> Therefore you cannot legally, commercially treat aging in the US, as aging is not recognized by the FDA as a disease, and there is no path towards reversing that situation.
If the FDA doesn't regard aging as a disease, then any treatments devised to prevent or reverse aging are not treatments for any disease; so wouldn't the FDA, under this policy, have no role whatsoever in regulating aging treatments?
Not considering aging a disease would seem to put anti-aging products entirely outside the FDA's reach.
Nope. Treatments would almost certainly involve synthetic drugs, which are prohibited by the FDA unless approved. But they can't get approved because of some Puritan regulation (thou shalt not use medical science to improve thy life, only to treat diseases). Yaay moralizing bureaucracy!
If the FDA doesn't regard aging as a disease, then any treatments devised to prevent or reverse aging are not treatments for any disease; so wouldn't the FDA, under this policy, have no role whatsoever in regulating aging treatments?
Not considering aging a disease would seem to put anti-aging products entirely outside the FDA's reach.