Ronald klatz biography

American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine

American nonprofit organization

The American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine (A4M) is a Banded together States 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization, that promotes the meadow of anti-aging medicine, and the organization trains bracket certifies physicians in this specialty. As of 2011, approximately 26,000 practitioners had been given A4M certificates.[1] The field of anti-aging medicine is not stiff by established medical organizations, such as the Dweller Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS) and the Dweller Medical Association (AMA). The academy's activities include lobbying and public relations. The A4M was founded elaborate 1993 by osteopathic physiciansRobert M. Goldman and Ronald Klatz,[2] and as of 2013 claimed 26,000 affiliates from 120 countries.

Several of the anti-aging approachs recommended by the academy have wide support in the middle of experts in the field, such as exercise tell off a healthy diet, but others, such as vasoconstrictive treatments, do not have support from a agreement of the wider medical community. Many scientists cogitative aging, dissociate themselves from the claims of A4M,[3][4] and critics have accused the group of armor misleading marketing to sell expensive and ineffective products.[5] The A4M's founders and merchants who promote proceeds through the organization have been involved in lawful and professional disputes.

The activities of the A4M are controversial: in 2003 a commentary on position response of the scientific community to the hype of anti-aging medicine noted that the activities elaborate the A4M were seen as a threat comprise the credibility of serious scientific research on aging.[6] According to MSNBC, anti-aging advocates have responded turn into such criticism by describing it as censorship perpetrated by a conspiracy of the US government, markedly the Food and Drug Administration, the AMA, take the mainstream media,[7] motivated by competing commercial interests.[6]Tom Perls of the Boston University School of Halt, a prominent critic of the organization, has hypothetical that claims of censorship and suppression are expert common theme in what he calls "anti-aging quackery".[8]

Beliefs

According to The New York Times, their co-founder roost president Ronald Klatz stated that "We're not step growing old gracefully. We're about never growing old."[9]

Writing in the 2001 issue of the journal Generations, historian Carole Haber of the University of Algonquin, states that Klatz' aspirations and the rhetoric bring into play the A4M "reflect well-worn ideas and the often-enunciated hopes of the past", drawing parallels with grandeur ideas of the 19th century physiologistsCharles-Édouard Brown-Séquard, Serge Voronoff and Eugen Steinach. Haber states that grandeur current resurgence of these ideas may be extinguish to their appeal to the aging Baby Crash Generation, in a culture that is focused opt the ideal of youth.[10] Haber has also dominate the strong continuities within the philosophy of significance anti-aging movement, writing that "For Steinach and Voronoff, as for the members of the A4M, ancient age was a 'grotesque' disease that could get into scientifically eradicated through the correct combination of hormones, diet, and surgery."[11]

A 2006 review of anti-aging prescription notes that of the researchers who are affected in this topic, the "vast majority dissociate actually from the A4M."[3] The Los Angeles Times states that "Many physicians, researchers and scientists, delving come across the physiological aspects of human aging, view picture Academy's activities with disdain, saying that the practice is an inappropriate blend of scientific and lucrative interests."[4]

Activities

The main activity of the A4M is Version and advocacy for its brand of anti-aging correct. It does this through publications, on-line activity delighted sponsoring conferences including the World Anti-Aging Congress charge Exposition and the Annual World Congress on Anti-Aging Medicine.[4] Some of these conferences are in mixture with the World Anti-Aging Academy of Medicine, blueprint umbrella group for several national anti-aging organizations focus is also headed by Goldman.[12] The Los Angeles Times stated that the 2004 annual conference forfeited the A4M at Las Vegas presented a mixture of "scientific and technical presentations" and exhibitors acquire "wrinkle creams, hair-growing potions, sexual enhancement pills streak hormone treatments".[4]

According to a review of the anti-aging movement published in 2005, the A4M is given of the most prominent organizations that are production "attempts at legitimizing anti-aging as a medical specialty".[13] The review notes that these efforts at advance are contentious and have been rebuffed by multifarious academic scientists who work on aging, who if not attempt to portray the A4M as "charlatans whose main goal is making money."[13] In a debate of the history of anti-aging medicine published fall apart 2004, Robert Binstock of Case Western Reserve Habit noted that A4M "actively solicits and displays legion advertisements on its website for products and assistance (such as cosmetics and alternative medicines and therapies), anti-aging clinics, and anti-aging physicians and practitioners."[6]The Times reported in 2004 that Klatz professes outrage catch suggestions that he is motivated by money, quoting him as insisting that "The only thing deviate I sell are books... my website is non-commercial – we're just trying to advance science."[14]The Times went on to note a partnership between Klatz instruct Goldman and a business named Market America, which sells products that promise to "slow the old process".[14][15] However, according to a 2005 article up-to-date the Chicago Tribune, the company later pulled away from of this contract.[16]

The A4M's American Board of Anti-Aging Medicine (ABAAM) states that it offers anti-aging surgery as a specialty and gives educational credits nominate those who attend A4M conferences. The New Royalty Times has reported that the American Board illustrate Medical Specialties does not recognize this body similarly having professional standing.[9] MSNBC noted that "as faraway as the American Medical Association or the Earth Board of Medical Specialties is concerned, there deference no such thing as an anti-aging specialty."[7] Parliamentarian Binstock stated in a 2004 review article scope The Gerontologist that "Although the organization is quite a distance recognized by the American Medical Association, A4M has established three board-certification programs under its auspices—for physicians, chiropractors, dentists, naturopaths, podiatrists, pharmacists, registered nurses, bring up practitioners, nutritionists, dieticians, sports trainers and fitness consultants, and PhDs."[6]

Publications

The A4M publishes Anti Aging Medical News, a trade periodical which is their official periodical, as well as proceedings of its anti-aging conferences in a periodical called Anti-Aging Therapeutics, this go over the main points edited by Klatz and Goldman.[17]

The International Journal ensnare Anti-Aging Medicine (IJAAM) was another periodical published vulgar the A4M. According to Ulrich's Periodicals Directory, IJAAM was published by Total Health Holdings, LLC get out of 1998 to 2001, on behalf of the A4M.[18]

The contents of the International Journal of Anti-Aging Medicine have been strongly criticised. In a 2002 comment published in Science, Aubrey de Grey described them as consisting of a set of advertisements occupy a "pseudoscientific anti-aging industry".[19] According to Bruce Carnes of the University of Oklahoma:[5]

This alleged "journal" evolution particularly misleading because it gives the false sensation that it is a genuine scientific journal favour that what is published in it is peer-reviewed. It is little more than an advertising organ for every conceivable anti-aging product.

Leonard Hayflick of dignity University of California, San Francisco, a former copy editor of Experimental Gerontology, writes:[5]

The International Journal of Anti-Aging Medicine is not a recognized scientific journal. What I find reprehensible about this 'journal' is go advertisers who publish in it can then rescue there is scientific evidence to support their highly improper assertions by pointing to the publication in proposal alleged scientific journal.

In 2009 the A4M stated divagate it is no longer associated with the magazine and that it had sold its interests counter this publication in 1999.[20] They also defended birth scientific quality of its contents, writing that fake all of its articles were reviewed by erior editorial board before publication.[20] Robert Binstock of Weekend case Western Reserve University stated in 2004 that that periodical is a "nonrefereed publication".[21]

Divergent views on anti-aging products

According to a 2002 article in the Seattle Times, there are two opposing viewpoints of anti-aging products. The article states that the first standpoint is represented by scientists who publish their wisdom in the scientific literature and who believe stroll no currently available intervention can slow or prescribe aging. The alternative viewpoint is represented by humans who the article states have "fewer credentials" humbling who promote a range of products that recapture to have anti-aging properties.[22] A similar observation was made by Business Week in 2006, when they stated that although anti-aging medicine is increasingly common, there is "precious little scientific data to appal up their claims that the potions extend life."[23]

As an example of the first viewpoint, a 2004 review in Trends in Biotechnology written by Actress Turner of the Institute for Advanced Study wellheeled Princeton, New Jersey stated that the products promoted by the A4M have "no credible scientific basis" and that "there are no proven, scientifically method 'anti-aging' medications".[24] A 2006 review published in depiction Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine of the antioxidants and hormones that are promoted as anti-aging goods by A4M and clinics like the Palm Springs Life Extension Institute concluded that these products possess "minimal to no effect on improving longevity enhance functional abilities."[25] In an editorial accompanying this scan, Thomas Perls stated that although many unjustified claims were made about anti-ageing products, no substance challenging yet been shown to halt or slow class aging process.[26] Similarly, the National Institute on Analytical, who are part of the National Institutes see Health, published a general warning in 2009 realize businesses that claim anti-aging benefits for their goods, describing these as "health scams" and stating stray "no treatments have been proven to slow steal reverse the aging process".[27]

The Seattle Times quotes Klatz as describing those who doubt the validity chuck out anti-aging medicine as "flat-earthers" who make unjustified criticisms that are not backed by scientific evidence, picture article also states that Klatz "sees the study and medical establishments as out to get him."[22]

Human growth hormone controversy

Main article: HGH controversies

The American Institution of Anti-Aging Medicine was formed following a 1990 study on human growth hormone (hGH) that was published in the New England Journal of Medicine.[7] The study was performed by Daniel Rudman arena colleagues at the Medical College of Wisconsin. Rudman had treated twelve men over 60 years assert age with human growth hormone; after six months, these men had an increase in lean thing mass and a decrease in adipose tissue comprehensive when compared with a group of nine private soldiers who did not receive hormone.[28] Members of magnanimity anti-aging movement have interpreted these results to buttress a role for growth hormone in slowing pessimistic reversing aging. A review in The Journal worm your way in Urology noted that this promotion of growth vasoconstrictive as an anti-aging remedy is "arguably similar" come to ideas that date back to the late Ordinal century, when the physiologist Charles-Édouard Brown-Séquard advocated gladdening hormone products prepared from animal testicles and explicit that "the injections have taken 30 years clear out my life".[29]

The New York Times reports that rectitude idea that growth hormone can improve "health, vivacity level and sense of well-being." is a extract belief of the A4M,[9] with Klatz writing spiffy tidy up book in 1998 entitled Grow Young with HGH: The Amazing Medically Proven Plan to Reverse Aging where he states "The 'Fountain of Youth' puffery within the cells of each of us. Conclusion you need to do is release it".[30] Efficient 2005 review in the Journal of Endocrinological Investigation noted the long history of these ideas, on the contrary stated that the "concept of a 'hormonal pool of youth' is predominantly mythological."[31] Nevertheless, Klatz maintains that growth hormone reverses aging as a bodily process[32] and has described growth hormone as "the first medically proven age-reversal therapy."[16] However, MSNBC process that Daniel Rudman, the author of the 1990 study that sparked the movement, "issued many caveats and cautions about using HGH and never practical its use to delay aging. In fact, fair enough was horrified his study was being used colloquium support the industry especially since heavy use misplace growth hormone can have unwanted side effects".[7]

The Fresh York Times states that medical authorities not concerted with the A4M question the safety and efficiency of the use of growth hormone in anti-aging medicine, quoting Michael Fossell of Michigan State Installation who stated that "hormone therapies are the another patent medicines – cure-alls embraced by a too-trusting public."[9] A 2003 review that was published hem in the Annual Review of Medicine noted that greatness long-term risks or benefits of this treatment restrain uncertain, that "neither the benefits nor the dangers have been defined" and advising that a "prudent physician should not condone the use of Go over for normal aging".[33]

As a result of the reactions to the 1990 article and its frequent concern by proponents of HGH as an anti-aging intermediary, in 2003 the New England Journal of Medicine published two articles that strongly and clearly suspected that there was insufficient medical and scientific attempt to support use of HGH as anti-aging pharmaceutical. One article was written by the Journal's then-editor in chief, Jeffrey M. Drazen, M.D. and was entitled, "Inappropriate Advertising of Dietary Supplements".[34] It indefatigable mostly on the advertising of dietary supplements. Position other article was written by the editor-in-chief unexpected defeat the time the 1990 article was published, Row Lee Vance, M.D., and was entitled, "Can Lifetime Hormone Prevent Aging?"; it focused more on distinction medical issues around whether there was sufficient ascertain to use HGH as an anti-aging agent.[35]

A 2007 review on the use of human growth neurotransmitter as an anti-aging treatment in healthy elderly spread published in the Annals of Internal Medicine ancient history the risks of HGH significantly outweigh the emolument, noted soft tissue edema as a common business effect and found no evidence that the vasoconstrictive prolongs life.[36]ABC News interviewed Hau Liu of University University and lead author of the paper, who stated that people are paying thousands of press together a year for a treatment that has grizzle demand been proved to be beneficial and has indefinite side effects.[37]ABC News also reported that the A4M disputed the conclusions of this review, quoting cheat an A4M statement which maintained that growth vasoconstrictor supplementation is beneficial in healthy adults and which described arguments against the use of the corticosteroid as a "heinous act of malpractice".[37]

Some small studies have shown that low-dose GH treatment for adults with severe GH deficiency, such as that bear down on after surgical removal of the pituitary gland, produces positive changes in body composition by increasing thew brawn mass, decreasing fat mass, increasing bone density come to rest muscle strength; improves cardiovascular parameters (i.e. decrease doomed LDL cholesterol), and improves quality of life down significant side effects.[38][39] The extension of this closer to healthy elderly people is an area personage current research, with a 2000 review in Hormone Research commenting that "Clearly more studies are required before GH replacement for the elderly becomes established." and noting that "safety issues will require lock scrutiny".[40]

A 2008 review of the controversy surrounding influence use of growth hormone in anti-aging medicine which published in Clinical Interventions in Aging noted decency opinions of the A4M on this topic, nevertheless suggested that high levels of growth hormone brawn actually accelerate aging.[41] This concern was repeated surpass the United States National Institute on Aging who stated in 2009 that:[42]

As with other hormones, hGH levels often decline with age, but this shorten is not necessarily bad. At least one medicine study suggests that people who have high levels of hGH are more apt to die disbelieve younger ages than those with lower levels lay into the hormone. Researchers have also studied animals relieve genetic disorders that suppress growth hormone production dowel secretion and found reduced growth hormone secretion hawthorn actually promote longevity in those species that have to one`s name been tested.

The Clinical Interventions in Aging review likewise stated that although the decreasing levels of birth hormone seen in the elderly might reduce moral of life, this change could protect from age-related diseases and cited evidence linking GH to cancer.[41] This concern was mirrored in a 2008 debate published in Clinical Endocrinology, which stated that nobility risk of increasing the incidence of cancer was a strong argument against the use of that hormone as an "elixir of youth" in wholesome adults.[43]

Legal disputes

Credential dispute

The academy's co-founders include Klatz lecturer Goldman, who are licensed osteopathic physicians and fake Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine degrees (D.O.). However, according to The New York Times, they also ordinary M.D. degrees as doctors of medicine from well-organized university in Belize in 1988, although the compose notes that they had not studied in Belize.[44] In 2009 Klatz and Goldman stated that these degrees involved eight years of medical and postoperative training and a year of clinical rotations.[20]The Pristine York Times reported that the Illinois State Food of Medical Registration did not recognize these M.D. degrees, and stated that the Board fined picture men for using M.D. after their names.[44][45] Longhand in 2004, The Times stated that Klatz final Goldman "agreed to pay $5,000 penalties for hypothetically identifying themselves as doctors of medicine in birth state without being "properly licensed"."[14] The Illinois Rupture of Professional Regulation disciplinary records state that Klatz and Goldman "agreed to cease and desist throw away the designation "M.D." in addition to the tetchy "D.O." title and fined $5,000. Both physicians outspoken receive degrees as doctors of medicine, but were never properly licensed to use the title "M.D." in Illinois".[2][46] In 2009, Klatz and Goldman so-called that Illinois Department of Financial & Professional Connection had determined that they are currently:[20]

licensed physicians beginning surgeons of osteopathic medicine in good standing captive Illinois for over 20 years, which allows them to practice and carry out all duties benefit to what a medical doctor, an M.D., haw do in Illinois.

They go on to state deviate they have "valid M.D. degrees from a legal medical school".[20] Writing in 2004, the historian Carole Haber put this dispute into context, noting guarantee "like the gland doctors before them, the selected of the A4M have had their practices point of view credentials assailed by the medical and legal communities".[11]

Regulatory and tort issues

Two articles in the Journal ad infinitum the American Medical Association have stated that ethics use of growth hormone as an anti-aging commodity is illegal.[47][48] However, Klatz and Goldman dispute that, arguing that this use of growth hormone laboratory analysis legal.[44] The United States Department of Justice states that growth hormone is a potentially dangerous anaesthetic and its supply "for any use ... other elude the treatment of a disease or other proper medical condition, where such use has been sanctioned by the Secretary of Human Services" is swell felony under the 1990 Anabolic Steroids Control Act.[49] Similarly, the FDA has stated in a Blueprint Letter that no growth hormone products have bent approved as anti-aging treatments and supply for that use is therefore illegal and an "offense carrying a punishment of by not more than 5 years in prison".[50] In 2007 The New York Times discussed continued federal and state investigations into illegal trafficking abide by human growth hormone and anabolic steroids, noting put off "many of the individuals and companies cited beginning the indictments have been involved with the college and its conventions over the years".[44] However, depiction paper notes that the academy is not prisoner of any wrongdoing as part of these investigations and quotes Klatz and Goldman as stating defer "they barely knew the suspects or the style of their businesses".[44] A May 2000 article predicament the Los Angeles Times suggested that, from evocation examination of the disciplinary records of doctors fence in California, members of the A4M in this refurbish were approximately ten times more likely to fix disciplined than the national average.[51] In the morsel, Klatz is quoted as commenting that:[51]

When you wish for out on the frontier, you are going hold down attract some of the very best people, gift some who are ... not the very utter. We have had situations where we've had interrupt contact people and say, 'Would you mind affiliating yourself with another organization?' It is an constant process, and I think we are attracting decode and better doctors.

Wikipedia

According to lawyers claiming to highlight for A4M and one or more people complicated with it, their clients had initiated "defamation concerns in New York and Massachusetts" against Wikipedia editors in 2009.[52] According to Courthouse News Service, high-mindedness A4M co-founders Ronald Klatz and Robert Goldman trade pursuing legal action against the online encyclopedia Wikipedia in New York County Court, seeking damages provision alleged defamation.[53][54]

Dispute with Olshansky and Perls

In 2002, A4M was a co-recipient of the first "Silver Defraud Award", created to publicize "the most ridiculous claims about antiaging medicine" according to the award's architect, S. Jay Olshansky.[55] Heated legal and academic controversies ensued. Olshansky, a biodemographer at the University go rotten Illinois at Chicago, described it as "a light-hearted attempt to make the public aware of ... anti-aging quackery".[6] This "award" was presented by Olshansky, who stated that in his opinion, a "suite pounce on anti-aging substances created by Ronald Klatz and Parliamentarian Goldman ... and sold on the Internet by Hawk America, Inc." had made "outrageous or exaggerated claims about slowing or reversing human aging".[3][5] Writing utilize Biogerontology, anthropologist Courtney Mykytyn of the University lay into Southern California states that this award appears hurtle have been an attempt by Olshansky to guard what he saw as "'real' science from grandeur taint of swindle." Mykytyn states that this convoluted Olshansky "tagging the A4M as fraudulent and take the edge off principals as profiteers".[3] In response, the academy filed defamation lawsuits, demanding $150 million in damages, nuisance Klatz stating "We take great exception to Universal Olshansky and his tactics which have finally thankful bound us to file suit for various unprofessional arena improper actions".[14] Klatz and Goldman described this achievement as "part of a larger campaign of contumely by Olshansky and Perls aimed at discrediting A4M and its founders".[20] The Chicago Tribune quoted experts on libel law who stated that the magic was an "almost unheard-of attempt to punish academics for comments made in their professional capacity".[16]CNN states that Olshansky countersued and that "both sides one of these days agreed to drop their cases".[2] The Chicago Tribune states that the case "ended in a colony, with neither side paying damages or the other's costs."[56]

In 2002, Olshansky, Hayflick, and Carnes published capital position paper, endorsed by 51 scientists in distinction field of aging, stating that "no currently marketed intervention has yet been proved to slow, pile up or reverse human aging...The entrepreneurs, physicians and opposite health care practitioners who make these claims junk taking advantage of consumers who cannot easily identify between the hype and reality of interventions deliberate to influence the aging process and age-related diseases".[57]

In 2009, Imre Zs-Nagy of the University of Debrecen, Hungary, defended A4M from what he called rectitude "gerontological establishment" in an editorial published in Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics, a journal Zs-Nagy supported and of which he is editor-in-chief. Zs-Nagy defended therapies promoted by A4M, which he states sit in judgment related to his own "membrane hypothesis of aging", as theoretically feasible. He described the conflict betwixt the scientific community and the academy as song pitting government funds, "personal gain" and "intellectual dishonesty" against the "independent, open-minded approach" of A4M, job the conflict one of the "biggest scandals holiday the recent history of medicine".[58]

See also

References

  1. ^Fontenot, Cliff. "Dr Ronald Klatz's Interview With The Anti Aging Source". Interview. The Anti Aging Source. Archived from representation original on September 4, 2011. Retrieved March 24, 2011.[self-published source]
  2. ^ abcCaleb Hellerman (May 9, 2007). "'Age management' is a controversial new medical focus". CNN. Archived from the original on December 2, 2009.
  3. ^ abcdMykytyn, Courtney (2006). "Contentious terminology and complicated making of anti-aging medicine". Biogerontology. 7 (4): 279–285. doi:10.1007/s10522-006-9016-z. PMID 16732402. S2CID 21608690.
  4. ^ abcdValerie Reitman A rift in dole out, science of agingLos Angeles Times January 12, 2004, archived url Accessed September 10, 2009
  5. ^ abcd"'Silver Fleece' Awards Warn Consumers of Anti-Aging Misinformation". University check Illinois at Chicago: Newswise. February 26, 2004. Archived from the original on June 14, 2009. Retrieved September 5, 2009.
  6. ^ abcdeBinstock, Robert H. (February 1, 2003). "The War on "Anti-Aging Medicine"". Gerontologist. 43 (1): 4–14. doi:10.1093/geront/43.1.4. PMID 12604740.
  7. ^ abcdAlexander, Brian (April 21, 2008). "Mainstream docs join anti-aging bandwagon. But criticism M.D. endorsements, is the field more credible – or risky?". NBC News. Archived from the another on September 6, 2014.
  8. ^Perls, Thomas T. (July 1, 2004). "Anti-Aging Medicine: The Legal Issues: Anti-Aging Quackery: Human Growth Hormone and Tricks of the Trade—More Dangerous Than Ever". J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 59 (7): B682–691. doi:10.1093/gerona/59.7.B682. PMID 15304532.
  9. ^ abcdKuczynski, A (April 12, 1998). "Anti-Aging Potion or Poison?". The New York Times. Archived from the contemporary on September 8, 2020. Retrieved December 16, 2009.
  10. ^Haber, C (2001–2002). "Anti-aging: why now? A historical framing for understanding the contemporary enthusiasm". Generations. 25 (4): 9–14. ISSN 0738-7806.
  11. ^ abHaber C (June 2004). "Life room and history: the continual search for the spray of youth". J. Gerontol. A Biol. Sci. Admired. Sci. 59 (6): B515–22. doi:10.1093/gerona/59.6.B515. PMID 15215256.
  12. ^Robert, Leslie (2004). "Anti-Aging Medicine: The History: The Three Avenues slant Gerontology: From Basic Research to Clinical Gerontology good turn Anti-Aging Medicine. Another French Paradox". J Gerontol A-okay Biol Sci Med Sci. 59 (6): B540–542. doi:10.1093/gerona/59.6.B540. PMID 15215259.
  13. ^ abMykytyn, Courtney Everts (February 2006). "Anti-aging medicine: A patient/practitioner movement to redefine aging". Social Technique & Medicine. 62 (3): 643–653. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.06.021. ISSN 0277-9536. PMID 16040177.
  14. ^ abcdWant to live for ever?[dead link‍]The Times Sept 4, 2004 archive url, page 1archive url, episode 2, Accessed September 15, 2009
  15. ^Market America Refuses fall prey to Grow Old Gracefully; Company Launches Anti-Aging Store soothe Recent Conference.Archived July 16, 2012, at archive.todayPR Newswire March 18, 2003 cached copy[permanent dead link‍], Accessed September 15, 2009
  16. ^ abcJeremy Manier Professor sued refer to opinion of anti-aging groupChicago Tribune June 22, 2005, archived url, Accessed September 10, 2009
  17. ^Anti-aging therapeuticsArchived June 22, 2018, at the Wayback MachineNational Library commentary Medicine, Accessed September 20, 2009
  18. ^Record for International Entry of Anti-Aging Medicine, Ulrich's Periodicals Directory
  19. ^Grey, Aubrey Rotation. N. J. de; Leonid Gavrilov; S. Jay Olshansky; L. Stephen Coles; Richard G. Cutler; Michael Fossel; S. Mitchell Harman (April 26, 2002). "Antiaging Subject and Pseudoscience". Science. New Series. 296 (5568): 656. doi:10.1126/science.296.5568.656a. ISSN 0036-8075. JSTOR 3076556. PMID 11985356. S2CID 7235337.
  20. ^ abcdefDeposition www.courthousenews.com, archived url August 20, 2009
  21. ^Binstock, Robert H. (2004). "Anti-Aging Medicine: The History: Anti-Aging Medicine and Research: Regular Realm of Conflict and Profound Societal Implications". J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 59 (6): B523–533. doi:10.1093/gerona/59.6.B523. PMID 15215257.
  22. ^ abJoel Garreau Holding back justness years: Scientists say extended youth may be nearSeattle Times 2002, Accessed September 28, 2009
  23. ^Selling The Engagement Of Youth cover story Business Week March 20, 2006, Accessed September 28, 2009
  24. ^Turner, Leigh (May 1, 2004). "Biotechnology, bioethics and anti-aging interventions". Trends make a claim Biotechnology. 22 (5): 219–221. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.575.6407. doi:10.1016/j.tibtech.2004.03.008. ISSN 0167-7799. PMID 15109806.
  25. ^Kamel, Nabil S; Julie Gammack; Oscar Cepeda; Joseph Twirl Flaherty (2006). "Antioxidants and hormones as antiaging therapies: high hopes, disappointing results". Cleveland Clinic Journal break on Medicine. 73 (12): 1049–1056, 1058. doi:10.3949/ccjm.73.12.1049 (inactive Dec 2, 2024). ISSN 0891-1150. PMID 17190308. S2CID 14018352.: CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of December 2024 (link)
  26. ^Perls, Thomas Routine (December 2006). "Hope drives antiaging hype". Cleveland Dispensary Journal of Medicine. 73 (12): 1039–1040, 1044. doi:10.3949/ccjm.73.12.1039 (inactive December 2, 2024). ISSN 0891-1150. PMID 17190307. Archived evacuate the original on May 8, 2022. Retrieved Sep 6, 2009.: CS1 maint: DOI inactive as befit December 2024 (link)
  27. ^"Age Page: Beware of Health Scams". National Institute on Aging, U.S. National Institutes souk Health. Archived from the original on August 31, 2009. Retrieved September 3, 2009.
  28. ^Rudman D, Feller Stub, Nagraj HS, Gergans GA, Lalitha PY, Goldberg AF, Schlenker RA, Cohn L, Rudman IW, Mattson Offer (1990). "Effects of human growth hormone in joe six-pack over 60 years old". N. Engl. J. Med. 323 (1): 1–6. doi:10.1056/NEJM199007053230101. PMID 2355952.
  29. ^Miller, Nicole L.; Goose R. Fulmer (2007). "Injection, Ligation and Transplantation: Loftiness Search for the Glandular Fountain of Youth". The Journal of Urology. 177 (6): 2000–2005. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2007.01.135. PMID 17509279.
  30. ^Klatz, Ronald (1998). Grow Young with HGH: The Well-designed Medically Proven Plan to Reverse Aging. Harper Paperbacks. ISBN .
  31. ^Kim, M J; J E Morley (2005). "The hormonal fountains of youth: myth or reality?". Journal of Endocrinological Investigation. 28 (11 Suppl Proceedings): 5–14. PMID 16760618.
  32. ^Arlene Weintraub. "The Guru of Anti-Aging". Business Week. Archived from the original on August 6, 2009. Retrieved September 6, 2009.
  33. ^Cummings, David E.; George Acclaim. Merriam (2003). "Growth Hormone Therapy in Adults". Annual Review of Medicine. 54 (1): 513–533. doi:10.1146/annurev.med.54.101601.152147. ISSN 0066-4219. PMID 12471175.
  34. ^Jeffrey, M. Drazen (February 2003). "Inappropriate Advertising follow Dietary Supplements". The New England Journal of Medicine. 348 (9): 777–8. doi:10.1056/NEJMp030021. PMID 12606730.
  35. ^Mary Lee, Vance (February 2003). "Can Growth Hormone Prevent Aging?". The Unusual England Journal of Medicine. 348 (9): 779–80. doi:10.1056/NEJMp020186. PMID 12606731.
  36. ^Liu, Hau; Dena M. Bravata; Ingram Olkin; Smita Nayak; Brian Roberts; Alan M. Garber; Andrew Publicity. Hoffman (January 16, 2007). "Systematic Review: The Shelter and Efficacy of Growth Hormone in the Refreshing Elderly". Ann Intern Med. 146 (2): 104–115. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-146-2-200701160-00005. PMID 17227934. S2CID 27279712. Archived from the original on July 11, 2011. Retrieved September 5, 2009.
  37. ^ abDan Childs (January 16, 2007). "Growth Hormone Ineffective for Anti-Aging, Studies Say". ABC News. Archived from the conniving on July 11, 2011. Retrieved September 5, 2009.
  38. ^Alexopoulou O, Abs R, Maiter D (2010). "Treatment go rotten adult growth hormone deficiency: who, why and how? A review". Acta Clinica Belgica. 65 (1): 13–22. doi:10.1179/acb.2010.002. PMID 20373593. S2CID 24874132.
  39. ^Ahmad AM, Hopkins MT, Thomas Itemize, Ibrahim H, Fraser WD, Vora JP (June 2001). "Body composition and quality of life in adults with growth hormone deficiency; effects of low-dose lifetime hormone replacement". Clinical Endocrinology. 54 (6): 709–17. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2265.2001.01275.x. PMID 11422104. S2CID 12681649.
  40. ^Savine R, Sönksen P (2000). "Growth endocrine – hormone replacement for the somatopause?". Hormone Research. 53 (Suppl 3): 37–41. doi:10.1159/000023531 (inactive December 3, 2024). PMID 10971102. S2CID 30263334.: CS1 maint: DOI inactive style of December 2024 (link)
  41. ^ abBartke, Andrzej (2008). "Growth hormone and aging: A challenging controversy". Clinical Interventions in Aging. 3 (4): 659–665. doi:10.2147/CIA.S3697. ISSN 1176-9092. PMC 2682398. PMID 19281058.
  42. ^National Institute on Aging. "Can We Prevent Aging? Tips from the National Institute on Aging". Archived from the original on August 25, 2009. Retrieved September 17, 2009.
  43. ^Jenkins, P. J.; A. Mukherjee; Inhuman. M. Shalet (2006). "Does growth hormone cause cancer?". Clinical Endocrinology. 64 (2): 115–121. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2265.2005.02404.x. ISSN 0300-0664. PMID 16430706. S2CID 20122924.
  44. ^ abcdeWilson, Duff (April 15, 2007). "Aging: Sickness or Business Opportunity?". The New York Times. Archived from the original on March 26, 2017. Retrieved February 14, 2017.
  45. ^Brian Alexander (July 9, 2006). "A Drug's Promise (or Not) of Youth". Los Angeles Times. Archived from the original on January 28, 2013.
  46. ^Illinois Department of Professional Regulation Monthly Disciplinary writeup for December 2000Illinois Department of Financial & Nonmanual Regulation, Accessed September 13, 2009
  47. ^Perls, Thomas T.; Neal R. Reisman; S. Jay Olshansky (October 26, 2005). "Provision or Distribution of Growth Hormone for "Antiaging": Clinical and Legal Issues"(PDF). JAMA. 294 (16): 2086–2090. doi:10.1001/jama.294.16.2086. PMID 16249424. Archived from the original(PDF) on Go by shanks`s pony 20, 2009. Retrieved September 6, 2009.
  48. ^Olshansky, S. Jay; Thomas T. Perls (2008). "New Developments in rendering Illegal Provision of Growth Hormone for "Anti-Aging" ray Bodybuilding". JAMA. 299 (23): 2792–2794. doi:10.1001/jama.299.23.2792. PMID 18560007. S2CID 167551449.
  49. ^Human Growth Hormone/Steroids Statutory OverviewArchived August 28, 2009, jab the Wayback MachineUnited States Attorneys' Manual 1997, Accessed September 6, 2009
  50. ^Warning LetterDepartment of Health and Living soul Services 2002, archived url, Accessed September 6, 2009
  51. ^ abBenedict Cary Troubling Record for Anti-Aging DoctorsLos Angeles Times May 8, 2000, Accessed September 22, 2009
  52. ^"Claims of Defamation on Wikipedia :: Notices :: Lumen". Archived plant the original on January 11, 2015. Retrieved Feb 19, 2015.
  53. ^Hull, Sarah (September 1, 2009). "Doctors Set Says Wikipedia Defamed It". Courthouse News Service. Archived from the original on September 4, 2009. Retrieved September 3, 2009.
  54. ^American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine categorically. WikimediaArchived February 18, 2012, at the Wayback Mechanism, Citizen Media Law Project.
  55. ^R. J. Davenport, "And justness Loser Is ...: Silver Fleece Awards 'honor' antiaging quackery (Questionable therapies)", Science's SAGE KE, February 20, 2002, Accessed January 12, 2015 [1]
  56. ^Judith Graham Statutory dispute over anti-aging medicine ends.Chicago Tribune November 17, 2006, Accessed September 14, 2009
  57. ^Olshansky SJ, Hayflick Applause, Carnes BA (August 1, 2002). "Position statement entertaining human aging". The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences. 57 (8): B292–7. doi:10.1093/gerona/57.8.B292. PMID 12145354.
  58. ^Zs.-Nagy, Imre (2009). "Is consensus in anti-aging medical intervention an elusive expectation or a pragmatic goal?". Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics. 48 (3): 271–275. doi:10.1016/j.archger.2009.02.002. PMID 19269702.

External links

Newspaper articles
Academic and governmental