the big debate is between the majority position of aging as damage accumulation versus the minority position of aging as an evolved program that causes damage
https://www.fightaging.org/archives/2015/05/there-are-many-theories-of-aging/
damage-based theories of aging recognize that certain genetic factors, such as defensive or protective genes, play a role in aging; likewise, programmed theories of aging recognize that some forms of damage contribute to aging and that environmental factors influence the outcome of aging to some degree. So the difference between these two camps lies in the underlying mechanism: damage-based theories of aging argue that aging is predominantly a result of interactions with the environment and/or damage from chemical reactions, while programmed theories argue that aging is predetermined and occurs on a fixed schedule triggered by genetic programs
http://senescence.info/aging_theories.html
Longevity science, also known as biogerontology, is one of the fastest growing life-sciences; as tycoons and billionaires throw money into the playing field, public awareness is rapidly growing as well.
The key milestone that all Advocates are fighting to achieve is the recognition of Aging as a disease; this achievement will allow research money to be granted to drug-studies that investigate aging directly and not an aging-related disease as the proxy.
(not my pic)
