Briefly, here are our conclusions: 1) SENS is based on the scientifically
unsupported speculations of Aubrey de Grey, which are camouflaged by the legitimate
science of others; 2) SENS bears only a superficial resemblance to science or
engineering; 3) SENS and de Grey’s writings in support of it are riddled with jargonfilled
misunderstandings and misrepresentations; 4) SENS’ notoriety is due almost
entirely to its emotional appeal; 5) SENS is pseudoscience. We base these conclusions on
our extensive training and individual and collective hands-on experience in the areas
covered by SENS, including the engineering of biological organisms for the purpose of
extending life span.