It isn’t entirely fair to categorize geroscience as the worse of the two serious and considered approaches to the treatment of aging as a medical condition, the one that isn’t as good as the SENS methodology of rejuvenation through repair of molecular damage. Nor is it entirely the case that geroscience aims only to modestly slow aging to gain a few years while SENS aims at radical life extension and rejuvenation of the old. It is also inaccurate to say that geroscience is concerned only with calorie restriction mimetics and other ways to induce beneficial stress responses, the manipulation of metabolism to resist aging a little better without addressing its root causes.
Yet if you pick a random point in the SENS portfolio and a random point in the geroscience portfolio, the stereotypes above are what you’ll likely land upon. Unless, of course, you happened to touch on some portion of the growing interest in senolytics, the selective destruction of senescent cells. This is the major area of overlap between the two at the present time, or – if you choose to look at things the way I do – the most prominent example of
Article originally posted at