18 replies to this topic

[bacopa]

Broken Portal talked a few times about having a science section perhaps only reserved for real research and other scientists. I think there is a lot that can be done on this grassroots level, and informed discussion could spur new ideas and hopefully one day could translate into real lab work defeating diseases, as well as the aging process.

Keep in mind many deadly diseases can and often do happen to people still in their youth. So a science section would work to see the bigger picture. It would also add more credibility to imminst, and would interest people in varying fields of science.

I personally am annoyed at times at seeing such a focus on supplements, when the real problems with disease and aging often occur regardless of even a great supplement regime. If we are to make a dent in delaying the grim reaper, it's essential we work on the problems with emphasis on disease pathologies and better research.

The hope of preventing disease merely through supplements is a bad idea in my honest opinion, in that there are many contradicting studies on even the most promising supplements. And for many you might be doing more harm then good, as others have said.

We need to attack the problem the right way, through actual research that could translate to real lab clinical trials. Otherwise we're just wishful thinking our lives away imho.

Edited by dfowler, 04 June 2010 - 07:22 PM.

[s123]

What else can I say than I completely agree with you!

My opinion is also that Imminst is too much focused on supplements. Although, I do agree that supplements can provide a certain level of benefit, they won't stop or reverse aging. We have to focus more on the core task, the defeat of involuntary death (mostly caused by aging). Imminst has made progress in this direction, for example the laser ablation project and now the science funding project.

Edited by s123, 05 June 2010 - 09:50 AM.

[bacopa]

I was just at Relay for life the cancer walk. An elderly ex nurse told me that they used to not even diagnose cancer just pretend it wasn't there. As in she described they'd open the person up, see a tumor, and do nothing about it!

I was positively shocked.

We are still very much in the dark ages for just diseases! Did you read the article on how so little research is translated to clinical trial called teh "valley of death"?

Then there is the article that only 5% of research is put into metastasis of cancer that kills 90% of all cancer victims.

imminst is in a unique position to turn into a grassroots org that focuses on new innovative ways to cure diseases, like having its members start startup biotech companies like Lively, I think it's called.

This supplement bs. is getting ridiculous and I have fallen into it as well. Not saying we should eliminate it, but we need to find people more willing to do the hard work, including supposedly ending aging.

it's articles like this http://www.scienceda...00601101420.htm that make me realize we HAVE to work on cancer so much harder, in of itself.

Edited by dfowler, 12 June 2010 - 03:12 AM.

[rwac]

I agree that a science section is a good idea, and it's been discussed before.
The only question is whether uninvited members should be able to read it at all. According to Duke, it should only be accessible to invited members for best results.

However, please stop hating on supplements. Supplements are currently our only easily available tool for health, comparatively ineffective as they are. Plus most of the people here aren't really able to contribute to the scientific research anyway.

[The Immortalist]

Plus most of the people here aren't really able to contribute to the scientific research anyway.

Obviously we need a science section to gather those that can contribute.

[Anthony]

Plus most of the people here aren't really able to contribute to the scientific research anyway.

Obviously we need a science section to gather those that can contribute.

I don't see how providing "uninvited members" with read only status will negatively impact a science forum.

Anthony

[s123]

However, please stop hating on supplements. Supplements are currently our only easily available tool for health, comparatively ineffective as they are. Plus most of the people here aren't really able to contribute to the scientific research anyway.

I don't hate supplements and take them myself. However, we shouldn't forget our real goal, the defeat of aging, and even though many people here cannot contribute to the science themselves, they can still support the goal by promoting it.

[caliban]

A science section with invite only status can be done, I think it had broad leadership support when the issue was discussed previously, and this is currently very easy to implement and manage using the "teams" function.

However, any such project needs a person (or more than one) to take care of it, to chaperone it and lead it to success.
Unless there is such a volunteer, the idea won't get far.

[Shepard]

If anyone would like to spearhead this project idea, please step forward.

[Mind]

Has anyone seen ResearchGate? Seems scientists want to connect. A scientist section at Longecity is still an option but it would still need a couple of volunteers to make sure it operates well.

[Danail Bulgaria]

The longecity has a very disturbing problem, and it is that the people, who are here, as general do not have a scientific background. This was quite dissapointing, when I understood it. I was expecting, that the majority of the people here are scientists, and it turned to be the opposite.

Longecity can be compared with the such called "patient organisations". People with different diseases sometimes make their own patient organisations, such as organiosation of the people with breast cancer, organisation of the people with prostate cancer, etc. but the majority of the people in such organisations are not doctors. On a very simmilar way here are gathered people who want to be immortal and that's all. Very few of the people here are cappable of doing an actual and important research, that to be a serious step in the process of making the human immortal. The patient organisations have proven, that they can not produce a real lead in the field, that they are gathered. This forum actually is not cappable of a serious research, that can really make a hudge step on the way to immortality. The only thing, that the patient organiosations can do effectively is to cry and to whimp to the government of different countries about how important is their problem to be cured. And the governments usually do not care about their whimps.

Patient type of organosations are cappable of conducting only small confirmative researches, e.g. researches, that have shown, that something is already done and the idea of the confirmative research is "let's see if we can do it too". The confirmative type of researches have proven, that they are not cappable of producing new knowledge independently if they approve or disapprove the results of the previously made study(s).

Patient type of organisations are cappable also sometimes to collect funding for "big large ideas support". Usually the funds, that the people from the patient organisation have given can be viewed as money thrown on the garbage.

Very small, miserable attempts have been made in this forum for scientists to be listed, united under a project, and effectively used, which is also a characteristic of a patient type of organisation. Such attempts wre incompletely so far made here http://www.longecity...all +scientists and here http://www.longecity...ts-into-groups/ and so far have not produced nothing more, than incomplete list of people, who eventually can do scientific research. I tried to focus the attention of the Longecity community over somrthing, that really is not explored, may have something to do with life extention, and definately is worth from scientific point of view to be explored in the topic of the never developing children http://www.longecity...veloping-child/ This, however, did not result in gathering scientists, collecting funding and producing a study.

[Avatar of Horus]

The longecity has a very disturbing problem, and it is that the people, who are here, as general do not have a scientific background. This was quite dissapointing, when I understood it. I was expecting, that the majority of the people here are scientists, and it turned to be the opposite.
...
etc.

What you wrote is quite disheartening, and there may be arguable truths in it.
However reading the forum for a couple of months before I joined, I got quite the opposite expectations: I mean that the major issue in the forum's life extension part is the slow turnaround, i.e., traffic, of the topics / conversations (with occasional surges of course).
For example the two Project Ideas topics which I replied to, had the last post about a year before. So regarding all this, at the current state of the situation, one cannot expect much.

But in my opinion all this is not the problem itself in the ImmInst / longecity and the general life extension community, but the consequence of the problem, which is the small size in numbers of the global community and movement membership.
And from this follows the low number of the scientists too, since in every community and organization there are people with different roles and interests.
Like as was written before in this topic:

Plus most of the people here aren't really able to contribute to the scientific research anyway.

Possibly the cause of these is that the majority of the people are simply not interested in life extension.

However I also feel a general contradiction here, that is between the sizes of the life extension movement and the so-called 'anti-aging industry', because this latter is a thriving business, with around 100 billion dollars a year in the USA alone.

Also there were mentions here and there in the forum about the need of convincing the people about our cause: the immortality and life extension; I however I don't like the idea of the persuasion of unwilling people, I think that at first perhaps it would be better that if they'd be made known about the movement at least, that is informing them about it. And if that's not enough in the terms of solving the problem, only after that the convincing can be considered.

Speaking about the Science section and the scientific community:
were there, for instance, outreach campaigns to them? I don't know, but I mean like e.g. A4 size longecity ad/info posters in the universities/colleges/campuses around the world. Or simply leaflets in their vicinity, in the places frequented by those people?

By the way, Is there a list here in the forum where the past campaigns can be seen, or the past flyers' text read?


All this is partially reminds me in general term to this article:
The Failure Of The Cryonics Movement - Saul Kent
http://www.longecity...ment-saul-kent/

Also this problem is the topic of a recent post of Reason in his excellent fightaging.org blog, titled:
"Why Isn't Longevity Science the World's Greatest Concern?"
Its about a recent speech of a Russion life extension activist Maria Konovalenko, titled the 'Dark matter of Transhumanism', that is 'Why hasn't the movement won (yet)?'. She calls it the dark matter, because, as she says: "It's something that we cannot explain and we don't understand."
And I must admit it's hard to understand, truly.
Its topic is here: http://www.longecity...eatest-concern/

Edited by Avatar of Horus, 12 April 2013 - 05:08 PM.

[Danail Bulgaria]

disheartening - yes. I may even add very disheartening.

arguable truths - I do not think so at this moment.

Maybe You believe, that traffic of the topics / conversations (with occasional surges) will produce a reliable scientific progress. However, I do not think so.

Also, according to me, the absence of scientists is a problem for this community. It may be a consequence of another problem, but it is also and
a problem itself.

[Avatar of Horus]

disheartening - yes. I may even add very disheartening.

arguable truths - I do not think so at this moment.

Maybe You believe, that traffic of the topics / conversations (with occasional surges) will produce a reliable scientific progress. However, I do not think so.

Also, according to me, the absence of scientists is a problem for this community. It may be a consequence of another problem, but it is also and
a problem itself.

You are right, It's just a phrasing difference, doesn't matter much.

I just meant that the low number of the scientists is the consequence of the small size of the global movement, and not the fault of the longecity community. And that we also need other type of people too, like ones who could help the research with organizing, funding and such.

So as the problems have been identified the main question remains: how could this situation be changed? What do you think?

[Danail Bulgaria]

It will be the best if people, who deal with real science connected with the aging to give a really scientific idea, that to be crowd funded and done. The problem here is who will give just like that his scientific ideas?

The participants in this forum, I suppose, use different supplements, anti - aging skin cremes, nootropics etc. There are also people here, who do not use them. This allows us to do a comparative study in ordeer to be seen if an antiaging therapy is effective or not. I suggested here: http://www.longecity...arch +for +free to be made a comparative study for the anti - wrinkles skin cremes, and brokenportal suggested, that we can make other simmilar like this study. Nothing happened, because of abscence of people, who want to participate.

Another thing, that can be done is to be crowd - funded a study, that to be carried out in an university, from proffessors, or people, who know what they do. I think, that it will be best the crowd funding to be made for a neuroscience projects, that to help preventing the neurons death and their daily loses.

Another option is someone here to give a nice scientific idea, that not to be risky, and to produce some scientific result. I didn't mind to suggest such here: http://www.longecity...veloping-child/ and this never happened, because of the money needed.

[Avatar of Horus]

Crowd funding is a good idea I agree, but to do that one needs a crowd first.

This is the topic of a recent post from here:
http://www.longecity...180#entry579639

Like many, I think that Ray Kurzweil is overly optimistic on the timeline for progress in technology. I don't think he's wrong in terms of his high level view on where our technology is going, just a few decades on the early side - which is unfortunate for those of us who will age to death before the advent of rejuvenation biotechnology. It is certainly the case that the first draft of technologies to repair the underlying biological damage that causes aging could arrive fairly soon, within two decades - but it's not just a matter of building them, even though there are detailed research and development plans for doing so.
The issues are persuasion and fundraising; when it comes to aging, the mainstream of the research community is set on goals that either have nothing to do with human longevity, or will do very little to extend life even after being realized at great cost. So the comparatively tiny and underfunded shard of the scientific community whose members are interested in realizing effective means of rejuvenating the old will likely spend the next twenty years on laying the groundwork, prototyping the biotechnologies, proving their case ever more completely, growing funding, and persuading ever more researchers to do the same. If there were hundreds of millions of dollars devoted to this cause today, we could leap ahead twenty years in this timeline - but there are not. The money and large supportive community still has to be bootstrapped, building on the present early phase in the growth of modern rejuvenation research, underway successfully but slowly for the past decade or so, giving rise to organizations like the Methuselah Foundation and SENS Research Foundation.

Edited by Avatar of Horus, 16 April 2013 - 09:56 PM.

[Danail Bulgaria]

So far there were several successfull gatheings of crowd funds, for the support of surprisingly junk ideas.

This shows, that even this cowd can fund well.

Simply the ideas have not to be junk ones, but really good projects that to be done in universities, and to be led from authorities.

[Mind]

We have a poll and discussion here about the Science Section/Initiative.

We also have a science forum where all of our current and former crowd-funded projects are listed. You can ask questions of the researchers even!

We are also offering a commission for science-related articles.

So we have made some small steps toward organizing more science content and getting more scientists to contribute. The fact remains, that we need more people to help do the actual work of managing the "science section" of LongeCity. The managers here at LongeCity are busy people with day jobs of post-graduate education to pursue. Scientists tend to be fairly busy as well. Does anyone have some free time? Or know someone qualified to manage a science section?

[Avatar of Horus]

So far there were several successfull gatheings of crowd funds, for the support of surprisingly junk ideas.

This shows, that even this cowd can fund well.
...

These are rather minor nevertheless significant research funding levels, and these too are important.
But more would be much better, for instance one of the leading regenerative medicine researcher Irina Conboy's embryonic stem cell aging research program has $2,246,020 funding. http://www.cirm.ca.g...ively-regulates

...
Simply the ideas have not to be junk ones, but really good projects that to be done in universities, and to be led from authorities.

As far as I know the last two of these longecity research grants: the microglia and cryoprotectant programs are following that way you've written: the first is conducted in the Fraunhofer Institute and the latter is at the University of Liverpool, both by good scientists.

And while I consider this university/institute funding method very good, I also think that this sort of research should be extended with DIYBio projects as well, because this latter type is more fitting to the smaller funding levels.

We have a poll and discussion here about the Science Section/Initiative.

We also have a science forum where all of our current and former crowd-funded projects are listed. You can ask questions of the researchers even!

We are also offering a commission for science-related articles.

So we have made some small steps toward organizing more science content and getting more scientists to contribute. The fact remains, that we need more people to help do the actual work of managing the "science section" of LongeCity. The managers here at LongeCity are busy people with day jobs of post-graduate education to pursue. Scientists tend to be fairly busy as well. ...

These are very good initiatives I think.

And as for the expansion:
I currently see two possible ways for the recruitment of scientist:

one is a direct approach, that is for example writing emails to them, and presenting the organization, its goals and grant possibilities, etc. However I don't know whether this type of outreach is a good one or not, but possibly requesting help from them could be tried, like appealing to their expertise generally, or asking their opinion about a given subject.

And the other way is an indirect one: that ImmInst/Longecity establishes its own research program and laboratory, and by this means it starts to produce new scientific knowledge, like research results on a regular basis, which may put the Institute more on the science map and can attract the attention of the scientists; and also showing them more that this organization is worthy for their interest and support.

Edited by Avatar of Horus, 28 April 2013 - 10:06 PM.