http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategies_for_Engineered_Negli...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategies_for_Engineered_Negli...
The way you worded it, it seems you're implying SENS is a widely accepted theory, while in fact it's anything but (although I'd say it certainly is interesting and worthy of investigation).
http://sens.org/about/leadership/research-advisory-board
The SENS Research Foundation has a yearly budget about a tenth of that of one of the largest aging research labs, the Buck Institute. The Foundation funds work in a range of laboratories around in the US and Europe, and has collaborations with Oxford, Wake Forest, and so forth.
Insofar as controversy exists, you might look on it as a facet of the present dispute over modern theories of aging: camps for aging as accumulated damage versus aging as evolved programming. The accumulated damage side is much bigger but split into several factions, one of which is centered around SENS.