other countries I was talking about.
	Exactly.
	It's the third world nations.
	And the reason why there's such an incredible amount of growth in the population of third world countries is In the first world, the less children you have, the better the quality of life you enjoy.
	Right.
	You have more money, you have better access to education, to healthcare, etc., etc.
	Right.
	The smaller families mean higher quality of life.
	In the third world, it's just the opposite.
	The more children you have, the better chance you have of being taken care of when you grow old.
	Right.
	The more hands there are to work the fields or to work the streets and to raise money for the family.
	Absolutely.
	Anti-aging medicine, the technology of anti-aging medicine, filters down from the first world to third world countries, and the quality of life starts to increase, as it is doing in many places.
	I predict that we're going to see a reduction, a vast reduction, in reproduction.
	Well, maybe so, but Dr. Howard, if Dr. Klatz had the pills right now, Would you recommend to him that he evenly distribute those pills everywhere, including India and Bangladesh and, you know, wherever?
	Well, I think even prior to that is the question of access to the medical technologies.
	Oh, yes.
	Who can pay for this?
	Who will pay for it?
	Almost anybody.
	Who's got the money?
	Who's got the money?
	But what about those who don't?
	And I think that is a serious ethical social problem.
	A very serious one.
	A very serious one, yes indeed.
	I don't have answers to these questions, but I am in the business of raising them, and I see the issue of access As a particularly pressing ethical issue.
	In some states they have for terminal patients they have almost a triage kind of system and committees of doctors and others will decide at times when plugs are pulled and procedures are not done because of the progression of disease or whatever.
	Will there be similar Committees at some point, maybe even very early on, who would decide where the benefits of anti-aging would be applied first?
	That seems likely, because if the technology drives the need, then some decisions will have to be made.
	Now just how they will be made, I can't possibly know.
	But that such decisions will be made seems almost certain.
	Mandatory.
	I mean, it will be forced upon us.
	Lord, I disagree.
	You do it.
	I hate to disagree with Dr. Howard, but I have to disagree with this.
	Dr. Howard hasn't told you what we haven't brought up, and I think it's really important.
	By the way, this is a historic show, Art.
	Again, you're at the very cutting edge of technology and of social issues.
	The issue of the ageless society and anti-aging medicine has not been addressed by the media period.
	This is the first time in the history of the world, by the way, I must say, because I'm the guy who coined the term anti-aging medicine.
	I'm glad you have quite a strong backbone, Art.
	I think you're doing a service to humanity and certainly to your listeners, and I commend you for that.
	But Dr. Howard is at Tufts University, and he can tell you more about his credentials there, but Tufts is taking a very bold step.
	Uh, and creating a dialogue to look at the social implications All right, listen, the two of you have a point of disagreement.
	We're at the top of the hour.
	Both of you, hold on.
	We'll come back and find out exactly what that really is.
	Well, I'll tell you, academics, when they disagree with each other, it's like listening to senators disagree.
	I'm Art Bell and this is Coast to Coast AM.
	This is a video of me and my wife driving in the desert.
	We're driving in the desert and we're in the middle of nowhere.
	You're late, got nothing to do.
	Some machine doing that for you.
	In the year 6565, ain't gonna need no husband, won't need no wife.
	You think your son, think your daughter too.
	From the bottom of a long life to the world In the end, let it bite the end
	If God's a comin' He oughta make it right then Maybe He'll look around Himself and say
	Guess it's time for the judgment day In the end, let it bite the end
	If God's a comin' He oughta make it right then somewhere in time.
	Tonight featuring a replay of Coaster Coast AM from February 3rd, 2000.
	My guests are Dr. Ronald Klatz, probably the world's foremost expert on anti-aging, and Dr. Vernon Howard of Harvard and Tufts, who considers the social implications of what it is that Dr. Klatz and company are doing.
	It's bound to be an interesting discussion.
	more coming right up alright once again dr ronald claps and dr vernon howard and
	And, you know, it really helps us all when academics like these disagree.
	We learn from it.
	You guys are like senators, though, the honorable so-and-so, and then there's got to be about five or six paragraphs of praise before you get to the point of disagreement.
	You're both at the top of your fields, and there is a disagreement here, Dr. Klatz.
	Where is it?
	Well, you've got to realize, Art, that Vernon is a pretty accomplished athlete, and a strong fellow, and kind of spooky.
	I wouldn't want to run into him on Dark Alley if I had to be nice to him.
	But beyond that, it's very seductive.
	It's a seductive argument to talk about How dark and how bleak and how miserable all this good stuff about anti-aging medicine is going to be.
	Let's take this win-win-win-win-win scenario of anti-aging medicine, a bright future with no disease, no illness, very little death except for perhaps trauma or accident.
	Uh, you know, and turn it around and say, oh, it's going to be so horrible, we're going to overpopulate the planet with all these elder cockers who, uh, you know, are drooling on their shoes or, you know, taking up, uh, breathing too much air for those, uh, new young people to, uh, get along.
	And, uh, frankly, uh, those of us at the American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine, or at least, well, Vernon's at the Academy as well, but, Those of us who are, you know, the clinicians at least, don't see it that way.
	We see a different reality.
	We see, with the creation of the Ageless Society, that this Ageless Society will be generating boundless amounts of wealth.
	And that's a very bright scenario rather than a dark one.
	And I say this because For every year that you can extend the healthy, productive lifespan of the American public, you increase the gross national product from anywhere from two to five trillion.
	That's with a T. Trillion dollars.
	So if we could only increase the healthy, productive lifespan of the American public by, say, four years, we're talking about a minimum We're talking about the creation of a minimum of an additional eight trillion dollars.
	That's enough to pay off the national debt, to pay off health care in the United States, and have money left over to send almost every young American to college for free.
	Realize that people generate the vast majority of their savings for retirement in the last ten years of their life.
	That's when they're the most productive, and that's when they generate the most wealth.
	If you could extend those last few highly productive years, if you could double them, then what we're saying is that people could double their savings, could double their income, their life income, the total amount of dollars they have left.
	To live on forever, and by a very simple equation, and this is in my book, Ten Weeks to a Younger You.
	I don't know if you have my book or not, my new one.
	I do.
	I have an autographed copy, actually.
	Oh, good.
	Well, in Ten Weeks to a Younger You, I talk about a very simple equation by which if anyone can do this, anyone who has 30 years and who can save roughly $2,000 a year with simple compounding interest will become a millionaire within 30 years.
	Right.
	You're absolutely right.
	But not everybody, as we all know, is responsible that way.
	That's why we have this social security system.
	That's true.
	Because most people end up at, what, 65 years of age with nothing but.
	Right.
	I mean, that's the reality versus...
	I understand that, Art, but I'm just saying that it doesn't have to be the reality.
	Any more than the population explosion has to be the reality.
	These are social and political issues.
	We have the technology to stop the population explosion today if the government of this world and the political power of this world were to desire it.
	With proper education, with people having a long-term plan, You know, when I was growing up, I'm sure as when you were growing up, people were old by age 30.
	And there was a common saying, don't trust anyone over 30.
	This was during the time of Vietnam.
	I said it.
	OK.
	Because people were old at that age.
	Well, today, heck, I know people who are 60 who are younger than I am, at least mentally and emotionally.
	The point is that if people grow up in a world where they expect 100 years of youth, Their philosophies and their way of living will change drastically, and we're seeing that already in the last 20 years with the Green Revolution, with all the political pressures against pollution and saving the environment, etc., etc., because people, as they get to a certain age in life, they become more philosophical, and they look at the world as an integrated whole, rather than simply
	You know, as a young child, will the world end at the end of his fingertips?
	But you're describing a very idyllic world that is not here right now.
	And I'm not saying we can't get to it, but we sure aren't there now.
	And for the foreseeable future, our environment right now, Doctor, versus the Greens who are trying to help it, is going downhill fast.
	Well, I have a hard time arguing that point with you, Art.
	Okay, let me just make another argument then.
	And I'll turn the podium over to Dr. Howard if he has any other comments.
	And that is this.
	We have two choices right now.
	We can choose to embrace the notion of the Ageless Society by supporting anti-aging clinical research and by supporting the biotechnology that's in the laboratories right now and helping to encourage that and cure these horrible diseases of old age, which I believe are, in fact, curable, including Alzheimer's, Parkinson's disease, diabetes, heart disease, and many forms, if not all forms, of cancer.
	Okay, we can embrace it and we can go for it, or we can say, oh no, no, no, no.
	Anti-aging medicine, we're not ready for that.
	The world's a horrible place.
	We want to keep it a horrible place another few years more.
	Let's take all this technology and lock it up in the back room, and let's just let things go the way they are today.
	Well, the way they are today, when you reach a certain age, about age 60, Or about age 60-ish, you start developing these degenerative diseases of aging.
	Sure.
	And so the last 10 years of your life, or 15 years of your life, are not the golden age.
	They're really the geriatric age, where you're taking about nine different prescription medications each year to take care of your arthritis and your degenerative diseases of aging.
	And we as a nation, under that scenario, will become a nation of nursing homes by the year 2025, because the Baby Boomers are retiring in math come the year 2011.
	And by the year 2025, there'll be two 65-year-olds for every young teenager in America.
	And forget about America being a superpower, because we'll be a geriatric power.
	We have two choices.
	We either change Aging as we know it, and we have the technology to do it.
	It's called anti-aging medicine.
	Or, we embrace geriatric medicine, and we start building nursing homes at a prodigious rate, like the Manhattan Project, because God only knows that we're going to need them.
	Okay.
	You make people who consider the ethical ramifications and the moral ramifications of this sound like the bad guys.
	Well, I'm not trying to.
	There are really some very serious questions, Dr. Howard.
	No, I don't think Dr. Clarkson is doing that at all.
	The vision that he sets out is indeed, I think, a positive and idealistic one.
	As I recall, if I have the logic of this correct, Art, our disagreement dropped out of your question to me about triage like the inevitability or necessity of triage-like decisions
	being made about access to anti-aging medicine on the presumption of inequities, inequalities and
	access to these clinical procedures of one kind or other.
	Now, behind that looks, and I think Ron did touch upon this, and just as he touched upon it, he backed away from it, and I think he backed away from it quite rightly.
	Namely, will the social institutions, the political structures, social attitudes, keep up with the technology?
	Can it catch up with the technology?
	He's recommending that it should.
	I would love to see that it would.
	But I remain more skeptical in that domain.
	As do I. As do I. I do believe that technology is driving us in that direction, but whether the social structures, the political structures, attitudes, cultural attitudes, and other resistances, ageism and the like, whether these elements, the cultural elements, will change in time to bring about equitable conditions, I just don't know.
	And I don't think Dr. Klotz knows either, but he hopes they will.
	And I just remain a bit skeptical.
	Dr. Howard, I think rightly so.
	At least by today's standards, if you are in Central Africa right now and you get AIDS, you are going to die.
	If you're in America and you get AIDS, there's every possibility you'll live a fairly long life with the advances they've made.
	So the guy in Africa, he dies because he doesn't have the money, he doesn't have the technology, he doesn't have anything.
	So he's going to die.
	I think what this exchange illustrates, and I'm sure Dr. Clark would agree with this, is the urgency of these issues.
	Yes.
	Not only the clinical ones, and they are remarkable.
	Just to listen to him talk about them leaves me, every time I hear this, my jaw drops.
	But at the same time, I'm alerted to so many of the ethical, psychological, social problems of the kind that we've just touched upon here.
	He's not going to stop.
	Dr. Klatz isn't going to stop, and I wouldn't want him to.
	Nor should he.
	Nor should he.
	But, boy, it sure is going to be a race.
	It certainly is going to cause a lot of people in many domains.
	Would you, for example, Dr. Howard, with the first availability of this technology, see to it that it's given to people who do positive things for society First, the Einsteins, the political leaders of great strength and vision, the poets, the... I don't know, you get the idea.
	Yeah, I get the idea, and I think it's an idea that many democratic societies would find repulsive.
	And yet there are others, from a practical point of view, if it were a question of the survival of the race, might very well opt for something like that.
	But that is yet another one of those ethical issues which touches on questions of elitism.
	And if you go from there, well, what about racial preferences or gender preferences or whatnot?
	When you base excess upon a hierarchy of talent or a hierarchy of class or race or political persuasion, where does it stop?
	Dr. Klatz, where does it stop?
	Well, I think it stops by not starting.
	Right.
	Let's look at this another way.
	You know, aging and immortality or I realize when I say immortality, I'm talking practical immortality.
	Lifespans of 150, 200.
	I'm talking about lifespans of everlasting of 10,000 and beyond.
	So let me be clear about that before my colleagues in the medical profession have me strung up.
	Okay, but let's bring this down to earth for a second.
	Let's change the conversation from practical immortality or longevity or extreme longevity to cancer.
	How about if company XYZ was to announce tomorrow that they had found the ultimate cure to cancer, and it came in a pill, and the pill cost practically nothing to produce, maybe a tenth of a cent a pill, and you only had to take one of them, and you were absolutely immunized for cancer for the rest of your life?
	Well... No matter how long that would be?
	You live in a really idyllic world.
	If there was such a pill, Doctor, I know for one second Think that it would cost practically nothing.
	They would absolutely figure out a way to have that pill be very, very expensive.
	I agree with you as a matter of politics and reality.
	But I'm just trying, for the sake of this argument, let's not talk about immortality for a second.
	Let's talk about cancer.
	Who would tolerate having the knowledge that there was a company that had the cure for cancer And they were not going to release it to everyone.
	They were only going to give it to their friends, and to the guys in Washington, and their buddies at the FDA.
	But the rest of us poor mortals would have to suffer because, you know, if we eliminate cancer, there might be a population explosion.
	There certainly would be a ding in the bank account of the powers that live off the cancer industry.
	At the very least, and that would be a multi-billion dollar hit.
	Yes, it would, but you see what I'm saying?
	It's inconceivable, or at least I hope it's inconceivable, to you that a company could withhold the cure for cancer, but you know, in the same breath, we're talking about withholding the cure to not just cancer, but heart disease, diabetes, Alzheimer's disease, etc., etc.
	It's a hundred times more It's pernicious to withhold the cure to aging, because aging is a disease, just as cancer is a disease.
	I guess we have to get used to thinking of it that way, because I don't right now.
	No, no, no.
	Cancer is a disease, heart disease, I understand that, the diseases of the brain, but aging, I've never thought of as a disease.
	I've thought of it as an inevitability, something that You know, ashes to ashes.
	I mean, it's meant to be.
	You just said the magic words, Art.
	It's meant to be.
	Well, as long as aging is meant to be, we're never going to find a cure for it.
	It wasn't until polio was not meant to be.
	That, you know, the medical profession was free to actually look for new ways of treating the disorder.
	You're right, of course.
	Alright, hold on please, doctors.
	We'll be right back.
	Arthritis.
	We'll be right back.
	You're listening to Arc Bell, somewhere in time, on Premier Radio Networks.
	Tonight, an encore presentation of Coast to Coast AM, from February 3rd, 2000.
	It's written on the wind, just everywhere I go So if you really love me, come on and let it show
	You know I love you, I always will I'm made of you by the way that I feel
	I'm made up by the way that I feel.
	Short people got no reason, short people got no reason, short people got no reason to live
	They got little hands, little eyes, they walk around telling great big lies
	They got little nose and tiny little teeth, they wear flat bone shoes on their nasty little feet
	Well I'm, no I'm not short people Premier Radio Networks presents Art Bell, Somewhere in Time
	Tonight's program originally aired February 3rd, 2000.
	Oh, that's something else you might want to think about.
	We don't have to have short people anymore.
	Because there'll be a pill.
	Like ounce.
	You take it, you get bigger.
	Well alright, we were discussing aging and really a lot more.
	And we're doing it with Dr. Ronald Klatz, who is probably the world's expert in this area of medicine, as well as Dr. Vernon Howard, who is obviously an expert in the social consequences, discussing the ethical and social consequences of such a gigantic revolution.
	It would indeed be a gigantic revolution.
	Dr. Klatz is president and founder Of the Anti-Aging Academy.
	The Academy of, actually, Anti-Aging is the way I think it's put.
	I believe there is an offer on the table.
	Dr. Klatz, they can phone your Anti-Aging Medicine Center, the American Academy of Anti-Aging, and they can get something sent to them.
	What?
	Yeah, we have a great deal of free listeners, Art.
	I always enjoy doing your show.
	Oh, we're at the American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine here in Chicago.
	I have 800 lines set up, and I think there's five incoming lines, so hopefully they won't be busy, or if they are, you can just call back.
	They're going to be locked up.
	Oh, well, okay, then that's great, because we want to get this information out.
	You see, we're a non-profit medical society, and our job is to get this information out to the public, to let the public know what can be done.
	To slow, for the early detection, the prevention, the slowing, and perhaps even the reversal of the aging process.
	And so if your listeners call this number, the American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine in Chicago, it's an 800 number.
	We'll send them a package of information.
	It's worth about $25 if they were to buy the material individually.
	It includes our magazines, it includes newsletters from the Academy.
	A yearbook of activities of the Academy lists doctors who are practicing this medicine, clinics that are providing this medicine, and even a physician's desk reference in this package, which lists all the different drugs and the nutrients and the therapies that are available that have anti-aging effects.
	Now, I only have enough packages for the first probably 1,000 callers.
	Okay, 500 to 1,000.
	I know there's at least 500.
	I think there may be enough for 1,000 callers, so you should give that number a call.
	What are you charging?
	We're charging nothing.
	You're charging nothing?
	No, it's you, Art, and for your people, the price is right.
	Yeah, the price is right.
	You better get ready.
	If there's anyone out there who would like to help the Academy, you know, we're in Chicago and we're looking for donations.
	We're a 501c3, we're a non-profit, and to do this sort of thing does take money, but you know, so if there's any benevolent sorts out there, Howard Hughes types especially, who would like to advance the science, I'd love to hear from you.
	That brings up kind of an interesting ethical question for you, Doctor.
	Let's say I was a Howard Hughes type.
	Well, I think you are Howard Hughes type money.
	No, I'm not.
	Billion.
	No, I'm not.
	No, I'm not.
	Let's say I had billions of dollars and I don't.
	Okay.
	And let's say I came to you privately and sat down in front of your desk and I said, look, doctor, I've got all the money you're ever going to need for the research you're doing, but I want you to keep me alive for at least 150 years.
	I want you to do everything in your power to do that.
	And here's $3 billion or $10 billion.
	Well, I'm not sure that he hasn't.
	uh... i'm i'm i'm i'm waiting for bill gates to call me any day i've i've been
	waiting for the last ten years frankly i don't understand why he hasn't
	because frank you know i mean what is there in life art after you have money
	handled well i'm not sure that he has a he he hasn't looked to me like he's been
	aging lately that the middle of that great to me art and i i i
	have a very well trained i in the for the uh... i
	I think Bill Gates needs my help more than he realizes.
	Oh, man.
	All right, well, you're going to need Bill Gates' help making an offer like that.
	Is that a 24-hour number, or is it during the day?
	No, it's 24 hours.
	Or they could go to our website.
	If they don't even want to make the telephone call, we have a website that has thousands of pages of free information.
	And it's WorldHealth.net.
	That's WorldHealth, one word, like the World Health Organization.
	Right.
	Dot net.
	I'm sure we've got a link up.
	I'm sure we do.
	As a matter of fact, last time I was on the show and we connected to you, it was incredible.
	We just got so much traffic through our website.
	I can imagine.
	And the important thing that I'd like to just say one last thing, commercial, not very commercial because we're not commercial, we're non-profit.
	What I'd really like the listeners to do is, I'd like them to join the American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine.
	We're a society that's open to the general public.
	Our goal is to make the American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine the next American Heart Association, because if we have enough members of the general public, we will be able to redirect the focus of research in Washington.
	The $15 billion or so that is spent on medical research, on scientific research, and directed towards things that count that that will count
	within our lifespan
	i mean it's you know research on the stale daughter and on you know uh...
	you know these these kind of interesting but uh... not necessarily
	a critical issues are important
	but realize the government is always spending one million dollars or less
	on clinical anti-aging medical research did you hear the little song i played
	coming into the short people that's right
	the rights of short people uh... there will come a time with the work that you're
	doing designer children
	That will absolutely be possible.
	It may even come before the big breakthrough in anti-aging.
	It's already here, Art.
	There are no more short people, or very few short people.
	Human growth hormone, over the last 30 years, has virtually eliminated dwarfism and midgetism.
	As a matter of fact, you'd be hard-pressed to cast for the Wizard of Oz today, because there are no more munchkins.
	Well, it's going to go, though, beyond that.
	It's going to go to ordering eye color.
	It's going to go to ordering intellectual level.
	Ultimately, it's going to go to true designer children.
	And, Dr. Howard, are we ready for that one?
	Well, certainly many of the established religions are not.
	And, once again, I think it's a question of how quickly social institutions can Catch up and there is ingrained in much popular thinking about such matters the distinction between what is natural and what is unnatural.
	This issue comes up all the time and again in discussions of contraception and the like and in vitro fertilization.
	And I think many religious sensibilities will be I'm highly stressed by these prospects.
	I'm not saying one way or the other whether they're right or wrong, but I think... You're just stating a fact.
	Yes, I'm stating a fact that there will be considerable social distress over these matters, as well as the other matters that we have discussed, and that they have to be dealt with, at least investigated, to diminish the amount of social stress and chaos that may result.
	Dr. Klatz, how frequently, as you plunge forth in your research, do you stop and think about things like this?
	Well, not very often, Art.
	I mean, it's not stopping the research.
	When you have, I know that you have panels of doctors, and you have meetings and seminars on this very thing, and you have people like Dr. Howard there.
	When you all get going, What turns out to be the center of attention?
	What turns out to be the center of contention?
	You know, the contention is basically focused around who will have access to this technology and who will control this technology.
	Who gets the pills?
	We said it earlier.
	We said it earlier, and I think the best synthesis Of these discussions, and you know, it's not like we're rushing into the future with our eyes closed and, you know, living this Pollyanna, you know, wish for this.
	No, but you may be squinting real hard.
	Well, perhaps.
	But, you know, these issues are in fact discussed.
	It doesn't slow us down, it doesn't stop the science, but we still talk about the philosophy, and we're really concerned about it.
	But the best answer that I've heard so far is that Democracy, democratization of this technology, you know, the technology in the greatest number of hands is the only equitable way of proceeding.
	So if we try and lock this stuff up in a closet somewhere, it won't stay there.
	We're talking life and death.
	Fine, then your answer is everybody gets pills.
	That would be my choice.
	And you, Dr. Howard, if the pill were available now?
	Oh, sure.
	I certainly agree with that.
	It's just that I think many other people wouldn't, on religious or moral or whatever grounds, they would probably reject it.
	How about just old, plain, practical grounds?
	In other words, if the pill was here today, and it were distributed to Mexico, where there's a large Catholic population, and they frankly don't practice a whole lot of birth control there, Along with a lot of other predominantly Catholic countries.
	I mean, this is what we're talking about.
	Yeah, but Art, what are we going to do?
	We're going to say, sorry, we don't like your politics, you can't live?
	Isn't that what we've done in most of our history?
	Well, maybe some have done.
	I haven't.
	I mean, World War II, somebody said to us, we don't like politics, so you're going to have to die.
	Well, I'm not arguing the point with you, Art.
	I mean, you know, if it comes down to a political choice, our political leaders may make very nasty decisions, as they have in the past.
	But, you know, if I'm the guy who's in charge and has my finger on the button, and it's my finger that's on the button, I'm going to let the genie out of the lamp.
	Now, that's an interesting thought.
	Do you think That they, in quotes, would allow you to let that genie out.
	That's a scary thought, Art.
	It's a practical one.
	I know, and you have more experience in this realm than I do, but I've heard... Well, I'm told that the guy who invented the carburetor that gets a thousand miles or whatever it is, he's dead.
	You know, he's a lump in the desert somewhere.
	Yeah, it is kind of scary that, you know, the implications.
	So far, I haven't had a knock on the door by anyone in black suits, but I expect that'll be coming sooner than later.
	Yeah, so do I. And I suspect that they will take you to someone who will talk to you about who gets the pill.
	Well, you know, that's what happened with Tesla, isn't it?
	Yes.
	And probably, you know, every other major breakthrough that has occurred in... Bingo!
	Yeah, they came in when he died and they confiscated every scrap of everything there was and they took it away and we haven't seen it since.
	That's what happened with Tesla.
	Well, you know Art, I don't know.
	I don't.
	All I can do is just do what I'm doing and that's to keep pushing the science and keep pushing society and keep Working towards this goal of a bright future and an ageless society, and I'll continue until such time as I'm stopped.
	Hopefully I won't be stopped very soon, but you might be right.
	There might be a knock on the door one day.
	Dr. Howard, you think of this sort of thing.
	Do you think that a government, whatever government there would be, or leadership we would have at a time that such an advance was made, would they be able to stay out of it?
	I doubt that they could stay out of it.
	I'm no prophet, but one of the reasons that I think it's important to discuss these issues openly is to keep the democratic process involved.
	I mean, there are issues of citizenship and service involved here, which we are very much concerned with at the Lincoln Filing Center for Citizenship and Public Affairs at Tufts.
	And the more open you can keep this debate, With both the clinical, I mean, I fully agree with Dr. Klaff that his role is to proceed on the scientific and the clinical, the medical side.
	Sure it is.
	And to press ahead.
	I think you would fully agree with me that other people with other interests, sociological, ethical, political, need to be added, brought on board to consider the very issues which you've been raising as adjacent fields.
	deserving of attention in order to keep the democratic process going so don't
	let this is so that the knock will not come at the door uh... in any kind of fine way
	so uh...
	dr class when you have the seminars with other doctors like dr howard
	and you get to this part of the discussion does your side of the table tend to go
	yeah yeah yeah uh...
	uh... it's not quite sure that it's better Ha!
	Well, that's probably because the answer is, yeah, yeah, yeah.
	It is inevitable.
	I know we're going to go plunging ahead.
	We're doing it on every front, the internet.
	We live in a dot-com world right now, and you just said, the anti-aging revolution will make that look like kid's stuff.
	Oh, absolutely.
	Think about it, Art.
	I mean, you know, we're right on the cusp of being able to reprogram our own DNA.
	I mean, how can a computer compete with that?
	We're talking about being able to take a pill or a shot or an injection to rebuild our heart, to rebuild our brain, to expand our consciousness.
	We're talking about implants of silicone implants.
	Have you seen a commercial running on television, Doctor, recently?
	that will allow you to have not just vision, but x-ray vision, infrared vision, will be
	able to allow you to connect instantly with the internet without a computer, just to think
	about it.
	Have you seen a commercial running on television, doctor, recently?
	You probably don't get to watch much, but it shows some guy in a store.
	Oh, yes, I've seen that.
	Oh yeah, but he's walking around.
	It looks like he's stealing stuff.
	He's shoving it in his jacket pocket.
	He walks right out the door, and the guard stops him like he's going to arrest him and says, sir, you forgot your receipt.
	Well, the guy had a chip implanted, and it read it, the chart debited the card, and he just... He didn't have to go to any checkout, because there wasn't any checkout.
	That's right.
	As a matter of fact, that chip actually exists.
	It's called the Digital Angel.
	And that was just... Oh my God, did they really call it that?
	That's exactly what they call it, and I'm trying to find the reference for it... Digital Angel?
	...in front of you somewhere.
	Sounds a little like a digital devil.
	It very well may be.
	That's kind of scary, frankly, and... Why would somebody with that sort of technology name it something they know would inflame the group that we all know we're talking about here?
	The Digital Angel?
	Well, maybe it's kind of like those government programs that are kind of like doublespeak.
	You know, like the government program for freedom of the media that are, in fact, you know, programs that remove your First Amendment rights.
	Wasn't it Ronald Reagan who wanted to name a submarine the Corpus Christi?
	I believe so.
	Oh my God.
	So there's really no stopping it.
	There's only controlling it, Art.
	There's only controlling it.
	We're rushing headlong into the future.
	This is the future of medicine, and it's not far-distant future.
	It's like tomorrow's future.
	The best we can hope for is to control the future.
	If we don't take control of it, if somebody doesn't have a vision for the way it should be, then God help us all.
	And even if the world was to develop according to someone's vision, You know, let's talk about my vision for a second, which I think is a kind of a happy, bright future.
	Even if the public was to embrace that vision itself, it would still be a massive undertaking to try and achieve that goal.
	But if we go forward with our eyes closed, hanging on with our nails to the edge of our chair, then disaster First time I've heard God's name tonight.
	Now, why not?
	Do you believe in a God, an active God of the Bible, Dr. Klatz?
	Oh, yes, I do.
	You do?
	I'm rather spiritual myself.
	You are?
	Not terribly religious, but I categorize myself as spiritual.
	Do you think that we're getting close to his ballpark, his arena, playing in his arena?
	Yeah, I think that we're getting closer all the time.
	I'm predicting, you know, why not, you know, we're breaking new ground every moment with this conversation.
	I'll give you another one of my predictions.
	I'm predicting that we will have a digital cerebral interface which will allow people to move their consciousness and their psyche into cyberspace within the next 25, uh... years to thirty five years that's probably the
	six way uh... that we might achieve practical immortality we might
	very well be able to become
	uh... got ourselves with in cyberspace we're certainly god-like
	you you mean actually help me to say that we are god's or will be god's of
	the say that we will have god-like powers
	the advent of the digital cerebral interface through uh... through cyberspace and virtual reality
	uh...
	uh... the creation of virtual realities is.
	Oh, I'm sorry.
	Oh, brother.
	Alright, here's what I would like to do.
	I would like to let the audience, if you both are up for it, ask you both questions.
	Sure.
	Are you both up for that?
	Oh, yes.
	Sure.
	All right, then that's what's coming next.
	Hold tight, both of you.
	I'm Art Bell, and this is Coast to Coast AM.
	Eternal Love, A New Meaning.
	You're listening to Art Bell, Somewhere in Time.
	Tonight, featuring a replay of Coast to Coast AM from February 3rd, 2000.
	I take my girl, I take her out to drive-in Our love's gonna be written down in history
	Just like Romeo and Juliet Only in America
	Can a guy from anywhere Go to sleep before her and wake up the millionaire of the
	world Only in America can a kid without a set get a break and maybe grow up to be president.
	Only in America, a land of opportunity, yeah!
	Would a classy girl like you fall for a poor boy like me!
	In America, get a kid who's watching cars, take a giant step and reach right up and start
	it.
	In America, you dream like this comes true.
	But a guy like me starts with nothing and ends up with you.
	Premier Radio Networks presents Art Bell's Somewhere in Time.
	Tonight's program originally aired February 3rd, 2000.
	Well, we've got the world's leading authority on anti-aging, Dr. Ronald Klatz, with us.
	We've also got a word of caution from Dr. Vernon Howard on the ethical dilemma, the moral dilemma.
	of perhaps one day in the age was decided on that all kinds of comments
	from the audience both bypass
	and on the phone and tackle some of that get back to the phones in a moment
	so i have a lot of cars online uh... for doctor clinton doctor howard but uh...
	doctors just a couple of very quick things I'm going to read you a couple of faxes I've got, and I've got handfuls of them here.
	This one.
	Oh, come on, Art.
	You're familiar with the term disinformation campaign, aren't you?
	You know, if these guys come out with a cure for cancer that costs no more than an aspirin, here's what'll happen.
	1.
	The FDA will never finish testing it on rats.
	They'll pump a rat full of 10 pounds of the stuff.
	The rat will die.
	2.
	These guys will be labeled dangerous quack so fast it'll make your head spin.
	3.
	Their research, their discoveries, maybe even themselves, will be buried so far into obscurity Tonight on your show may be the closest they'll ever come to getting their information anywhere near the public.
	Four, my bet is the medical lobby and the drug companies and their lobbies in Washington would arrange to have these guys investigated by the Justice Department, the IRS, or any number of other agencies.
	And if they can't stop them, you'll probably see another accidental, unfortunate Waco-type affair.
	And five, Immortality is in direct conflict with almost every organized religion.
	If the government doesn't get these guys, that church will.
	Oh well, so much for my life extension program.
	Listen, we gave out a phone number for this free information, and not only are your phone lines jammed, but the entire trunk line going to your phone lines is jammed.
	Well, I'll get that straightened out in the morning, so if the listeners will bear with us.
	They can go to our website at worldhealth.net and log in there for all kinds of free information and a free newsletter, and that's an unlimited offer.
	But if they would go to that phone number, I'll get that fixed first thing in the morning.
	I suppose that there's just too much interest, which is a good thing.
	Well, it's a telling thing, isn't it?
	In other words, as much as we sit here and fret about the social consequences, individually offered the opportunity, people are going to take it every time.
	Right, Dr. Howard?
	Yes, I do think so, yes.
	It's self-interest.
	Yes, it is.
	It's how we elect presidents.
	You know, we check our wallet, right?
	And we vote.
	The only catch is we would like to link it to enlightenment so that it becomes enlightened self-interest and not mere selfishness.
	Yes, well, alright, then this question.
	How do your guests feel that religion and spirituality will be affected by the existence or the use of anti-aging technology?
	Will there be a backlash by the traditional mainstream religions?
	So, will people become more spiritual, or would they tend to become less so?
	Dr. Howard, this is your... Yeah, right.
	This is asking me to be a prophet, not merely a philosopher.
	Well, I think it will vary greatly from one religion or even subset of religion to another.
	Some may become really quite wrapped up in the natural, unnatural distinction, like one of the earlier questioners on the issue of contraception.
	Others may see it, as I hinted in the comment a while back, as an opportunity for increased spirituality, in the sense that one needn't feel so rushed at life.
	One needn't feel the kind of desperation that I think drives people either to fanatical extremes on the one hand or to grotesque extremes of materialism on the other.
	Yes.
	One would have time to reflect.
	One would have time in particular, I think, to reflect on the patterns of one's own life.
	the patterns of one's own life. And so I don't see in this an
	inherent threat to religiosity or spirituality.
	I do see a threat piecemeal, as it were, vis-a-vis certain doctrines and cherished beliefs, particularly in the realm of what we would commonly call metaphysics, where you think you can properly draw a line between what is proper and right and natural and what is improper and wrong and unnatural.
	Those are fierce distinctions in the minds of some people, and they tend to run in the face of scientific procedure, because they're not scientific concepts.
	And whenever religion and science get into conflict, except in a political way, it's religion that loses.
	I think the literal interpretation of religious doctrine is A misinterpretation of what religion really is all about, but I won't go into that.
	Well, let's come back to the wallet for a second.
	Here's a fact, straightforward, from Louise.
	Thank you, Louise.
	It just says, kids can't wait now until their parents kick the bucket to get their money.
	I'm curious.
	That's probably true, isn't it?
	Well, there is that wonderful book out there, I forget who wrote it, called Die Broke, which advocates a different approach to personal finance.
	And then just one more before we go to the phones, and we'll go back to them.
	Art, we all thought that Ralph Nader was a bit of a nut on safety.
	Just wait until death by accident is virtually the only way anybody dies.
	People will be wearing a helmet and airbags when they go out to walk the dog.
	And, speaking of dogs, Will we see the 50-year-old dog, the 80-year-old cat someday?
	Or, with the way medical science works, Dr. Klatz, might we see them first?
	You will see them first.
	We're seeing them now.
	We're seeing laboratory mice that are living to the equivalent age of about 160 years of age.
	We have fruit flies that are equivalent to about 180 years of age.
	We have roundworms that are equivalent to age 300 to 500 years of age.
	Has there been any experimentation on higher mammals?
	You know, cats, dogs, monkeys?
	Well, my dog was an experiment in progress, I suppose.
	I mean, I didn't experiment with my dog before.
	I first got it worked out with my patients and my family members, because after I was
	my dog, I couldn't take any chances with him.
	But Lex, Lex the Wonder Dog I called him, he was an incredible example of the powers
	of anti-aging medical therapies.
	At 11, he was an old dog with gray hair and a gray nose and clouded eyes.
	We put him on an anti-aging medicine program and he, in the space of six months, reverted back to the equivalent of an eight-year-old Airedale.
	He was running and frolicking with the Golden Retriever down the block.
	Really?
	Oh yes, and he went strong until age 16.
	When did you finally get him?
	Well, he ended up with a stroke.
	and i rehabilitated him from the stroke but the quality of his life had gone
	down he wasn't the
	he wasn't a happy young puppy that he was just six months earlier
	and after the stroke he started having these minor uh... infections and as soon as the quality of his life was
	gone i wasn't i didn't
	Although I could have kept him going, I believe, for another year, at least, maybe two, I wasn't going to put him through that issue because that's not what anti-aging medicine is about.
	It's not about living a long life.
	It's living a high-quality life.
	That's what it's all about, a high-quality, productive, youthful life.
	So I put him down at age 16 and a half, and that's the equivalent of about 116 years.
	Okay, but doesn't that kind of beg the question that we were discussing earlier about the quality of life in the latter years?
	We don't put down people.
	Not yet, anyway.
	Well, no, we don't, but I mentioned earlier about these senior athletes.
	What we're seeing is that in our oldest all, the people who are senior athletes and the people who are age 100 and beyond, by the way, there are now 70,000 Americans age 100 and beyond.
	They're the fastest growing segment of our population, by the way.
	and in these people who are for the estimated one else on the tradition
	that they stopped announcing them but i have a really
	yes they have because it's just too many of them
	uh... willard scott just doesn't have that much airtime but the point is is that these people
	when they do uh... go they go relatively
	quote a pleasantly They get sick, and they're sick for a few weeks, maybe a few months, and that's the end, and it's over, and it's not this heroic kind of, we're going to spend 90% of all of the health care dollars that you've ever spent in your life in the last year or two trying to keep you alive with heroic means, and it's really not keeping you alive, it's just prolonging your death.
	Well, here's a practical question I can't resist since we've come down this road.
	And it is as follows.
	If people know that they can live for a very long time, and the only way they're going to die is going to be some sort of violence, how do we get people to take hazardous jobs in this brave new world, like policemen, going to war as a soldier for our country, being a fireman, something that might end your life dramatically and quickly?
	Well, I think that would be great, wouldn't it?
	I mean, think about it for a second.
	You mean having a hard time filling those jobs?
	Having a hard time filling those jobs because I would like nothing better than to have a society where people are so concerned about their health and mortality that they don't commit violent crimes because it's simply not worth it.
	Where people don't go off to wars because their life is of such a high quality and such a value that they don't want to squander their life on war.
	Isn't that a rather... It's a wonderful picture.
	It's so wonderful that it's unrealistic.
	Well, unfortunately, I acknowledge that.
	But I don't think we'll have a problem filling these positions.
	There are enough people who get off on the adventure and the adrenaline rush that that will always be a pull for many people.
	More skydiving and bungee jumping and such?
	Well, if you're going to go, go.
	You know, wouldn't it be a lot more fun to go with a broken bungee cord than it would be to go from cancer or from a slow-lingering degenerative disease?
	I mean, I'm playing with a lifespan of 150.
	I'm not sure I've thought about the broken bungee cord thing, and it's not very attractive.
	I realize it's quick, but it's not very attractive.
	Well, I'm planning on making it to 150 personally, but when the end comes, I want it to come... Budget court style?
	Yeah, of my own choosing, of my own decision.
	Not some horrible, you know, not some horrible, you know, twist of fate.
	This will be a hard question for you, Dr. Klatz, but if If we as a human race begin to live 150 years, 300 years, and an individual decides they have lived long enough, at say 112, and they want to opt out, do you think that physicians should be able to help them do that comfortably?
	I think historically the role of a physician has been to assist their patient Both in achieving the highest quality of life that they can, and the highest use of their life, and the highest pursuit of health.
	And that sometimes that that included the guarantee of a painless, or relatively painless, and non-burdensome death.
	But here we'd be facing a different question, not so much say a decline in health, I would have a difficult time with physicians helping people shed their mortal coil because they were bored.
	I would have a difficult time with physicians helping people shed their mortal coil because
	they were bored.
	I don't have such a problem with assisted suicide, however.
	There are two different issues.
	Very different issues, yes.
	I think I would have a problem with doctors just giving people a way out simply because
	they are bored.
	If they want to go, then it's time to go bungee jumping with defective bungee cords.
	Dr. Howard, any comments on that?
	Well, it's interesting listening to this conversation between you, how many of these issues have been explored through a variety of myths and stories and artworks that have been bequeathed to us over the centuries, particularly the past 200 years.
	On the point of death by accident, in Bernard Shaw's play Back to Methuselah, that's one of the major issues in the opening A scene where Adam turns to Eve and says, look at this dead fawn.
	Isn't that strange?
	Someday this will happen to me, however long I live, however many years, equal to the grains of sand on the beach.
	Sooner or later, I'm going to trip up and end up like the fawn.
	In Janacek's opera, The Bacropolis Case, it's the story of a 337-year-old woman who was bored out of her mind.
	But partly, the moral of that story is that She lived a long time, but she kept repeating herself.
	She had something like a 320-year singing career.
	That's a record, I think, in fiction.
	Indeed.
	And so I think what Dr. Klatz indirectly is referring to and calling for, and what many of these stories call for, is some recognition of the necessity of renewal.
	Otherwise, boredom is a threat.
	All right, it's a threat if I keep people waiting too long.
	First time caller on the line, you're on the air with Drs.
	Klatz and Howard.
	Hi.
	Hi, this is Tom in Buffalo, New York.
	Hello, Tom.
	Hi.
	Quick comment on the religious aspect.
	I think if from sickness and death, good for the soul, I doubt if Jesus would have gone around curing the sick and raising the dead, although some of his contemporaries are very authorities.
	Claims he was doing the work of the devil, I think they were wrong.
	Two questions if I could quickly.
	Number one, is it possible that they will find a medical cure for boredom?
	Some sort of genetic correction?
	Or how about a mood-altering drug?
	Because boredom would be the issue, and another completely different question is, finally, in the end, don't we have to die to be with God?
	Ah, well, let's see.
	Who wants that one?
	Don't ask me.
	I haven't been there yet.
	With regard to boredom, boredom is basically a function of your choices and your opportunities in life.
	And anti-aging medicine is all about opportunities.
	It's about the opportunity to choose your own healthcare destiny and about having all the time that you could possibly want or need to achieve mastery in this lifetime.
	We all have a purpose on this planet, at least I believe we have a purpose, and some of us don't stay around long enough to achieve that purpose or even to discover that purpose, and that's the ultimate benefit of anti-aging medicine.
	And I think once you know what your purpose is, you it's very hard to be bored
	i was bored out of my school when i was uh... a teenager
	and when i was uh... a young adult and then i got involved in in my medical
	career and i have been bored a day since i haven't had the time to
	be bored and there would be as you point out there would be time
	to find out is right for you
	whereas now so many people do not uh...
	That certainly is an upside.
	There's no question about that.
	The second part of the question, do you need to die to be with God?
	Well, I certainly hope not.
	Alright, we'll hold it right there.
	We'll be right back.
	Do you have to die to be with God?
	Hammer might be the only way to go.
	You're listening to Art Bell's Somewhere in Time on Premier Radio Networks.
	Tonight, an encore presentation of Coast to Coast AM from February 3rd, 2000.
	I am around the world and it is my time. I am around the world and it is my time. I am around the world and it is my
	time. I am around the world and it is my time.
	I have a lot of love between my brothers and my sisters, all over this land.
	Ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh.
	Ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh.
	I had a belt.
	I ring it in the morning.
	I ring it in the evening.
	All over this land.
	I ring out.
	Danger!
	Steering away from the crest of a wave.
	it in the evening all over this land blurring out dangers
	Steering away from the crest of a wave just like magic
	Oh, rolling and riding and slipping and gliding just like magic
	And you, and you feel just like I do And you, oh Higher and higher, baby It's a livin' thing It's a terrible thing to lose.
	It's a given thing.
	and you're listening to our bills somewhere in time on premier
	radio networks tonight on board presentation of coast to coast a m
	from february third two thousand five guests are dr ronald clark's the world's
	leading authority on anti-aging and doctor vernon a
	who has just been heckle credentials
	the world.
	To be discussing, he's actually co-founder and co-director at Harvard's Philosophy and Education Research Center in 1983, and is, I guess, tackling the philosophical end of this as best he can, and the impossibly difficult ethical, moral questions that arise from human beings just living on and on.
	We'll get back to it in your calls in a moment.
	All right, once again, back to our guests.
	Howard is either in Cambridge right now, I think, in Massachusetts, or somewhere up in
	New Brunswick, Canada, which is...
	No, I'm in Cambridge.
	You're in Cambridge at the moment.
	All right.
	Dr. Howard, is this a frequent topic of conversation among your peers?
	That's a very good question.
	It depends on how you look at it.
	I would not say that the issues of longevity or even of anti-aging medicine have much exercised moral and social philosophers up to now.
	Now, medical ethics is, of course, a burgeoning branch of philosophy and of values in medical practice.
	I don't think it's going to be much longer before they get around to it, particularly as this specialty, as Dr. Clark has reminded us, takes off and captures the public attention.
	And I think that's what is happening.
	It's been around for some time, but I think it's now becoming a public issue as people see the opportunities for taking control of their own well medical destiny police but uh... but it's great a
	control over and then that goes right back to the question uh... here i am a
	hundred and fifteen years old yes
	uh... in good health bored out of my skull
	and i really for whatever reason i want in my life uh... philosophically
	uh... how do you view that uh... with with the new technology it's it's it's
	I can link this to your other query.
	Many, many of the stories and myths that we've inherited, especially over the past 100 years, including even stories like the Dracula and Frankenstein tales, the portrait of Dorian Gray, a picture of Dorian Gray, deal with this sort of issue.
	The wages of longevity, if you could put it that way, the risks.
	Admittedly, these people were engaged in creating imaginative works of art, but they were struggling with these issues.
	It's the earthly dream.
	It's different from the dream of immortality.
	Anybody interested in literature or read stories like Virginia Woolf's Orlando will know that these are the issues that these people have been dealing with.
	So they're in the woodwork.
	They're in the literature.
	And I think as the public becomes more and more aware, practically speaking, that I think the ethical social issues, even as they merge out of literature and art, will come to the forefront.
	All right.
	First time caller on the line, you're on the air with Dr. Klapsen.
	Howard, hi there.
	Hi, this is Joel in beautiful Marin County, California.
	Okay.
	And I, Dr. Klapsen, I've been taking several non-prescription anti-aging drugs for a few years, like melatonin, DHEA, Deprinyl Citrate.
	I feel great.
	My immune system is strong and I think they're terrific.
	I have two quick questions.
	First, I just have one quick comment for you, Art.
	Someone can be bored out of their mind at 115 or at 70 or at 50, but I don't think that has anything to do with the benefits of anti-aging drugs.
	I mean, if they want to end their life, that's a whole other issue.
	Right, but it is for physicians if we want to have a civilized world and ethical, moral issues.
	Oh yeah, of course.
	No question about that.
	Mike, two quick questions.
	Dr. Klatz, do you know about Deprinil Citrate and the FDA not only not approving it, but now banning it from even being produced and sold?
	No, that's not correct.
	Deprinil is sold, and it's FDA approved, and it's sold under the name Aldepril, which has side effects.
	It doesn't have the same benefits as Deprinil.
	Well, no, they're very similar.
	The drug is essentially identical.
	There's a lot of marketing hype behind this company that manufactures Deprinil Citrate, which is a liquid product, which has been yanked off the market.
	I'm not happy to see restriction of any safe medication for political reasons.
	And that's probably what's going on.
	The company that was manufacturing it, and I won't mention their name, they kind of flew in the face of a lot of regulations from the FDA and really tried to skirt the issue and sell directly to the public this drug, which is a prescription drug.
	What does it do, doctor?
	Deprinil was originally developed, well, it is marketed in the United States as an anti-Parkinson's drug.
	But it has some other interesting side effects.
	It has a beneficial effect on depression.
	It protects the brain.
	It's a nootropic agent, and that means it protects the brain from toxic damage that occurs with aging.
	And it may be able to help revitalize some of the brain cells that are not dead, but are kind of in a resting state, or that have been damaged, that can be rehabilitated and can be rejuvenated.
	And so, Deprinil has very profound anti-aging effects in dogs and in rats, and we think that it may have some profound... that it may have some anti-aging effects in people.
	We don't know yet because it hasn't been studied in people for that effect, but it certainly is a good drug for Parkinson's disease.
	It may work for Alzheimer's.
	Why has it been meant?
	No, the thing that the caller is calling about is a liquid form which is being marketed outside, you know, by mail order.
	Oh, definitely.
	He's not talking about the prescription drug thing.
	I see.
	So that's what we're supposed to have the FDA for, to do testing and to determine something is safe to be consumed.
	Right, and it's just an issue of whether the FDA will allow prescription drugs to be sold outside of the normal channels, and certainly they don't want that to happen.
	If we get an anti-aging drug, a really good anti-aging drug, they're going to be testing that one until all of us are pushing up the daisies.
	Well, that's another story, and certainly the human growth hormone story.
	It fits that equation very well.
	But we'll have to save that for another night, because it's a long story.
	I bet it is.
	East of the Rockies, you are on the air with Dr. Howard and Dr. Platts.
	Hi there.
	How are you doing, Art?
	This is Ted in Houston.
	Yes, sir.
	I sort of want to echo the last caller and give a more realistic echo to the facts that you began the last segment with.
	Two nights ago, I was trying to find sources of renutrient or furan on the Internet.
	And apparently they've been put under FDA control and restriction by a new law that just went into effect three days ago because there is, again, some possibility for abuse of these medications.
	But for the most part, for the most people that use them, they're very positive medicines.
	Are you there?
	Well, I'm here.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, I'm here, too.
	I'm just waiting to see if somebody wants to respond.
	Okay, well, the new treatment is GHB, which was banned for very spurious reasons.
	This is the date-rape drug that people have been using, beating their chest about over the last few months.
	And the interesting thing with GHB is GHB has been used by the bodybuilding community for years, a very safe substance when used appropriately.
	Why is it called the date rape drug?
	I mean, what does it do?
	Well, if you take it, and in very large quantities, like tablespoon quantities, with alcohol, it does make you drowsy and tipsy and sleepy.
	And apparently, some individuals have induced their dates to take enough of this stuff to make them drowsy and tipsy.
	uh... there are their friends have claimed that they would have
	date rape occur to them icy but it's a very hard to math the the unpleasant flavor
	of this particular substance and it's an arm and literally an average individual would have to take it but able spoon
	or more in alcohol
	uh... but uh... it's a it made a really good media story uh... and uh... it was uh... blown way out of proportion
	and so much so that the federal government enacted it by act of congress
	has reclassified this substance as a controlled uh...
	controlled substance or
	Wow.
	I never did know the story behind that.
	Well, to the Rockies, you're on the air with Dr. Klatt and Dr. Howard.
	Such is the power of the media, Art.
	Yeah, I guess so, huh?
	Hello there, West of the Rockies.
	Are you there?
	Hi, Art.
	Hi.
	Just one comment.
	Well, a comment and a question.
	When Dr. Vernon was talking about we wouldn't be in such a rush and we'd have more time, and that's all relative.
	Being human beings, we'd be doing the same thing we're doing now.
	I wanted to ask Dr. Vernon, and I'm assuming this is the Dr. Vernon that's written a number of books.
	Dr. Vernon Howard, I think you do have a number of books, don't you, Doctor?
	I do have a number of books, but there's a danger of confusing me with another Vernon Howard, who some years ago used to write self-help pamphlets.
	I'm not that person at all.
	Oh, I see.
	I'm a scholar and a teacher, and he founded himself A counselor to the stars, meaning the Hollywood stars.
	And I've never had a... I've had many star students, but never a Hollywood star in my class.
	Well, I was assuming that's probably who you were.
	No, I'm not.
	With the philosophy and everything.
	Right.
	Well, thank you for giving me the opportunity for making that difference clear.
	Well, I had no idea there were two of you.
	It just so happens, I usually publish under V.A.
	Howard, or Vernon A.
	As this other fellow published it under, well, the same name, but without the A. Oh, I see.
	Oh, okay.
	Well, I wanted to ask you about one of his books, I guess.
	I don't really know much about them.
	I couldn't comment.
	Okay.
	Well, thank you very much.
	All right, dear.
	Thank you for the call, and take care.
	First time caller on the line, you're on the air with Dr. Howard and Dr. Klatz.
	Hello.
	Hello.
	Hi there.
	Where are you?
	We're in Sutherland, Oregon.
	Okay.
	1120 and um I wanted to tell you of um there is um a company in Canada and I won't say if you don't want me to and they have a lot of supplements um you know they're already anti-aging and um my husband and mother-in-law had um some amazing results in taking sulfur or MSM and my mother-in-law had Two years to live with her kidney disease and three weeks later after taking it she felt like she had never been sick.
	It builds new cells and it's good for a lot of things.
	My husband has arthritis and he says he feels 20 years younger.
	Do you have any specific question ma'am?
	No, I just wanted to bring that up to everyone.
	Art, this is Dr. Klotz.
	Thank you.
	You know, it's interesting.
	A lot of callers are interested in these anti-aging drugs.
	Obviously.
	On our website at www.worldhealthnet, with the American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine, our website has literally thousands of pages, several hundred of them devoted to new anti-aging drug therapies and nutrients.
	Really an in-depth look at many of these new therapies that are out there, and our site is completely non-commercial.
	You need to be very careful on the internet, because so many of the sites are selling a product.
	We don't sell anything, and we're a non-profit medical society, so we try and walk that very straight and narrow line of being scientific and accurate.
	But what we do offer on our website at worldhealth.net is information that addresses almost all aspects of anti-aging, pharmacology, treatment, and with Dr. Howard's help and Tufts University, we're even going to start delving into the philosophical and sociological issues of aging that will be on our website as well.
	Oh, it will?
	Yes, yes.
	We're planning on adding those topics and those issues to our site.
	Well, that'll make quite a forum, I'll tell you.
	East of the Rockies, you're on there.
	There's actually a discussion board on immortality already.
	All right, East of the Rockies, hold on one second, there is?
	Yes, there is.
	At World Health Net, under monument.net.
	That ought to be quite a discussion.
	All right, East of the Rockies, you're on there with Dr. Klatsen.
	Howard, hi.
	Yes, I do have a question over the fact that Aging in society, I think, really will cause a lot of problems in our society.
	You mean a lack of aging?
	Well, a lack of aging, I'm sorry.
	Because a lot of new ideas and things like that come from younger people.
	People, as they get older, do have a tendency to accept what they have, where the young don't.
	I mean, the fresh perspective.
	Oh, but you've fallen right into Dr. Klotz's trap.
	You see, because he's saying that this additional age you'll have will be a healthy, productive age.
	Yeah, but 80% of the people around here don't actually do anything other than work and then go home and watch TV or listen to the radio.
	The famous useless eaters.
	Yes.
	Well, I don't know how to respond other than the belief that as people gain more resources and more control and more power over their lives where they don't have to work.
	You know, that's another spinoff of the Ageless Society is people won't have to work, that they will actually have real useful leisure time.
	And that's something that we've never really seen in our society.
	Well, we're actually trained against that.
	I mean, we are absolutely mind-conditioned against that.
	We are trained to be... productivity is everything.
	Climbing socially and financially, it's everything.
	Yes, but there will come a time in the not-too-distant future where there will be a large segment of our population which I believe will be called the leisure class.
	And these people will be people who have worked their 20 years
	and are looking forward not to another 10 or 15 years of disease and disability and finally death,
	as the golden years are today, but will be looking forward to another 50 years
	of youthful, productive lifespan and they won't necessarily have to spend it in the workplace.
	It won't be necessary.
	They'll have the opportunity to go back to college or to explore new avenues or self-mastery.
	And that's, I think, the bright future and the hope of anti-aging medicine.
	I'm hoping that you're wrong, Art, and that this utopian vision is achievable.
	All right.
	West of the Rockies.
	Without a lot of time, you're on the air with Dr. Klatz and Dr. Howard.
	Hello.
	Hi, Howard.
	One time you had a caller that called in and said that her doctor had advised her that cancer survivors should not take, like, human growth stimulators.
	And I wondered if the doctors had any opinions on that.
	Some lady did say that.
	Yeah.
	I was wondering what the doctors had to say about that.
	Yeah.
	In other words, doctor, somebody who has just had a bout with cancer, the uncontrolled growth of cells, Might be tampering with something they ought not, if they're prone to... Certainly.
	The latest evidence on human growth hormone, there was a concern with prostate cancer, with human growth hormone.
	The latest reports on human growth hormone is that there is no association between it and cancer, certainly, at least not prostate cancer.
	Some cancers are stimulated by growth factors, whether it be testosterone, estrogen, human growth hormone, or whatever it is that's a stimulatory agent.
	If you have cancer, if you're doing anti-aging medicine, period, you need to be under a physician's supervision.
	This isn't like taking a little extra vitamin C every day.
	This is a very complex, complicated type of therapeutics that requires laboratory analysis and lots of it.
	For the real downtown version of anti-aging, when you come in with whatever dollars you need, To undergo a year-by-year program, how expensive is it?
	If you're relatively healthy, you could get by for as little as $1,500.
	That's for a year, right?
	Per year.
	That's for the diagnostics and for the medical program.
	That doesn't include your nutrients.
	Most people who are on anti-aging medicine are spending about $100 to $200 a month in nutrients.
	If you have something wrong with you that needs to be fixed, or you're advanced age and we need to undo a lot of the damage that has been done, you might spend upwards of $5,000 or $6,000 a year for the medical and the diagnostics associated with an anti-aging medicine program.
	So in other words, you're suggesting that even with an abused body, it's possible at a greater expense to begin to reverse the damage done?
	We do it all the time.
	I have patients who are on this program who are in their 90s, who are doing very, very well.
	I mean, extraordinarily well.
	All right, listen, this program is ending.
	We're flat out of time.
	So, a final word?
	Give that last number again, or could you give that number again so people can call?
	Of course, for that free $25 package.
	And, Dr. Howard, any final words?
	I would like to thank you both very much for making this both a pleasurable as well as an adventurous time.
	Oh, I'm glad to hear that, Judge.
	And it's thanks to the both of you.
	All right, then.
	Doctors, good night.
	Thank you.
	Thank you for a wonderful program.
	Well, there you have it, folks.
	You've heard it.
	Do you want it?
	My guess is a lot of people will say, no, not me.
	But most people are going to say, hell yes, I want it.
	That's it.
	From the high desert, I'm Art Bell.

▲