Supplements: I am skeptical of them--people think they are going to live 10 to 20 years longer on them and I think it is maybe more in the range of 3 to 5 years, if that. I haven't seen much in the way of clinical studies that show X supplements increases human life span by Y years. That said, my goal with supplements is not radical longevity; I hope to gain more quality years, which I suspect I will. I'd rather live a shorter life-span, but it be one that is enjoyable and worth living than a longer one in misery.
This notion seems prevailent, and also short sighted. I could be wrong, Im just saying. I would much rather take the chance of living for 50 years in misery if I could hold out until Longevity Escape Velocity than to obliterate for eternity. Now maybe I would change my mind when the pain became to great, but it seems to me that a lot of people would have arthritis, parkinsons and and only enough money to shop at a discount food store so they would rather off themselves. There are kids in other countries that live their entire lives in more pain than is the threshold that I get the feeling a lot of people in the life extension discussions indicate they would rather off themselves before they ever even get to the point of. Im sure its not exactly like that, but that is the precedent that notions like that seem to be setting and I think its dangerous.
Mprize: I am even more skeptical of this. For the Methuselah Mouse Prize, well, I'd like to see at least 3 solid examples of prior competitions in any field that lead to eventual breakthroughs in science and technology that were applied to society (as opposed to a one-shot gimmicks/stunts/wonders). I can't think of any--most of it is driven by government or private grants.
As for the second part, I am even more skeptical. Stuff like the "300" are a bit gimmicky for a whole slew of reasons. Now grants for SENS research is more along the lines of what mainstream academia uses, and if it follows all the proper protocals and benchmarks, then maybe it has more legitimacy. I know a number of members on these boards are involved (yes, Elrond, I saw you listed), but that doesn't convince me that the research or the direction follows all the appropriate standards, or that it is even investigating in the right direction.
I could be wrong, I just hear the reports, but wasnt the x prize successful on a bunch of different levels? Even if it wasnt successful before, it doesnt mean it cant be now. If a scientist works with gerontology or bio engineering or something along those lines, then how isnt enticing them to make longevity breakthroughs in mice with millions of dollars as a prize a good idea? You say they would be better off writing more grants, ok, good idea, but what is going to get them to want to write grant proposals for longevity research more, a happenstance desire to take that direction in the face of a variety of possible directions to take in the research field, or a multi million dollar prize dangling the end of that life sustaining option?
Not to mention the prize garners media exposure which plants the seeds of biogerontology engineering in the minds of millions if not billions of people. If even just 1% of 1% of those seeds sprout, that is still a huge pay off. Besides that it will also plant the seeds in philanthropic people and organizations minds that will yeild further grants and funding.
My thoughts: Innovation comes from a number of sources, but a large percentage is based in either the government or corporate sectors with grants offered from either of those sectors. You'll also see advancements arise, by accident, from the military industrial sector (while researching or developing something else entirely) or other related fields, like NASA.
That reminds me of the quote, "Innovation occurs for many reasons, including greed, ambition, conviction, happenstance, acts of nature, mistakes, and desperation. But one force above all seems to facilitate the process. The easier it is to communicate, the faster change happens." James Burke, Connections
Imminst can and will embody more and more of the government and corporate sector. Lets keep the communication flowing.
I think we should expect a "cure to aging" from one of those sources--especially if big money can be made off of it and there is real science to back it up. I think stuff like the Mprize makes people feel good about themselves, but until something substantial comes out of it, I'll remain skeptical. There is too much self-serving agendas in fields such as this--"money for grants", which translates to "money for my salary and lifestyle" reigns supreme in this area, in some cases moreso than actual research (oh, enough "papers" will be published to rationalize continued money pouring in, but actual progress is far from assured, at best). I've had more than my share of involvement with the scientific community and research institutions to see a lot of the downsides involved in things like this. That said, it is the way the world works--other fields are just as self-serving, so I am not knocking the researchers: They are more than needed, they are essential. But eh, the Mprize--it doesn't fit my criteria for funding. I am sure, if it meets all the necessary standards, there is plenty of grant money it can acquire through other sources.
This is an underestimation of the world. Ive seen the world free slaves, Ive seen the world band together for d day, Ive seen the united states elect a black president, Ive seen ghandi stage sit ins to free india, I saw a man go to the moon, democracy flourish and tyranny crumble. That, is the way the world works. I understand where your pessimism can come from but it is only as big of a drag as your attachment to it is. Also, this money pocketing greed that you talk about is to be expected in life times with horrific looming time scales. Youll see people in concentration camps do desperate things against each other to survive in them. But give them a plan, a hope of escape and they will band together and use that drive to live as well as they can to produce extrodinary results. In short, life extension researchers dont want some measly couple bank accounts and houses. I mean really, look at the classic example of Aubreys clothes and tell me that this cause will tend for researchers to pocket their grant money.
So that's why I am going with supplements for now. Eventually, I'll have to pay up in big cash, anyway, if a "cure" to aging is found. You can expect it to cost a hell of a lot, regardless of whether the Mprize helps uncover the cure or not. In some ways, one might argue the best choice is: Save your money and invest it wisely to grow it. You'll need that money to buy the cure down the road, anyway.
Thats like saying, dont invest in d day, invest in rebuilding our economy after d day becomes successful. Well
d day isnt going to be successful if we dont invest in it now.
I'm not about to reduce my happiness if there's no reason for it, that's just silly. If it's denying yourself from damaging mediums or eating disgusting but healthy food though, it should be done.
