The Quest for Clearly Understood Signifiers
I'm a firm believer in brands and names. If you can't say a few short words in response to "what is it you work at?" and be immediately understood, then you have one more hurdle to surmount every time you're out looking for funding, deals, and partnerships. "Cancer research" is a good example. The life sciences are fantastically complex, but everyone knows where you stand with "cancer research" - those words carry a great deal of weight and shared understanding.
Unfortunately, "aging research" doesn't carry the same weight. Cancer research is well-understood to mean searching for the cure, but "aging research" has no such connotation. Something better is needed for those of us in search of a recognizable brand for engineering a cure for aging.
Back a ways, I decided to jettison use of the term "anti-aging science" as a bad deal. It carries a lot of shared understanding, but not the right sort of shared understanding - it's a gateway to communities of magical thinking and glittery cosmetics. If that was going to help serious attempts to engineer the repair of aging, the benefits to the research community would have been clear already. They are not, needless to say, and "anti-aging science" is a poisonous swamp - it is white-coated actors playing cosmetics researchers in TV commercials.
So what do you tell people you support? Once upon a time I had hopes for "healthy life extension," but I think that life extension is on the way out as a name with promise. It suffers from too much contact with the "anti-aging" community, and is at once too vague and too clinical. I'm presently in favor of "longevity science," - or "engineered healthy longevity," or the like - in absence of other good candidates. This seems to have legs, as I've seen "longevity science" used out there in other parts of the online world. It's snappy and to the point, and not yet subverted by the horrible children in the anti-aging marketplace. The only downside that springs to mind is that it does nothing to dispel the Tithonus Error - that many people think engineered longevity means being old for longer rather than young for longer.
But these are just my views. I'd be interested to see what other people think about nomenclature and branding in initiatives aimed at the repair of aging through applied science.
How about "Engineered Healthy Longevity?"
I have long been of the opinion that a key problem for SENS and other approaches to healthy life extension emerges from our terror of death and intense desires for youth and longer life. In such a setting, where time is always our enemy, we hedge against our greatest desires by consciously minimizing the chances of attaining them. In that way, our disappointments are chronic but manageable. The moment there is an actual "proof of concept" for healthy life extension, the equation shifts. Once the possibility of life extension becomes real, investments (emotional and financial) become rational. Nothing will change the calculus more than the first Methuselah Mouse and the bestowing of the first Methuselah Prize. Once that happens, it won't particularly matter what we call it, though using terminology unencumbered by any associations to the charlatans of anti-aging marketing would make sense (or, perhaps, SENS.)
How about "Human rejuvenation"? Tithonus Error impossible, and the "human" implies its intricate enough to involve the whole body and not just face. The only possible misinterpretation is those who think that it involves restoration of childhood.
I'm not a researcher, just a recent biology graduate who's interested in anti-senescence issues, but I had a similar (small) dilemma deciding how to tag related posts on my blog. I don't want people to think I'm a nut, so "functional immortality" was right out. I rejected "anti-aging", for the reasons you mention, and variations on "senescence", since I don't think the term is commonly understood outside the field. I finally just settled on "longevity", which I think is clear and relatively free of baggage.
I like "longevity science" or "longevity research". Sounds respectable, but imparts a sense of hopefulness at the same time. I think eventually, as actual biomedical apps come online, the term "anti-aging" will shed most of its negative connotations, though maybe the public will be ready for "anti-senescence" by then. And one day, we'll openly speak of "rejuvenation" technologies. I just hope I'm still around then.
In terms of branding, how about Aubrey de Gray adopt the more conventional look of an expert? Would Dr. Spock (not the vulcan) have had his influence, for better or worse, if he presented himself the way de Gray does? And how about the cultivation of celebrity spokespeople. The way the various disease societies do.
how about:
Biological Restoration Science
Aubrey de Grey does look strange with his massively long beard, but then again, look at Einstein's hair. I think Aubrey will be fine with his beard because it probably gets attention, which is good, however, he needs to stop making videos trying to convince people to support his research and instead needs to talk more about some research progress he has made so far to discover things that nobody else has discovered yet, to prove that he is useful. unfortunately i bet many people still think he's a lunatic or a charlatan, because many people are aware of societies willingness to tolerate many different ridiculous views without criticizing them at all. Therefore people assume Aubrey's views are just more of that ridiculousness. i'm not a supporter of censorship; when someone says something incorrect i think it's not the best idea to silence them. i think a better idea is to let their opinion be heard while then having someone else explain why it is incorrect. unfortunately there are people in society who think they are right, while they are possibly gravely wrong, and these people have been given legal protection from criticism (because of their violent reaction) and it is these people who are actively or passively opposed to Aubrey's philosophy. i think you know what people i'm talking about. if those people turn out to be incorrect and Aubrey turns out to be correct then those people would have been responsible for the misery and destruction of ridiculously huge numbers of people, including us.