While sounding benevolent, this approach is “too little & too late”. We will never succeed in finding good Healthspan Solutions with such small amounts of money at such a large cost for just collecting & tracking the funds.
No, if we are to really solve human Healthspan Solutions on a sensible timescale (say 15-30 years) we must fund it properly & prioritize strategically (for maximum effectiveness). This points to funding by: the Government; HNWI’s; Corporations; the Public.
OR, some combination of these 4 potential sources.
Elliot Bergman, Ph.D.
Co-founder Geroscience Healthspan Forum (“GHF”)
NOTE: GHF is 100% dedicated to the Healthspan Campaign (Imperative) and on helping fill the huge gap between basic and applied aging research.
On Aug 15, 2014, at 8:42 PM, Reason wrote:
> For those who follow the evolution of crowdfunding efforts in connection with research funding (e.g. experiment.com), you might take a look at LabCures, something that seems very recently launched, and is a more novel approach than most in the field.
> This is an age of distintermediation, and crowdfunding seems like something that will inevitably take over a chunk of the sort of research fundraising that presently flows through big per-disease charities. But do people who go beyond a nebulous support for curing a specific disease really want to pick and choose projects, or are they happier rooting for teams? If the latter, crowdfunding may inevitably shift in the direction of a LabCures-like approach.