PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Robert H Binstock

Publications and source records attributed to Robert H Binstock.

11 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Older voters and the 2004 election.

For several decades, candidates in U.S. presidential election campaigns have articulated policy issues designed to appeal to older Americans. However, exit-poll data have consistently shown that older people have distributed their votes among presidential candidates in roughly the same proportions as the electorate as a whole, favoring the winner of the popular vote. This happened again in 2004. The percentage of older persons voting for George Bush was slightly more than the national average, suggesting that old-age policy issues are not the predominant factors affecting older voters.

Aged↗
PubMed2004

Anti-aging medicine and research: a realm of conflict and profound societal implications.

Biogerontologists have recently launched a war of words on anti-aging medicine. They seek to discredit what they judge to be fraudulent and harmful products and therapies, and to distinguish their own research from what they regard as the pseudoscience of anti-aging injections, special mineral waters, and other services and products. Yet, many of these biogerontologists are themselves trying to develop interventions that will actually slow or arrest the fundamental processes of human aging and substantially extend average life expectancy and maximum life span. Achievement of these biogerontological goals would drastically alter the nature of individual and collective life, radically transforming virtually every social institution and norm. Biogerontologists who are engaged in anti-aging research need to undertake more active leadership in helping the public to understand their goals, to deliberately consider the implications of their fulfillment, and to begin thinking about ways to shape those ramifications in constructive fashions.

Aged↗
PubMed2004

Anti-aging medicine: can consumers be better protected?

The use of interventions claiming to prevent, retard, or reverse aging is proliferating. Some of these interventions can seriously harm older persons and aging baby boomers who consume them. Others that are merely ineffective may divert patients from participating in beneficial regimens and also cause them economic harm. "Free market regulation" does not seem to weed out risky, ineffective, and fraudulent anti-aging treatments and products. Public health messages, apparently, are having little effect. What more can be done to achieve better protection for older consumers? An analysis of the potential for federal and state action reveals many barriers to effective governmental regulation of anti-aging interventions. In view of dim prospects for stronger public regulation, physicians and other professionals--especially geriatricians and gerontologists--will need to be more aggressive in protecting older consumers. In particular, The Gerontological Society of America and the American Geriatrics Society should undertake a sustained program of specific educational efforts, directed at health professionals and the general public, in which they sort out as best they can the helpful, the harmful, the fraudulent, and the harmless anti-aging practices and products.

Advertising↗
PubMed2003

The war on "anti-aging medicine".

Leading members of the gerontological community have recently launched a war on anti-aging medicine, seeking to discredit what they judge to be fraudulent and harmful products and therapies, and to distinguish their research from what they regard as the pseudoscience of the anti-aging movement. This article interprets the contemporary war on anti-aging medicine as largely an attempt by established gerontological researchers to preserve their hard-won scientific and political legitimacy, as well as to maintain and enhance funding for research on the basic biological mechanisms of aging. First, it recounts the difficult struggle of U.S. biogerontologists to join the scientific mainstream in terms of legitimization and public funding. Second, it examines how elements of a contemporary anti-aging movement seem to threaten the hard-won public legitimacy of established gerontological researchers and practitioners. Third, it looks at the "boundary work" responses of the gerontological community to the anti-aging movement. Finally, it assesses the consequences of the war on anti-aging medicine to date.

Aged↗