First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
Cure to all disease.
13126 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
(´◔౪◔)✂╰⋃╯
Offline
Posted 2/11/13
Ugh, people really need to stop using the over population theory. When people think over population, they start believing they need to exterminate their kind.
28101 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / Toledo
Offline
Posted 2/11/13 , edited 2/11/13

immitis wrote:

Fun fact. Cure all disease and our immune system will slowly weaken over generations, and as nature is want to do a new one we can't cure will show up eventually.

Also on the point of age wearing on mental health. What most people forget is a lot of the wear and tear on your mental health is your bodies degrading with age. Presumably if the average life span has come to such a point, that would be a issue already solved through reduced or reversed strain of your bodies natural ability to repair.


This is most definitely true. People already weaken their immune systems and those of their children by using so much hand sanitizers and things of a similar nature. The more we are exposed to, within reason, the stronger our bodies get.



FlyinDumpling wrote:

Ugh, people really need to stop using the over population theory. When people think over population, they start believing they need to exterminate their kind.


And the problem with that is?....
6215 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / NY
Offline
Posted 2/11/13

Realtaliation wrote:


kamaitachi5587 wrote:


Realtaliation wrote:

I would think that a prolonged lifespan may just lead to an overburdening of the mental health of an individual. I really can't imagine myself having to deal with the same types of @$$holes in society, the same personal finances, or filing taxes for years. Sure you can enjoy more pleasures and travels and switch jobs, but can you handle having to slave away knowing that you have "x" amount of years until retirement? 200 years is a long time.


I agree in order to cope with a significantly longer lifespan neurological changes would be required on a physical level. We can assume that with the technology to increase longevity there would be concurrent technology to expand and enhance our brains to cope with longer usage. Though I hope that by the time we have the technology to increase our lifespans to a radical degree we have matured a bit as a race.


Not only on a physiological level for neurons alone, but all manners of our organic constitution, unless through some means we can also prolong the durability or bone and tissue. I'd surmise there would be either synthetic replacement, or even a more prolific trade in human parts. Though you are right that through technology and a longer lifespan there is less conflict of interest and less time based scarcity, that causes such.


I wouldn't be adverse to full prosthetic. Something analogous to Ghost in the Shell. An artificial body would negate the issue of resources for a population of "immortals". Ghost in the Shell or something like the cymeks from Dune. though with cymeks you still are limited by a human brain. The next step most likely will be cellular repair with nano machines. Before we get to that stage though we will be growing parts in the lab. It will be a slow process but we will defeat aging at some point. More than likely in our life times. We only have to survive to the first major breakthrough. That will get us over the hump.
6215 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / NY
Offline
Posted 2/11/13 , edited 2/11/13

mhibicke wrote:

I think that the title of this thread is misleading, and that the SENS website is mysterious and vague on a lot of things. It kind of reminds me of cult propaganda.
That aside, I may ask them for some funding for my research, as they have a budget of 4.5 million dollars. But I would need to do a better background investigation, because I don't want the quality of my research to be tainted by being funded by a cult or political special interest group or something.


What line of research are you in? Have you published in any journals? I'm always trying to read up on the current trends in medical research and technology. I Also, you are absolutely correct gaining research funding from a disreputable source will almost certainly if not invalidate your findings they would be questioned.
Posted 2/11/13
I think they should put these drugs inside kinder eggs so only the lucky one's get cured. besides who the hell wants to live 200 years, death is the new life kids!!! Dieing is fun, lets die together!!!
27813 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / Urban South
Offline
Posted 2/11/13

kamaitachi5587 wrote:

What line of research are you in? Have you published in any journals? I'm always trying to read up on the current trends in medical research and technology. I Also, you are absolutely correct gaining research funding from a disreputable source will almost certainly if not invalidate your findings they would be questioned.


Neuropharmacology, and I'm in grad school and haven't published yet. Hopefully by this time next year I'll have two or three manuscripts accepted. I am investigating the usefulness of selective alpha 7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor agonists to mitigate the cognitive defects associated with mood disorders and antidepressant treatment, and the anxiolytic and neurotrophic effects of selective beta estrogen receptor agonists alone and coadministered with alpha 7 nAChR agonists. My long-term goals include discovery of novel, fast-acting treatments for mood and memory disorders that bypass the serotoninergic pathway.

How about you?
17024 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Middle of Nowhere...
Offline
Posted 2/11/13
All these smart people is too much for my little brain to handle, Master always told me that the only cure to my grandmama's sickness is hard work, yessum' Master Candie sure did say that
2185 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / Behind you
Offline
Posted 2/11/13

mhibicke wrote:

I think that the title of this thread is misleading, and that the SENS website is mysterious and vague on a lot of things. It kind of reminds me of cult propaganda.
That aside, I may ask them for some funding for my research, as they have a budget of 4.5 million dollars. But I would need to do a better background investigation, because I don't want the quality of my research to be tainted by being funded by a cult or political special interest group or something.


There's plenty of information on SENS to make an informed decision on whether you would think that they have any alternative movies. For one, the universities and organizations that they are collaborating with.
2185 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / Behind you
Offline
Posted 2/11/13 , edited 2/11/13

justanotherguy_2005 wrote:


immitis wrote:

Fun fact. Cure all disease and our immune system will slowly weaken over generations, and as nature is want to do a new one we can't cure will show up eventually.

Also on the point of age wearing on mental health. What most people forget is a lot of the wear and tear on your mental health is your bodies degrading with age. Presumably if the average life span has come to such a point, that would be a issue already solved through reduced or reversed strain of your bodies natural ability to repair.


This is most definitely true. People already weaken their immune systems and those of their children by using so much hand sanitizers and things of a similar nature. The more we are exposed to, within reason, the stronger our bodies get.



FlyinDumpling wrote:

Ugh, people really need to stop using the over population theory. When people think over population, they start believing they need to exterminate their kind.


And the problem with that is?....


Well, there is already basis to believe that there is a good chance that by significantly increasing life span, massive overpopulation can still be preventable. You have to realize, this isn't an over night thing. Surely if we all stopped aging tomorrow, it would go out of control. The way this would work is probably more like how computers evolve.

You don't go from windows 98 to Windows 7 over night either. You also don't go from an Intel Pentium 2, to an I7 just like that. You build up and constantly refine and improve until you have something that is better. Controlling population explosion will be something that is gradually considered and is slowly tackled before any 'cure all' even comes out, because by then it will be a high profile topic.

Our very minds would change in the way that we accept it. What we now look at with skepticism and doubt, people in 70 years may think of as the norm, and in fact find it quite silly to think that anybody ever doubted it. After all, we repair parts of a car too!

Then on the topic of how new diseases would come about. Once we prevent human created disease, we have already solved a huge portion of disease in general. This is because humans do not interact with wild creatures nearly as much as they used to. So with that out of the way, how about insects, and animals? Well at some point we could reach a tipping point in how fast we invent new methods at preventing disease. I mean, understanding so many different principles and identifying so many patterns, that isolating new diseases is radically easier when you have 10 million other diseases to instantly rule out.

Lastly, there's the understanding that there is a limit to just how 'different' a disease can actually be. We may just get to a point where we can cure any new disease within a matter of months if not weeks or days. Who knows, perhaps humans won't even have to make the cure, when our computers could be so sophisticated that they do it for us.
19191 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / United States of...
Offline
Posted 2/11/13
I would rather not live till 200, anywhere between 80 and 90 is fine with me.
28101 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / Toledo
Offline
Posted 2/11/13 , edited 2/11/13

netdisorder wrote:




Well, there is already basis to believe that there is a good chance that by significantly increasing life span, massive overpopulation can still be preventable. You have to realize, this isn't an over night thing. Surely if we all stopped aging tomorrow, it would go out of control. The way this would work is probably more like how computers evolve.

You don't go from windows 98 to Windows 7 over night either. You also don't go from an Intel Pentium 2, to an I7 just like that. You build up and constantly refine and improve until you have something that is better. Controlling population explosion will be something that is gradually considered and is slowly tackled before any 'cure all' even comes out, because by then it will be a high profile topic.

Our very minds would change in the way that we accept it. What we now look at with skepticism and doubt, people in 70 years may think of as the norm, and in fact find it quite silly to think that anybody ever doubted it. After all, we repair parts of a car too!

Then on the topic of how new diseases would come about. Once we prevent human created disease, we have already solved a huge portion of disease in general. This is because humans do not interact with wild creatures nearly as much as they used to. So with that out of the way, how about insects, and animals? Well at some point we could reach a tipping point in how fast we invent new methods at preventing disease. I mean, understanding so many different principles and identifying so many patterns, that isolating new diseases is radically easier when you have 10 million other diseases to instantly rule out.

Lastly, there's the understanding that there is a limit to just how 'different' a disease can actually be. We may just get to a point where we can cure any new disease within a matter of months if not weeks or days. Who knows, perhaps humans won't even have to make the cure, when our computers could be so sophisticated that they do it for us.


I assume then this is all in response to me not having a problem with the mass extermination of humans to prevent overpopulation? I was never saying it should be done. I was merely making a half joke in regards to my indifference with the idea.
2185 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / Behind you
Offline
Posted 2/11/13 , edited 2/11/13



I assume then this is all in response to me not having a problem with the mass extermination of humans to prevent overpopulation? I was never saying it should be done. I was merely making a half joke in regards to my indifference with the idea.


No actually, I just skimmed through the recent comments and was responding to the comment you quoted which was referring to the overpopulation theory. It was easier to quote you as I could respond to his comment while also commenting on what you said about immune systems.


Somewhat_Insane_Monkey wrote:

I would rather not live till 200, anywhere between 80 and 90 is fine with me.


Well, your very comfort zone of wanting to live between the ages of 80 and 90 are the result of artificial increases of lifespan thanks to modern medicine. If modern medicine is to increase the life span to 200 years of age, wouldn't it be just as rational to accept this increased lifespan as well?

This is exactly what SENS is attempting. You don't go around everyday thinking that your ability to live up to the age of 90 is only due thanks to medicine, do you? I doubt it. You also wouldn't think about it after passing well into the stages where rejuvenative medical technologies can help you to live to 200.

Mind you, when neanderthals were around, they only lived on average to be about 30. So I assume that you would want to live no longer than to 30 if you were a neanderthal, and could comprehend that unit of time. Although if you are right, and I am wrong. Then if something terrible happened, and every human today could only live to around 30, you would still find that living between 80 and 90 years of age to be an ideal, all because you have claimed your ideal age to be static by rejecting an option of far longer life. This places you in a contradictory rut, because you'd find a much longer lifespan than what is obtainable as an ideal that you want to reach, while at the same time rejecting something to help you acquire that longer lifespan, which is impossible to any sensible human.

However, if I am wrong about my neanderthal lifespan theory of you having a dynamic view on your longevity while accepting your fated lifespan, then what you have said contradicts the basic principles of lifespan science, because you would not like to live to 200. Either you can make your view of longevity dynamic just like the technology and medicine that increases it, or you can live in a vortex of hypothetical contradiction. Lifespans are dynamic, not static. So why would you want your own lifespan to have a static limitation when it can be conquered? Would you throw down your sword and surrender your army that was on the verge of victory?

It's interesting how logic can come full circle to poke you in the back. Although, your username...
13126 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
(´◔౪◔)✂╰⋃╯
Offline
Posted 2/11/13

justanotherguy_2005 wrote:
This is most definitely true. People already weaken their immune systems and those of their children by using so much hand sanitizers and things of a similar nature. The more we are exposed to, within reason, the stronger our bodies get.

FlyinDumpling wrote:

Ugh, people really need to stop using the over population theory. When people think over population, they start believing they need to exterminate their kind.


And the problem with that is?....
then comes the question of who to exterminate, and a whole bunch of caste systems going at it like monkeys.
27813 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / Urban South
Offline
Posted 2/11/13
Has anyone considered the shortening of telomeres, or the build up and agglutination of protease-resistant misfolded proteins?
Most of the problems associated with aging are due to the inability of the body to repair itself on a cellular level, due to shortened telomeres. Until a technique to lengthen telomeres can be successfully used on humans without causing horrible cancers, we are going to get old, sick, and die.
Likewise, many age-related diseases like Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, and Huntinton's Chorea are caused by the accumulation and agglutination of protease-resistant misfolded proteins. Most people are aware of transmissible spongiform encephalopathies like Mad Cow Disease, but are not aware of how similar some other neurodegenerative diseases are mechanistically. Anyway, the reason that they are associated with aging is because it takes time for the misfolded proteins to build up and begin to damage cells. The older you live, the longer these proteins accumulate. While some of these misfolded proteins are ingested (like by eating contaminated meat), many spontaneously misfold internally. This is uncommon, and by itself negligible. However, misfolded proteins are sometimes infectious, and so can touch properly folded proteins and cause them to flatten and misfold as well. Then the flattened proteins stack up on each other and occlude normal cellular function.
28101 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / Toledo
Offline
Posted 2/11/13

FlyinDumpling wrote:



then comes the question of who to exterminate, and a whole bunch of caste systems going at it like monkeys.


Nah. They can just do things like in the book Battle Royale but on a massive scale. Collar everyone with explosives and have them all start killing each other. Make it so random people explode if nobody participates.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.