4 ms·

No. But people are willing to believe the wildest nonsense in order to avoid confronting the fact that work is required to achieve a desired end. --- Addendu

No. But people are willing to believe the wildest nonsense in order to avoid confronting the fact that work is required to achieve a desired end. --- Addendum 1: If you want to stop aging, fund SENS research to the tune of a billion dollars over ten years. http://www.sens.org http://www.sens.org. Full stop, end of story. Addendum 2: stress is known to accelerate the erosion of telomeres (or accelerate whatever process of aging is associated with shorter telomeres), so in that sense patterns of thought that translate into physiological changes do seem to accelerate aging to some degree. Like all such metabolic issues, it isn't any worse/better than what you can do to yourself with diet and exercise.

orangecat 17y ago
Addendum 1: If you want to stop aging, fund SENS research to the tune of a billion dollars over ten years. http://www.sens.org http://www.sens.org. Full stop, end of story. I'm baffled that this never comes up when we're discussing spiraling health care costs. The vast majority of health care dollars are spent trying (and ultimately failing) to treat conditions that are the direct result of aging. Even a billion dollars a year on research like what SENS is doing is cheap if there's any possibility of success. And that's not even accounting for the massively increased quality of life that would result, or the economic benefit of people remaining productive their entire lives. FWIW, I've joined the cause to donate $100 to SENS once 10,000 people sign up: http://apps.facebook.com/causes/297361 http://apps.facebook.com/causes/297361.
- ximeng 17y ago
  You might have to deal with euthanasia, stopping people having kids, or sharing wealth more widely if people live longer though.
  - derefr 17y ago
    While we're playing with the human body's regulatory mechanisms, we can just make ovulation happen only once per year.
  - jodrellblank 17y ago
    And? (I think we should deal with euthanasia and suicide anyway as a matter of fairness, and population growth if it becomes a serious issue).
    - ximeng 17y ago
      And these topics are not cleanly dealt with by society at the moment. I agree that we should deal with these areas better. If we as a society can't agree that terminally ill people should be allowed to die in peace, then I don't think there's any cause for orangecat to be baffled that we don't fund anti-aging research as much as we should. You don't get a billion dollars unless you can have a sensible discussion about the necessary consequences of the research. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/7166200/Pope-Benedict-XVI-criticises-tide-of-secularism-in-UK-and-support-for-euthanasia.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/7166200/...
tokenadult 17y ago
If you want to stop aging, fund SENS research to the tune of a billion dollars over ten years. http://www.sens.org http://www.sens.org. Full stop, end of story. What if the research doesn't turn up anything we can do? Or, worse, what if it shows that stopping aging requires exercise, adequate sleep, eating vegetables, and refraining from excessive sex, drugs, and rock and roll?
- reasonattlm 17y ago
  That question shows that you didn't read http://www.sens.org http://www.sens.org. What needs to be done - exactly what biotechnologies are needed - is established, known, and in some cases within a few years of being trial-ready (e.g. replacement of mitochondrial DNA).
  - tokenadult 17y ago
    This has been demonstrated with human subjects and long-term follow-up? Aubrey de Grey is younger than I am, but looks older http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aubrey_de_Grey http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aubrey_de_Grey and his work has been subjected to a good bit of scientific criticism, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Grey_Technology_Review_controversy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Grey_Technology_Review_contr... so why should huge amounts of my taxes be directed specifically to his organization, rather than to the usual variety of government-overseen funding agencies, to fund projects that compete on the basis of good science http://norvig.com/experiment-design.html http://norvig.com/experiment-design.html http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/ http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/ to show what the real trade-offs are of various treatments?
    - Jach 17y ago
      I understand your criticisms, and I agree money should be placed into places likely to bear fruit, but are you really pulling the taxes card? Would you rather have huge portions of your taxes go toward trying to kill people, or toward trying to save people? (I know that's a somewhat unfair question, but take just a bit away from military spending and you have a lot to work with.)
tocomment 17y ago
What's so great about SENS? Aren't there lots of other research programs on this?

orangecat 17y ago

Addendum 1: If you want to stop aging, fund SENS research to the tune of a billion dollars over ten years. http://www.sens.org http://www.sens.org. Full stop, end of story. I'm baffled that this never comes up when we're discussing spiraling health care costs. The vast majority of health care dollars are spent trying (and ultimately failing) to treat conditions that are the direct result of aging. Even a billion dollars a year on research like what SENS is doing is cheap if there's any possibility of success. And that's not even accounting for the massively increased quality of life that would result, or the economic benefit of people remaining productive their entire lives. FWIW, I've joined the cause to donate $100 to SENS once 10,000 people sign up: http://apps.facebook.com/causes/297361 http://apps.facebook.com/causes/297361.

ximeng 17y ago
You might have to deal with euthanasia, stopping people having kids, or sharing wealth more widely if people live longer though.
- derefr 17y ago
  While we're playing with the human body's regulatory mechanisms, we can just make ovulation happen only once per year.
- jodrellblank 17y ago
  And? (I think we should deal with euthanasia and suicide anyway as a matter of fairness, and population growth if it becomes a serious issue).
  - ximeng 17y ago
    And these topics are not cleanly dealt with by society at the moment. I agree that we should deal with these areas better. If we as a society can't agree that terminally ill people should be allowed to die in peace, then I don't think there's any cause for orangecat to be baffled that we don't fund anti-aging research as much as we should. You don't get a billion dollars unless you can have a sensible discussion about the necessary consequences of the research. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/7166200/Pope-Benedict-XVI-criticises-tide-of-secularism-in-UK-and-support-for-euthanasia.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/7166200/...

tokenadult 17y ago

If you want to stop aging, fund SENS research to the tune of a billion dollars over ten years. http://www.sens.org http://www.sens.org. Full stop, end of story. What if the research doesn't turn up anything we can do? Or, worse, what if it shows that stopping aging requires exercise, adequate sleep, eating vegetables, and refraining from excessive sex, drugs, and rock and roll?

reasonattlm 17y ago
That question shows that you didn't read http://www.sens.org http://www.sens.org. What needs to be done - exactly what biotechnologies are needed - is established, known, and in some cases within a few years of being trial-ready (e.g. replacement of mitochondrial DNA).
- tokenadult 17y ago
  This has been demonstrated with human subjects and long-term follow-up? Aubrey de Grey is younger than I am, but looks older http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aubrey_de_Grey http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aubrey_de_Grey and his work has been subjected to a good bit of scientific criticism, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Grey_Technology_Review_controversy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Grey_Technology_Review_contr... so why should huge amounts of my taxes be directed specifically to his organization, rather than to the usual variety of government-overseen funding agencies, to fund projects that compete on the basis of good science http://norvig.com/experiment-design.html http://norvig.com/experiment-design.html http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/ http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/ to show what the real trade-offs are of various treatments?
  - Jach 17y ago
    I understand your criticisms, and I agree money should be placed into places likely to bear fruit, but are you really pulling the taxes card? Would you rather have huge portions of your taxes go toward trying to kill people, or toward trying to save people? (I know that's a somewhat unfair question, but take just a bit away from military spending and you have a lot to work with.)

tocomment 17y ago

What's so great about SENS? Aren't there lots of other research programs on this?