Adverts help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. To go ad-free join as a Member.
Where would you invest 10 million into life extending technology?
#31
Posted 15 May 2008 - 10:21 AM
#32
Posted 15 May 2008 - 09:39 PM
10 million could make a difference there.
#33
Posted 16 May 2008 - 12:38 AM
or maybe theyd actually invest a single shiny penny
Edited by HYP86, 16 May 2008 - 12:42 AM.
sponsored ad
#34
Posted 16 May 2008 - 09:47 PM
a better question is: Would the government invest a dime in LE tech?
or maybe theyd actually invest a single shiny penny
Yeah. Thanks god bushit is on his way out.
#35
Posted 17 May 2008 - 02:53 AM
Green_Living_Center.jpg 263.82KB 2 downloads Green_Living_Center_2.jpg 199.71KB 1 downloads
#36
Posted 18 February 2009 - 01:15 PM
Getting a slice of the 27 billion from the NIH is a start.
http://www.ted.com/i...our_bodies.html
#37
Posted 21 February 2009 - 06:56 PM
At $10m and above, I'd invest it in lobbying the government.
Getting a slice of the 27 billion from the NIH is a start.
http://www.ted.com/i...our_bodies.html
Good idea. Thats part of how I would market it with 10 million. At this time I would use that kind of money to help market the idea to the world through some balanced marketing strategy. I would interview the most successful marketing strategists and maybe campaign managers in the world and hire one or two of them.
From what I can see it would probably run just like presidential campaigns are run, yard signs, pamphlets, mailings, campaign buses speaking at venues constantly, spreading literature and books and stuff as they go, spreading resources like grants and scholarships, writing key figures for support, putting up billboards, spreading songs about the cause, and running television, radio and newspaper commercials to name a few.
In order to get to a place where we can do that, I think we need to raise our membership and revenue by launching a mini campaign like that ourselves. We can raise our revenue through greater membership and we can raise our membership through projects like the ones in the imminst projects section or LEEEP.
Edited by brokenportal, 21 February 2009 - 06:57 PM.
#38
Posted 22 February 2009 - 10:44 AM
a little like the ITP but with less procedural methods in order to try more substances per year, and combinations
#39
Posted 22 February 2009 - 08:45 PM
A center to test life-extension strategies in mice,
a little like the ITP but with less procedural methods in order to try more substances per year, and combinations
I hope you keep moving along with this project. I look forward to it becoming fruitful. Keep pushing and contacting and discussing and digging in and Im pretty sure you should find all the help and support you need to set it up.
#40
Posted 24 February 2009 - 07:04 AM
#41
Posted 24 February 2009 - 02:57 PM
#42
Posted 24 February 2009 - 02:59 PM
A center to test life-extension strategies in mice,
a little like the ITP but with less procedural methods in order to try more substances per year, and combinations
This is what we need, people with courage to try new things, not fools who are willing to sacrifice themselves on the altar of bureacracy for a few meaningless promises.
#43
Posted 24 February 2009 - 07:16 PM
I cant find out what happened on that vote, but I think that they gave the NIH far less, like 18 billion. If thats true then thats a horrible loss and something that 10 million in lobbying could have turned around.
Thats not only a horrible loss, that could mean the difference between mine and yours indefinity or eternal obliteration right there.
#44
Posted 27 February 2009 - 05:46 AM
#46
Posted 06 March 2009 - 05:59 AM
$10 million in These companies:
InterMune, Inc.
BioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc.
Myriad Genetics, Inc.
Why those three?
#47
Posted 07 March 2009 - 01:05 PM
Oh yes, with gene therapy we could have additional copies of p53 and p16 not to have cancer, plus of telomerase to live 125y on average, that would be great.Gene therapy
http://www.dailymail...eat-cancer.html
Meanwhile perhaps we might reach it just with supplements and conventional medicine, before gene therapy: there are already supplements to overexpress telomerase (e.g. astragalus as far as i understand), and with the abundant current research against cancer there is hope we might soon be able to avoid cancer...
Edited by AgeVivo, 07 March 2009 - 01:08 PM.
#48
Posted 08 March 2009 - 04:30 AM
2)Biotechnology
3)SENS
4)Nanobiotechnology(applied nanotechnology to biology)
5)Stem Cells
6)A combination of the above
Eliezer Yudhowsky said that using nanotechnology to cure aging is like using a sledgehammer to swat a fly, or something along that line. I think a combo of nanotechnology & biotechnology, as in nanobiotechnology, would be the best. Ray Kurzweil says that the 1st bridge is biotechnology, the 2nd is nanobiotechnology. So he's saying that biotechnology will come before nanotechnology. I"m saying that a combination would be gd.
Now, where would we get 10 million frm?
Edited by CalebZ, 08 March 2009 - 04:36 AM.
#49
Posted 07 May 2009 - 07:19 AM
#50
Posted 07 May 2009 - 08:14 AM
Unless you mean cloning organs! though isn't it the same as building them from stem cells? ^^
I also believe stem cells is the true "now"
Nanotechnology has a lot of theoretical potential but.. it's still very theoretic and impractical I think!
#51
Posted 07 May 2009 - 08:24 AM
How can cloning help life extension :X
Unless you mean cloning organs! though isn't it the same as building them from stem cells? ^^
I also believe stem cells is the true "now"
Nanotechnology has a lot of theoretical potential but.. it's still very theoretic and impractical I think!
Yes, cloning could help through cloned tissue and organs, which I believe we are closer to achieving then some of the other technologies on the poll. I also believe it's similar to stem cells like you mentioned, thus my belief they should have been linked together on the poll.
#52
Posted 13 May 2009 - 04:41 AM
How can cloning help life extension :X
Unless you mean cloning organs! though isn't it the same as building them from stem cells? ^^
I also believe stem cells is the true "now"
Nanotechnology has a lot of theoretical potential but.. it's still very theoretic and impractical I think!
I also thought it was impractical and out of reach with current technology especially after reading some horror stories on nano-gene therapy using viruses, but a new promising study posted on the nanotechnology section has sparked my interest in the field once more.
Here's the study: http://www.imminst.o...showtopic=28299
My vote still doesn't change though, stem cells/organ/tissue cloning remain #1 on my list.
#53
Posted 13 May 2009 - 05:12 AM
Also, Brokenportal, in regards to the questions you posed:
The NIH might get around $30.8bil. Reference this recent article: http://www.genomeweb...oposes-308b-nih. The NIH's budget over the past few years has been in the $28-$29bil range if I recall; while Congress might not give the NIH $30.8bil, I don't think it is going to cut the agency's budget. If Arlen Specter's legislation passes (and it likely won't), that would add another $1bil to the kitty; Arlen's proposal "...would create an independent agency dedicated to advancing science from the laboratory into practice." Reference http://specter.senat...d6-725a233f8625.
In other good news (at least in my opinion), politicians as well as "people on the street" are beginning to discuss the possibility of "rejuvenation." Their conversation is usually limited; it only revolves around stem cell therapy and its potential to replace aging organs, cure age onset diseases like type II diabetes, etc. However, these discussions represent an advance.
Anthony
Edited by Anthony, 13 May 2009 - 05:13 AM.
#54
Posted 04 July 2009 - 12:31 AM
Edited by RickCampos, 04 July 2009 - 12:32 AM.
#55
Posted 09 July 2009 - 09:40 PM
#56
Posted 26 September 2009 - 12:21 AM
I would put my $10mil into SENS research.
Also, Brokenportal, in regards to the questions you posed:
The NIH might get around $30.8bil. Reference this recent article: http://www.genomeweb...oposes-308b-nih. The NIH's budget over the past few years has been in the $28-$29bil range if I recall; while Congress might not give the NIH $30.8bil, I don't think it is going to cut the agency's budget. If Arlen Specter's legislation passes (and it likely won't), that would add another $1bil to the kitty; Arlen's proposal "...would create an independent agency dedicated to advancing science from the laboratory into practice." Reference http://specter.senat...d6-725a233f8625.
In other good news (at least in my opinion), politicians as well as "people on the street" are beginning to discuss the possibility of "rejuvenation." Their conversation is usually limited; it only revolves around stem cell therapy and its potential to replace aging organs, cure age onset diseases like type II diabetes, etc. However, these discussions represent an advance.
Anthony
Maybe the budget wasnt cut. I wish I could find that. I think I saw on tv the other day that the annual budget for roads is something like 45 billion. Can you beleive that? But thats not horrible news. That just means there is plenty plenty of room here for us to work to get this show more fully on the road.
Also, SENS research is great, but I think I would spend the 10 million on advertising to the world, then we can support sens and imminst and sing inst and cryonics inst and everything, with 7 billion peoples worth of resources and funds and dedication and effort. If we tell them, they will come. Some people say, "Lets not talk about immortality, it scares people." Fine, lets not go to that extreme. But then they turn around and say, "Lets use terminoligy like maintaining function and eliminating age related diseases." Well, when we say things like that then people dont get the point. They think we are talking about compression of morbity and thats not going to help this cause. We can tell them, "We want unlimited lifespans, indefinite life extension, we want to remain healthy and alive in this grand gracious spacious sea of incredible mystery for as long as we can." We can do that. People will listen to that. Heres one main major example of why, billions of people across the world beleive people when they tell them there is an invisible person, or committee of people in the sky, granting them wishes and controling the world like a video game, or a reincarnated frog master and stuff like that. If that many people, intelligent and dull alike can beleive stuff like that, they can and will definitely beleive this cause is real and serious when we tell them about it. All we have to do is tell them. Im pretty sure I would put most of that 10 million in to getting the word out to the world.
#57
Posted 26 September 2009 - 08:29 PM
#58
Posted 26 January 2010 - 09:28 PM
#59
Posted 27 January 2010 - 03:04 PM
Edited by kafkastoaster, 27 January 2010 - 03:06 PM.
#60
Posted 27 January 2010 - 03:06 PM
Edited by kafkastoaster, 27 January 2010 - 03:07 PM.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users