I agree that SENS is likely the best place to send donations to promote longevity research.
Actually, it’s a shame that longevity research doesn’t get mentioned by the Effective Altruism movement very often. I’m just now casually wondering if there might be enough value in having a Givewell-like nonprofit evaluation organization focused on longevity research to justify creating such an organization. Note that Animal Charity Evaluators is an animal-based Givewell-like nonprofit evaluation organization—which means that this sort of thing has been done before.
This having been said, Aubrey de Grey already seems incentivized to fund the most cost-effective anti-aging research first, so directly funding SENS might be everyone’s best bet.
It’s both a research intensive area and one that has traditionally used up weirdness points/not garnered much interest from the usual philanthropy crowd. Probably of interest once EA is significantly bigger.
It probably depends on if you think the SENS approach or more mainstream types of aging research are more likely to produce more significant results. It’s worth mentioning that Google’s “Calico” company has recently announced a partnership with Buck.
Animal Charity Evaluators makes sense because of a values difference: they provide recommendations for people who prioritize animals much more than is typical. I don’t think there’s something similar with anti-aging; it’s just that GiveWell’s not yet in a position to evaluate more researchy organizations, though this is changing as the Open Philanthropy Project progresses.
(I do think a GiveWell competitor would be valuable, but in the cause-neutral sense of one looking at all the potential funding-constrained altruistic options and picking the best ones.)
This having been said, Aubrey de Grey already seems incentivized to fund the most cost-effective anti-aging research first, so directly funding SENS might be everyone’s best bet.
Aubrey de Grey has a fairly specific road map and is going to fund project on that road map. If you disagree with his road map you can think that Antiaging money should be spend differently.
I agree that SENS is likely the best place to send donations to promote longevity research.
Actually, it’s a shame that longevity research doesn’t get mentioned by the Effective Altruism movement very often. I’m just now casually wondering if there might be enough value in having a Givewell-like nonprofit evaluation organization focused on longevity research to justify creating such an organization. Note that Animal Charity Evaluators is an animal-based Givewell-like nonprofit evaluation organization—which means that this sort of thing has been done before.
This having been said, Aubrey de Grey already seems incentivized to fund the most cost-effective anti-aging research first, so directly funding SENS might be everyone’s best bet.
It’s both a research intensive area and one that has traditionally used up weirdness points/not garnered much interest from the usual philanthropy crowd. Probably of interest once EA is significantly bigger.
Another good non-profit research institution that funds a lot of good aging research is the Buck Institute for Research on Aging.
http://www.thebuck.org/
It probably depends on if you think the SENS approach or more mainstream types of aging research are more likely to produce more significant results. It’s worth mentioning that Google’s “Calico” company has recently announced a partnership with Buck.
Animal Charity Evaluators makes sense because of a values difference: they provide recommendations for people who prioritize animals much more than is typical. I don’t think there’s something similar with anti-aging; it’s just that GiveWell’s not yet in a position to evaluate more researchy organizations, though this is changing as the Open Philanthropy Project progresses.
(I do think a GiveWell competitor would be valuable, but in the cause-neutral sense of one looking at all the potential funding-constrained altruistic options and picking the best ones.)
Aubrey de Grey has a fairly specific road map and is going to fund project on that road map. If you disagree with his road map you can think that Antiaging money should be spend differently.