2 ms·
Sorry if I don't articulate this well. I'm very much in favor of life extension and SENS but I get the perception that it's still a "fringe" science or maybe it
by deegles 11y ago
Sorry if I don't articulate this well. I'm very much in favor of life extension and SENS but I get the perception that it's still a "fringe" science or maybe it's not perceived as well by the broader community. Can you speculate why there isn't more money and effort being directed to this research if it has so much potential?
- reasonattlm 11y ago1) pure science changes direction very, very slowly under the best of circumstances. 2) regulation strongly constrains funding by steering it towards drug discovery. 3) people don't like being told they're doing it wrong, even when it is absolutely true. 4) the real goal of most researchers is to catalog metabolism, not to produce any way of treating aging.
- JoshTriplett 11y ago1) Lack of visibility; how many people even know this research is going on, and that it's potentially close enough to not classify as science fiction? 2) A perception as "natural", together with the naturalistic fallacy. The black plague and cancer are "natural" too, but we have no qualms eradicating them; yet for some reason, people romanticize death, especially when thinking primarily about it applying to other people rather than themselves. 3) Related to that naturalistic fallacy, aging afflicts a less sympathetic group. Given a disease that strikes down the "young and healthy", or the affliction hidden behind such thoughtless and abominable phrases as "it was their time" or "natural causes", the former will tend to attract more funding. 4) In a word, spirituality, whether spoken of or otherwise. 5) Too many crackpots through history have tried to peddle life extension, creating guilt by association.