3 ms·
People who offer solutions and timetables are researchers trying to get funding(always overly optimistic). The fact is that we have a relatively tiny amount of
by soup10 14y ago
People who offer solutions and timetables are researchers trying to get funding(always overly optimistic).
The fact is that we have a relatively tiny amount of understanding and control over organic matter. And far more basic research breakthroughs are required before aging can seriously be discussed. SENS and transhumanists are like a primitive civilizations enchanted by the prospect of landing a man on the moon before the horse and buggy was invented, which is why most biologists don't take them seriously.
- thronemonkey 14y agoI agree with the gist of your comment (that we're VERY far away from anything like conquering mortality) but I am a biologist and I would describe myself as a transhumanist — not the Ray Kurzweil, this-is-happening-in-the-next-50-years sense, just in the sense that I think the transhumanist vision is something we should strive for (however far away it may be) and use an inspiration.
- reasonattlm 14y agoMost biologists do in fact take SENS seriously - you are very behind the times, and your characterization of the technologies involved is outright wrong. See the SENS Foundation advisory board, for example, as a representative sample of influential figures in the life sciences: http://sens.org/sens-research/advisory-board http://sens.org/sens-research/advisory-board Equally, see the proposed plan for moving thirteen mitochondrial genes into the cell nucleus: this has been achieved over the past five years for three of the thirteen, and last year someone came up with a generalizable method that should be applicable to all of them, rather than having to hack a separate methodology for each one. http://sens.org/sens-research/research-themes/mitosens http://sens.org/sens-research/research-themes/mitosens Your comments show that you are unfamiliar with the research community and with the science in question.