-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Age-defying: Master key of lifespan found in brain
- Thread starter Kimawolf
- Start date
- Status
Fenderputty
Banned
Hopefully by the time we're 50 they've figured out how to reverse aging.
SniperHunter
Banned
I am sorry I don't know too much about biology.
Lambda Pie
Banned
i wouldn't mind getting sterilized in exchange for a longer lifespan/immortality. if that's the trade off, make me ever-lasting.
Even if aging could be slowed, or stopped, I wonder how it would be distributed to the general population. Are only the richest going to be able to afford it, what role would the government take in limiting it? Pretty interesting stuff. I would love to be around to see it, even if I'm not one of the 'immortals'.
CornBurrito
Member
Gay people benefit the most from this.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
Forget mice just study Pharrell in a lab.
This man is 40 years old.
This man is 40 years old.
There is no rational reason why you should live longer than everyone else.
Fenderputty
Banned
There's going to be some very interesting social debates moving forward as technology progresses. This type of shit combined with 3D printing an other advancements and soon we'll be on Gattaca level discussions.
cuevas. PhD.
Member
If mice can afford it why not us.
Freezie KO
Banned
Just keep the research going. Nobody is saying "Only rich people will get the cure for cancer!" or "Only rich people will get the cure for Alzheimers!" Sure, that might happen at first. But just keep it coming. I've only got 30-50 years left.
Hcoregamer00
The 'H' stands for hentai.
Living Forever, not going to happen.
Extending Lifespan another 50-100 years, possible.
Extending the healthy lifetime and taking out dementia, yes please, it will help us all.
Extending Lifespan another 50-100 years, possible.
Extending the healthy lifetime and taking out dementia, yes please, it will help us all.
lab mices are bilioneres
I think the expensive idea is because of how much healthcare costs. That's different. Say you're terminally ill with cancer. There is no cure for cancer, only treatments that improve your odds. Those treatments are extremely long and high maintenance.
If they figure out a suite of anti-aging treatments, it's likely going to be inject-able, mass produced, and in high demand. Probably government subsidized like nothing else. It's going to be cheap, like water, utilities. Maybe expensive at first like modern sanitation and electricity was at first but not for long.
CornBurrito
Member
There's no rational reason for why everyone should die at the same age either.
Not everyone can afford cancer treatments in the US. That doesn't mean we should deprive treatment for those who can afford it.
Actually it can happen there are animals that do not have lifespan. They just grow until they fall from some disease or will be eaten by some other animal.
SniperHunter
Banned
yea everything in the universe has a lifespan, every thing including the universe itself will die at one point
Sanky Panky
Banned
Nature is about balance, hence we die. Not a good idea to become more of a pest than we already are.
CornBurrito
Member
Can you explain why lobsters don't age?
This wouldn't prevent humans from aging or dying. Just extend their lifespan.
Instead of appealing to naturalism, you could man up and take the hypothetical treatment and dedicate your life to fixing our energy/global warming problem.
Can't stop growing!
CornBurrito
Member
But man nature is like... the best
I don't do anything unnatural. *posts this from my air conditioned home, with artificial lights, on my man-made internet.*
Initially, but then doubtless a company would come along and package immortality to be affordable for the general public. They'll be the Apple of their time
Well we may start eating eachother when we will run out of food. Because that is 100% confirmed if human lifespan will increase a lot.
CornBurrito
Member
Isn't there enough food in the world for us? IIRC the problem is distribution.
Nature isn't about shit.
Immortality could greatly increase the number of veteran scientists and other field experts we'll have collaborating on their respective projects, a lot of the mistakes from history can be dealt with on a very real basis. Humanity will be collectively more wise, and the work we produce significantly improved. We'll have youthful, mentally and physically fit teachers conveying thousands of years worth of knowledge to societies children.
Needless to say, this is a very real investment into dealing with the problems the future holds. If we can surpass the initial rough patch, we'll become galactic contenders, and then the REAL shit will start to go down.
Who realistically doesn't want to be about for that?
You Are Viewtiful
Member
At this rate we'll discover it tomorrow! I read two articles about this today, and zero yesterday. That's an infinite increase. Tomorrow???????
Falcs
Banned
But it would be better if you start to extend your life in your late teens/early 20's when you are at your physical peak rather then when you're in your 50's and your body has already deteriorated.
It'd be like having a longer 20's rather than having a longer 50's.
Hcoregamer00
The 'H' stands for hentai.
That is a good point, even if you can extend lifespan there is still disease, cancer, and many things that will kill you. Just because you can live for 1,000 years doesn't mean that you will live that long when there is war, famine, and random acts of violence.
Liquidsnake
Banned
Then we put out word to the superstitious peasants that if you eat a billionaire, you live an extra 100 years. problem solved/created/whatever. interesting things made to happen.
Bah, non-issue. Extend lifespan, wait as scientists figure out how to reverse aging (rejuvenation).
Sanky Panky
Banned
Can you tell me if there are studies that have confirmed that lobsters never die of age, or if there have been mechanisms discovered to measure their age?
the answers seem to be no, and yes
Conor 419 said:
What kind of utopia do you live in? If your illustrious saviors of the world can't do shit for 40+ years, what indication do you have that they can do it in the additional time? Very naive.
Freezie KO
Banned
Q
Queen of Hunting
Unconfirmed Member
sounds like science is just gonna break human life in future, we need people to die to keep the world moving and for space (as harsh as they may sound) we are aready struggling for space in many place and when u got less n less people dying then yeah, i fear those times lol
Cyber Caesar
Member
1. The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster
for the human race. They have greatly increased the life-expectancy of
those of us who live in "advanced" countries, but they have
destabilized society, have made life unfulfilling, have subjected
human beings to indignities, have led to widespread psychological
suffering (in the Third World to physical suffering as well) and have
inflicted severe damage on the natural world. The continued
development of technology will worsen the situation. It will certainly
subject human beings to greater indignities and inflict greater damage
on the natural world, it will probably lead to greater social
disruption and psychological suffering, and it may lead to increased
physical suffering even in "advanced" countries.
- Ted Kaczynski PhD
for the human race. They have greatly increased the life-expectancy of
those of us who live in "advanced" countries, but they have
destabilized society, have made life unfulfilling, have subjected
human beings to indignities, have led to widespread psychological
suffering (in the Third World to physical suffering as well) and have
inflicted severe damage on the natural world. The continued
development of technology will worsen the situation. It will certainly
subject human beings to greater indignities and inflict greater damage
on the natural world, it will probably lead to greater social
disruption and psychological suffering, and it may lead to increased
physical suffering even in "advanced" countries.
- Ted Kaczynski PhD
CornBurrito
Member
It actually is possible to measure age. So you're wrong.
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
Self directed evolution through genetic modification and cybernetic enhancement. But why do we have to "evolve" anyway? It's an undirected process with no end point. It's not like we'll be getting better because of it.
Sanky Panky
Banned
I laid it out a bit confusing, but yes, we know how to measure their age now, and no, we don't know how long they live for. Estimates are they die at age 100.
- Status