The SENS Challenge
Live Forever 26 Apr 2006
I think we are all (of course) hoping for Aubrey to be triumphant (his response to each challenge will also be published). May is only a few days away, so hopefully we will know the results soon.
Edit: As mentioned below, it was pushed back one issue to the July/August issue, due to the originally tight timeframe.
Edited by liveforever22, 27 April 2006 - 12:05 PM.
opales 27 Apr 2006
I think we are all (of course) hoping for Aubrey to be triumphant (his response to each challenge will also be published). May is only a few days away, so hopefully we will know the results soon.
Commentary on existing submissions (2/5 down the quite lenghty post)
http://lists.calorie...ety&D=0&P=42239
ag24 27 Apr 2006
Live Forever 27 Apr 2006
Update: the May/June issue was an impractically tight timeline for everyone so the July issue is now the one. The three submissions (with my rebuttals) are going to the judges any day now.
I thought that it sounded pretty quick when you first provided the link. We will all (I'm sure) be looking forward to the July issue. [thumb]
jaydfox 27 Apr 2006
Heh, after I read that on the CR list, I almost posted that at ImmInst myself, because it seemed too good to just leave on the list.Commentary on existing submissions (2/5 down the quite lenghty post)
http://lists.calorie...ety&D=0&P=42239
ag24 08 Jun 2006
maestro949 08 Jun 2006
ag24 08 Jun 2006
Live Forever 09 Jun 2006
Live Forever 09 Jun 2006
http://www.technologyreview.com/sens/
Mark Hamalainen 09 Jun 2006
Mobbs
Clearly this is the least interesting challenge, from the counter response its hard to tell if they even read Aubrey's rebuttal... They also seem to have the (obviously) mistaken impression that SENS is calling for a hault on all basic research.
Weinstein
Here at there is at least some interesting ideas presented. However the consistent theme seems to be that additional problems would crop up after an initial increase of maximum lifespan achieved by SENS. However difficult one may expect those additional problems to be, they are already admitting that some life extension could be achieved, which certainly disqualifies him from winning the challenge.
Estep
The best contender, or at least the most adamant... they correctly and repeatedly point out that SENS is very optimistic, but that in itself does not discredit it from scientific discussion. For example:
Obviously SENS is not a 'proof'... its an educated guess and proposal to solve a problem which is solvable but for which the difficulty cannot be fully predicted.de Grey’s “arguments” that accumulation of heterogeneous waste products in lysosomes can be dealt with in a manner similar to therapies for lysosomal storage diseases, do not constitute proof in the least
As far as I can see, none of the entries meets the challenge. They all focus on what could be wrong about SENS, without aknowledging that the best way to find out the truth is to openly discuss and research the proposals that SENS makes.
opales 09 Jun 2006
Finally, they suggest that the method my coauthors and I outlined[7] for isolating such hydrolases is
”obvious pseudoscientific pretense and technological window dressing.” This is a most revealing
statement [4], unlikely to have been made by a scientist who had checked the credentials of the
coauthors most likely to have contributed the material, namely the bioremediation specialists. The
passage in question was in fact contributed by Prof. Bruce Rittmann, who, as Estep et al. could
have discovered by consulting his online CV [9] is a universally acknowledged world leader in
bioremediation. Perhaps Estep et al. simply regard the whole field of bioremediation as
pseudoscience? That would be a surprising opinion for a biologist to hold of a field that has a 30-
year history of outstanding scientific, technological and commercial success.
[lol]
Yeah, in your face [lol]
Da55id 09 Jun 2006
doug123 09 Jun 2006
SENS you!
http://www.technolog...images/sens.jpg
Karomesis 09 Jun 2006
The populace is reluctant to concede the possibility of 5000 year lifespans.....right now, but by assimilating the concept of a few years here, and a few dacades there, the masses, who already deeply desire the true fountain of youth, will be far more likely to rally together in support of it.
I think that is the real battle that must be waged, the battle for the hearts and minds of the citizenry, then scientists who are holding to seemingly ancient gerentology pardigims will be forced to make way for the new ideas being presented by the likes of aubrey and others, or be consigned to a bygone era.
The second half of the chessboard is upon us, who will stand with the pioneers and who will fall by the wayside?
maestro949 09 Jun 2006
If any of you are inclined to politely comment on the submissions, the discussion capability has been turned on on the TR Challenge Sens site.
I've only glanced them over so far and can't really comment yet. I plan to digest them over the weekend. It would be easy to throw out a kneejerk reaction but I really want to study them and make sure I have had time to give them and Aubrey's response some thought.
Regardless, this is a big win for aging research. Dialogue is crucial to shaping theories. If there is resistance to ideas from bright experienced people there is probably a good reason. We just need to tease those apart and figure out what the next steps are for moving the ball forward.
manofsan 09 Jun 2006
The second half of the chessboard is upon us, who will stand with the pioneers and who will fall by the wayside?
Hehe, Darwinism is on our side -- those who don't believe in pursuing life-extension will perish, while those who pursue it and succeed will live on to set the agenda.
I'm particularly optimistic, because the baby-boom generation are approaching their retirement years, and will be increasingly demanding cures for their ills and infirmities.
The marketing is slowly but surely bending more and more in the right direction, and eventually the fruits of this will be undeniably in grasp.
peterragnar 09 Jun 2006
Karomesis 10 Jun 2006
And dear Karomesis, all we need do is have control of the center of 64 to win forever!!!! You know what I'm talking about.
Indeed. [sfty]
Hehe, Darwinism is on our side -- those who don't believe in pursuing life-extension will perish, while those who pursue it and succeed will live on to set the agenda. wink.gif
good point, I mentioned in another thread how the process is leading to something, but what?
jaydfox 10 Jun 2006
Heh, about the same time the TR article came out, maybe a month or two earlier in fact, an article came out in Popular Science that featured Aubrey. It was kind of funny, because the TR article had Aubrey against a stark white background, whereas one or more of the shots in the PopSci article had Aubrey against a stark black background. The contrast was very cool.I want to make a shirt that says: "What, you don't think we can live forever?" with this pic on on the front...could we get a more...angry shot? On the back...
SENS you!
http://www.technolog...images/sens.jpg
If you can't find the pictures, Kevin of the MPrize might have them archived somewhere, perhaps even on the MPrize website.
jaydfox 10 Jun 2006
http://www.popsci.co...ecbccdrcrd.html
http://www.popsci.co...ecbccdrcrd.html
See the 3rd and 4th images in the slideshow especially.
Not sure how long either of these links will be good: the original links to the article went bad. This is one of those sites that sees fit to reorganize from time to time without concern of maintaining link functionality.
Live Forever 10 Jun 2006
doug123 10 Jun 2006
But I think I want a super kind photo of Aubrey on the front and a mean and sorta sarcastic or really serious photo of Dr. de Grey with a smile and a middle finger on the back. It will have to have a controversial message to draw attention. On top of that middle finger could perhaps go a mouse. An infinity symbol ala ImmInst could be worked into the design too. The design I want to look so cool that everyone would WANT to wear one; not just think it "looks cool." It has to look cool enough to wear. I know a really talented artist, I am going to have her work on it, and ask for everyone here to vote on the most appealing design (the question will be: what would you actually wear?) It would have to be a color shirt (not black and white). I can blow up to $1000 or more on production of the shirts, so we'll see what we can do.
Edited by nootropikamil, 11 June 2006 - 12:05 AM.
opales 11 Jun 2006
I like this shot: http://img.timeinc.n...et_c700x890.jpg Aubrey does kind of look like a prophet.
But I think I want a super kind photo of Aubrey on the front and a mean and sorta sarcastic or really serious photo of Dr. de Grey with a smile and a middle finger on the back. It will have to have a controversial message to draw attention. On top of that middle finger could perhaps go a mouse. An infinity symbol ala ImmInst could be worked into the design too. The design I want to look so cool that everyone would WANT to wear one; not just think it "looks cool." It has to look cool enough to wear. I know a really talented artist, I am going to have her work on it, and ask for everyone here to vote on the most appealing design (the question will be: what would you actually wear?) It would have to be a color shirt (not black and white). I can blow up to $1000 or more on production of the shirts, so we'll see what we can do.
I like it. Let's do it. Life extension can be cool after all!
(seriously, if we could portay LE as cool we would reach escape velocity a helluva lot faster)
doug123 11 Jun 2006
John Doe 11 Jun 2006
It seems that the third one has some merit. But I thought Aubrey's quip about the Wright Brothers was telling and exactly right.
But the question of just what Aubrey, and his challengers, needs to prove is horribly murky. This is not just any science experiment. Lives are at stake.
RighteousReason 11 Jun 2006
This is not just any science experiment. Lives are at stake.
Very valuable insight...