To the Editor:

Thank you for your interest in science on the biology and mechanisms of aging (“Dogs Test Drug Aimed at Slowing Aging Process,” “Chasing Immortality” series, front page, May 17). The field is indeed vibrant, and new insights from researchers are driving momentum and tangible progress. Your article conveyed that excitement.

But based on a single quote from one of us (Dr. Francis Collins), a reader might get the impression that the National Institutes of Health does not see aging research as having the same importance as projects on specific diseases. That would be an unfortunate misunderstanding of our position.

In interviews with the writer, we discussed a range of projects and the emergence of the new field of geroscience, which seeks to better understand how mechanisms of aging may underlie disease and disability. We also talked about hard choices that N.I.H. faces in funding all scientific opportunities to address pressing public health needs.

Much of what we discussed about N.I.H.’s interests in this research, however, was not captured. Without this context of our wholehearted support for basic aging research and geroscience, readers may believe that N.I.H. doesn’t place much value on this area of research. That is certainly not the case.