There was an interesting article in The Guardian on Saturday 20th July, reporting on 25 "anti-aging fixes - without surgery". What a relief to find someone writing about cosmetic surgery not being the first resort in their fight against the effects of living longer. Unfortunately, it's not all good. The fact that the writer is only 38 and a half is a little dispiriting,
There was an interesting article in The Guardian on Saturday 20th July, reporting on 25 "anti-aging fixes - without surgery". What a relief to find someone writing about cosmetic surgery not being the first resort in their fight against the effects of living longer. Unfortunately, it's not all good. The fact that the writer is only 38 and a half is a little dispiriting, although she does see (from afar) that "50, 60 and 70 bear little resemblance to the mature years of a couple of decades ago".
So, anyway. You read on and you come across the opinion that the choice "to go under the knife" to try and look more youthful is no-one's else's business. Do we agree with that? Not really. It's similar to the argument surrounding obesity. If one person is overweight, that is only their problem. But if 30%-plus of the population is obese then it becomes a social problem. So, in the case of a single individual wanting to take the route of surgery, that is indeed a personal choice. But when an ever higher and higher percentage of people who appear in the media choose to take that route, and in doing so they seriously affect the prevailing aesthetic, then we believe that is a social issue, and we believe that those who choose not to be "cut" have the right to agitate for people who look like them, and who represent them, to appear in equal numbers in the media.
However, the real disagreement is with the article's implication that looking "as youthful as you feel on the inside" is something that only happens from the neck upwards. While the article recommends many no doubt effective treatments and therapies, the only ones not aimed at the face are stopping smoking, taking cod-liver oil capsules - and using exfoliating socks. There is no mention at all of any idea that making the effort to be more energetic is a good way to look as energetic as you feel.
At SGSC, we try to stay away from the usual language of looking or appearing "youthful". We are happy to be the age we are, and we try to avoid - or perhaps only mitigate - some of the drawbacks of getting older. We work on a level of trying to encourage people to preserve and increase their strength, fitness and suppleness so as to be better, and in that way to look better. We don't try to look "youthful", we try to look vital. If you keep your muscles stronger and more toned, keep your joints more pliable, your posture will be more upright, your movement will be more dynamic, and that is where your energetic appearance will come from.
Another benefit is that you won't get that extraordinary disconnect that appears in so many people we see on TV where there is a bland smoothness from the chin upwards, while from the neck downwards it is a completely different being inhabiting the clothes.
So, if you want to spend loads of money on face treatments - and one session of each of the 25 treatments listed in the article will set you back several years' worth of gym membership, even allowing for the financial savings of giving up smoking - please do so. But bear in mind also that if the only parts of your body you make an effort over are from the chin-upwards, then you just might find yourself in a position where your face is making promises that your body can't keep.