3 ms·

They aren't engaged in general, "aging," research actually, DeGray has stated he's interested in life-extension technology, to the extent that it might be possi

They aren't engaged in general, "aging," research actually, DeGray has stated he's interested in life-extension technology, to the extent that it might be possible. Their goal, as stated on the website you just linked to, is as follows: > Our goal is to help build the industry that will cure the diseases of aging. I'm not saying you're wrong...I just think there's some confusion online as to what they really are trying to do. They don't research aging in general, which would imply they are a University Body whose sole function is research for the purpose of research...they are specifically attempting to create a kind of science, which may or may not be valid, by funding certain types of research done by recognized research institutions, with the hope that evidence will support what they believe to be true...sort of like how the Koch brothers fund all sorts of research hoping to poke all sorts of holes and nuances into the accepted version of how climate change is understood. They may very well come up with something interesting, informed, and comprehensive...but that does not mean that they are being realistic. In research you don't get to choose whether your hypothesis is realistic or not...you just sort of go out into the woods and start picking things up and seeing whether what you think the laws of nature are...really are true...but you could be completely wrong and you might find nothing. You don't get to choose whether you catch a fish...you may come back to shore with zero fish after fishing for 50 years...or 100 years...or an infinite number of years.

reasonattlm 10y ago
SENS isn't new science. It is a synthesis of existing evidence for what causes aging and age-related disease, pulled in from many branches of medical research. The original contributions are the high level view of damage repair as the guiding basis for treatment, plus specific plans for how to address these causes. I don't think you can say it's wrong in wholesale at this point, given where things stand. The mainstream position in the aging research community is that aging is caused by an accumulation of damage. Senescent cell clearance has been on the SENS agenda since day one, with plenty of evidence to back it as a cause of aging from the past decades of research. Life extension has been demonstrated in mice through senescent cell clearance. There are two funded startups moving senescent cell clearance therapies to the clinic. You'll also find it hard to argue against the proposition that amyloid causes specific age-related conditions. E.g. amyloid beta in Alzheimer's disease, transthyretin amyloid in heart disease. These are very mainstream concerns. Similarly, there are few objections to the idea that declining stem cell function is a cause of aging, and plenty of evidence to show that restoring stem cell activity is beneficial. And so on.

reasonattlm 10y ago

SENS isn't new science. It is a synthesis of existing evidence for what causes aging and age-related disease, pulled in from many branches of medical research. The original contributions are the high level view of damage repair as the guiding basis for treatment, plus specific plans for how to address these causes. I don't think you can say it's wrong in wholesale at this point, given where things stand. The mainstream position in the aging research community is that aging is caused by an accumulation of damage. Senescent cell clearance has been on the SENS agenda since day one, with plenty of evidence to back it as a cause of aging from the past decades of research. Life extension has been demonstrated in mice through senescent cell clearance. There are two funded startups moving senescent cell clearance therapies to the clinic. You'll also find it hard to argue against the proposition that amyloid causes specific age-related conditions. E.g. amyloid beta in Alzheimer's disease, transthyretin amyloid in heart disease. These are very mainstream concerns. Similarly, there are few objections to the idea that declining stem cell function is a cause of aging, and plenty of evidence to show that restoring stem cell activity is beneficial. And so on.