Subject: Sci.life-extension FAQ #1: Welcome

From: [email-masked] (Brian Manning Delaney)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 1994 14:49:07 GMT

(Sci.life-extension FAQ #1.)              July 5, 1993 Edition.

                      Welcome to Sci.life-extension

  This newsgroup is for the discussion of techniques of slowing,
stopping, and reversing the aging process, from a practical as well as
theoretical standpoint. This includes, as life-extensionists say,
"adding life to years as well as years to life;" i.e., we'll also
discuss ways of restoring and maintaining youth, not just prolonging a
life which may be in an already senescent state.

So defined, the purpose of the group overlaps somewhat with a few
other newsgroups. Let me run through a few topics and suggest whether
they belong in sci.life-extension or in some other group.

                               * * *

--> How to slow down, stop, or reverse the aging process.

Any such attempt to alter the aging process belongs here. This is the
primary purpose of the group. If cryonics is construed as an attempt
to reverse the aging process, it is an exception (see the following).

--> Cryonics.

There is a group, sci.cryonics, dedicated solely to cryonics. Cryonics
should be discussed there.

--> Nanotechnology.

Several people e-mailed me asking why I hadn't included nanotechnology
as an appropriate topic for sci.life-extension in earlier versions of
this "Welcome." They argued that nanotechnology will be central to
life extension techniques of the 21st century (and beyond). While this
may be true, there is already a group, sci.nanotechnology, dedicated
to the science. Until nanotechnology matures, the questions involving
its application in any sphere (be it in cryonics or in the
rebuildinging of damaged mitochondrial DNA) will center on the
possibility of nanotechnology itself, not on any other substantive
discipline -- e.g., statements like "we could just undo the oxidative
damage through nanotechnology" gain utility, at this point, only
through an assessment of the very possibility of nanotechnology, not
through considerations of the aging process.

--> Cosmetics.

Newsgroups in the "Sci" hierarchy should be scientific discussions.
Topics such as the reversal of collagen-cross-linking in skin are
appropriate to sci.life-extension; topics such as the proper
application of makeup to cover sun-damaged skin belong elsewhere.

--> Cognitive-enhancing drugs (including nootropics).

Cognitive enhancers (aka "smart drugs") are drugs which could "add
life to years." As such, they are part of life extension. However,
there is a newsgroup, alt.psychoactives, whose purpose -- according to
some -- is for the discussion of cognitive enhancers.  There has been
debate recently, though, about the nature of alt.psychoactives. One
person claims the group is for cognitive enhancers, another claims it
is for anti-depressants, anti-anxiety drugs, and the like.

Since it doesn't waste significant net resources to cross-post,
perhaps the best idea is to cross-post articles on cognitive-enhancers
to alt.psychoactives and sci.life-extension.

However, if the topic is the potential anti-aging properties of
cognitive enhancers (many cognitive enhancers, such as centrophenoxine
and hydergine, are purported also to increase life spans), then of
course sci.life-extension is the appropriate group.

--> Getting more out of the same number of years of life.

In addition to cognitive enhancers, there is a wide range of topics
that might generally be grouped together under the heading of "adding
life to your years." At one extreme would be religion and
psychotherapy -- which could easily be construed as "adding life to
years" -- and at the other extreme would be drugs such as DMAE, which
are purported to reduce one's need for sleep. The former topics belong
in other newsgroups dedicated to them (sci.psychology, ...religion...,
etc.).  DMAE, and drugs that are alleged to reduce the need for sleep,
are perfectly appropriate topics for sci.life-extension.

--> Theories of Aging.

Any scientific discussion of aging is appropriate for this group, even
if it doesn't bear directly on the practical questions of import to
longevists. Scientific discussions that fall within molecular biology
(not all scientific discussions of aging would) could be cross-posted
to bionet.molbio.ageing, though bear in mind that the Bionet groups
are primarily for professional researchers ("Joe, how did you do that
gene-splice you were talking about last week?") and they aren't
carried by nearly as many Usenet sites as sci.life-extension.

                             * * *

Life extension is the haunt of many charlatans and profiteers. Part of
the function of this group will be, I hope, to ferret out fact from
fiction in the mass of life extension organizations and publications
that now exists.

-Brian Delaney <[email-masked]>
-- 
Brian M. Delaney <[email-masked]>
              or <[email-masked]>