Talk:Rejuvenation

message: Should nanotechnology-induced dechronification be mentioned in the introductory paragraph? Isn't that only one out of many possible ways of achieving rejuvenation? I think its place is somewhere after the table of contents. Alex.g 10:49, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that this is an inappropriate reference. In fact, I have just removed the dechronification links (dead links) altogether. It was an historical artifact. I do think it is worth alluding to stem cells, and molecular repair, so the last sentence of the intro paragraph now does that. --Ben Best 14:24, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment 

message: I have placed a "not verified" tag on this section because I feel that the text of the section is too general and does not cite even a remote reference, while some other parts are entirely unexplained ("Since the emergence of philosophy, sages and self-proclaimed wizards always made enormous efforts to find the secret of youth" is an example). I'm currently looking for myths connected to forced rejuvenation but this article does not help me in more than telling me that there are supossedly examples of people sleeping with younger people. I hope someone can clear this up. AdamDobay 19:36, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical background 

message: Currently Regenerative medicine redirects to stem cells, and there is no obvious category Regenerative medicine to sit above both stem cell treatments and Rejuvenation (aging). If there is no objection, I will create the category in a day or two.
Also organizattiosn such as New York Stem Cell Foundation‎  and
McEwan Center for Regenerative Medicine do not have a clear category. What are some of the organizations for this page?
Any ideas? History2007 (talk) 03:18, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: To my knowledge, the only organizations devoted entirely to rejuvenation are the ones associated with Aubrey de Grey, namely the Methuselah Foundation and other project associated with his Strategies for Engineered Negligible Senescence. --Ben Best (talk) 04:30, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

text: There are many  biomedical gerontologists devoted to anti-aging, but only Dr. de Grey is specifically devoted to rejuvenation, to my knowledge. --Ben Best (talk) 05:07, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

text: I don't know of anyone on that list with an MD from a place like Belize. Aslan, Kyriazis and Pearson are the closest to hucksters of any of them. Some might call Sinclair a huckster, but with his Harvard education and situs his credentials cannot be challenged. Garan and Pearson are the only ones on  the list without PhDs, and I believe that almost all on the list have PhDs from very reputable institutions, as you can easily verify by reading their respective Wikipedia entries. --Ben Best (talk) 12:39, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Category & research centers

message: Some people do not seem to know the difference. The section on telomeres might be relevant to life extension, but it is not relevant to rejuvenation. Or if it is, there is no indication in the text as to why it is relevant. I am deleting that section. GirlForLife (talk) 03:26, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rejuvenation is distinct from [[life extension]] 

message: I would like to add a link on the "external links" section to my wiki on rejuvenation called Rejuvepedia.
I am the administer of Rejuvepedia and would like to get the opinion of other editors if it is ok to link to the website inline with:
"It is true that a link from Wikipedia to an external site may drive Web traffic to that site. But in line with Wikipedia policies, you should avoid linking to a site that you own, maintain, or represent—even if WP guidelines seem to imply that it may otherwise be linked. When in doubt, you may go to the talk page and let another editor decide."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:External_links#Advertising_and_conflicts_of_interest
The address is http://www.rejuvepedia.org
All harsh, but ultimately constructive, criticisms are highly welcome. Thank you.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Caston81 (talk • contribs) 10:15, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links section 

message: I reverted  by . First of all, the etymology for "rejuvenation" is re- (Latin: "again") + juvenis (Latin: "young"). The rest was not in line with WP:MEDRS. Gabbe (talk) 11:57, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rasayana Chikithsa? 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Rejuvenation which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 14:32, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The discussion was moved to Talk:Rejuvenation (disambiguation). – wbm1058 (talk) 14:50, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress 

message: This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 06:00, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible copyright problem