4 ms·

Meh, so does caloric restriction (even in numerous mammals like rhesus macaques) but it doesn't appear to remotely have a comparable effect in humans. Even if

Meh, so does caloric restriction (even in numerous mammals like rhesus macaques) but it doesn't appear to remotely have a comparable effect in humans. Even if it did translate to humans ok you might live lonver but what about your mental health, what about your memory, what about your joints, what about your vision? I'd rather die at 40, 50 or 60 than die at 150 blind as a bat unsure of who I am or where I am 23 hours of the day being pulled around in some sort of neutral buoyancy contraption that keeps me from getting bedsores because my joints are so deteriorated even standing is quite painful.

Erlich_Bachman 8y ago
Why do people still use this argument? Every single proponent and scientist working on longetivity aims at increasing the life quality also, along with lifespan. It's an obvious thing to do and to aim for, and everyone seriously working in the field does this already. They are not looking to make humans live 150 years at the 80-year-old life quality, they are looking to expand and extend the life quality, so that the same quality at 40, 50, 60 years etc - to last for longer, thus extending the overall range as well...
- ryanmercer 8y ago
  >Every single proponent and scientist working on longetivity aims at increasing the life quality also, Maybe because zero progress has been made in regards to cognitive decline, vision preservation/restoration and retarding or reversing joint deterioration? Just a hunch... Worldwide life expectancy is 1.48 times what it was in 1950 and yet: - Cancer rates have experienced a 6% (Leukemia) to 183% (Multiple Myeloma) since 1950 - 1 in 10 Americans over the age of 65 has Alzheimer’s. - According to the Vision Council of America, approximately 75% of adults use some sort of vision correction - For women, they can start to show signs of joint pain due to aging after age 50, while men are likely to see it before age 45 - Roughly 7 million people in the United States are living with a total hip or knee replacement. Continuing pain is common. So cool, some worms live an extra 2-3 weeks and have infinitely less exposure to UV radiation, wholly lack joints, have incredibly simpler brains, live orders of magnitude less to be exposed to random radiation and countless compounds that can cause genetic mutations and damage, experiences orders of magnitude less environmental stress over their lifespan etc.
  - svachalek 8y ago
    Most research in life extension is based on reducing the incremental damage caused by radiation, stress, toxins etc. so they will increase the duration of youth and middle age as well as feeble old age. I think a lot of the real world gains in life span are coming from entirely different things though, like treating and preventing heart attacks and cancer. This does end up extending the "old" part of our lives.
  - wild_preference 8y ago
    Well, somebody has to care enough to further the research. If the human population was serious about quality-of-life improvement, they would eat healthy and exercise. But they don't. Most people in this forum don't.
  - tastyham 8y ago
    Human lifespan hasn't increased very much. Life expectancy at birth has increased significantly due to reductions in childhood disease and accidental death, but life expectancy at 50 and 60 have barely moved over the last 100 years. People have a much higher chance of making it to old age, but all the issues you cited will still hit them once they get there.
    - philipkglass 8y ago
      From 1918 to 2018, remaining life expectancy at age 60 in the United States has increased 44% for men and 52% for women. https://www.ssa.gov/oact/NOTES/as120/LifeTables_Tbl_10.html https://www.ssa.gov/oact/NOTES/as120/LifeTables_Tbl_10.html
  - JamesBarney 8y ago
    It seems like there are two approaches to trying to increase the healthspan of individuals. One is wait for the body to fail and try to correct it. This is 99.9% of all research funding. The other is trying to coerce the body into failing more slowly and less often(.1% of funding). It seems weird to criticize the second approach because the first approach has made so much more progress extending lifespan than healthspan.
ArchTypical 8y ago
> I'd rather die at 40 You won't think so when you turn 40.
- ryanmercer 8y ago
  I'm 33, I very much came close to death a handful of years ago when my potassium levels were low enough I was paralyzed and my heart was struggling to beat. Quite convinced I was in my final moments with "well shit, this is how it ends" running in a loop in my mind as I shouted for help, as I was manhandled onto a stretcher, as I was terrified in an ambulance as it took turns and I had no ability to brace myself, as I was manhandled onto an ER bed, as I lay in the ER bed unable to scratch my nose, unable to sign my name, unable to turn my head to see what the nurses were doing. I was quite certain I was on my way out of this world until I felt the burn of that IV potassium raging through my veins. I have zero desire to ever be old and decrepit, to lose any worthwhile ability to care/provide for myself, to ever begin to lose my memories. ( see: https://www.ryanmercer.com/ryansthoughts/2013/2/19/flashback-to-the-hypokalemic-episode.html https://www.ryanmercer.com/ryansthoughts/2013/2/19/flashback... ) I watched my father's quality of life tank drastically when I was 12 before he died of cancer. I've watched my mother that's now in her mid 60's deteriorate rapidly in just the past decade after getting thyroid dancer, developing semi-rapid bone deterioration, COPD and type II diabetes. My father's father fell off of the first step of a ladder and died a few days later as a result. My mother's father is in his late 80's and has severely been suffering from dementia the past several years. His wife died a few months ago having been on oxygen for over a decade and herself experiencing advanced dementia at the end. I stand by what I said, I'd rather go out at 40 than spend a few, or several, decades miserable.
JamesBarney 8y ago
If you look at most people in the 100's they had a far higher quality of life in there 50s/60s/70s than people who died in their 70s/80s. So I think the dichotomy you're presenting is a false one.

Erlich_Bachman 8y ago

Why do people still use this argument? Every single proponent and scientist working on longetivity aims at increasing the life quality also, along with lifespan. It's an obvious thing to do and to aim for, and everyone seriously working in the field does this already. They are not looking to make humans live 150 years at the 80-year-old life quality, they are looking to expand and extend the life quality, so that the same quality at 40, 50, 60 years etc - to last for longer, thus extending the overall range as well...

ryanmercer 8y ago
>Every single proponent and scientist working on longetivity aims at increasing the life quality also, Maybe because zero progress has been made in regards to cognitive decline, vision preservation/restoration and retarding or reversing joint deterioration? Just a hunch... Worldwide life expectancy is 1.48 times what it was in 1950 and yet: - Cancer rates have experienced a 6% (Leukemia) to 183% (Multiple Myeloma) since 1950 - 1 in 10 Americans over the age of 65 has Alzheimer’s. - According to the Vision Council of America, approximately 75% of adults use some sort of vision correction - For women, they can start to show signs of joint pain due to aging after age 50, while men are likely to see it before age 45 - Roughly 7 million people in the United States are living with a total hip or knee replacement. Continuing pain is common. So cool, some worms live an extra 2-3 weeks and have infinitely less exposure to UV radiation, wholly lack joints, have incredibly simpler brains, live orders of magnitude less to be exposed to random radiation and countless compounds that can cause genetic mutations and damage, experiences orders of magnitude less environmental stress over their lifespan etc.
- svachalek 8y ago
  Most research in life extension is based on reducing the incremental damage caused by radiation, stress, toxins etc. so they will increase the duration of youth and middle age as well as feeble old age. I think a lot of the real world gains in life span are coming from entirely different things though, like treating and preventing heart attacks and cancer. This does end up extending the "old" part of our lives.
- wild_preference 8y ago
  Well, somebody has to care enough to further the research. If the human population was serious about quality-of-life improvement, they would eat healthy and exercise. But they don't. Most people in this forum don't.
- tastyham 8y ago
  Human lifespan hasn't increased very much. Life expectancy at birth has increased significantly due to reductions in childhood disease and accidental death, but life expectancy at 50 and 60 have barely moved over the last 100 years. People have a much higher chance of making it to old age, but all the issues you cited will still hit them once they get there.
  - philipkglass 8y ago
    From 1918 to 2018, remaining life expectancy at age 60 in the United States has increased 44% for men and 52% for women. https://www.ssa.gov/oact/NOTES/as120/LifeTables_Tbl_10.html https://www.ssa.gov/oact/NOTES/as120/LifeTables_Tbl_10.html
- JamesBarney 8y ago
  It seems like there are two approaches to trying to increase the healthspan of individuals. One is wait for the body to fail and try to correct it. This is 99.9% of all research funding. The other is trying to coerce the body into failing more slowly and less often(.1% of funding). It seems weird to criticize the second approach because the first approach has made so much more progress extending lifespan than healthspan.

ArchTypical 8y ago

> I'd rather die at 40 You won't think so when you turn 40.

ryanmercer 8y ago
I'm 33, I very much came close to death a handful of years ago when my potassium levels were low enough I was paralyzed and my heart was struggling to beat. Quite convinced I was in my final moments with "well shit, this is how it ends" running in a loop in my mind as I shouted for help, as I was manhandled onto a stretcher, as I was terrified in an ambulance as it took turns and I had no ability to brace myself, as I was manhandled onto an ER bed, as I lay in the ER bed unable to scratch my nose, unable to sign my name, unable to turn my head to see what the nurses were doing. I was quite certain I was on my way out of this world until I felt the burn of that IV potassium raging through my veins. I have zero desire to ever be old and decrepit, to lose any worthwhile ability to care/provide for myself, to ever begin to lose my memories. ( see: https://www.ryanmercer.com/ryansthoughts/2013/2/19/flashback-to-the-hypokalemic-episode.html https://www.ryanmercer.com/ryansthoughts/2013/2/19/flashback... ) I watched my father's quality of life tank drastically when I was 12 before he died of cancer. I've watched my mother that's now in her mid 60's deteriorate rapidly in just the past decade after getting thyroid dancer, developing semi-rapid bone deterioration, COPD and type II diabetes. My father's father fell off of the first step of a ladder and died a few days later as a result. My mother's father is in his late 80's and has severely been suffering from dementia the past several years. His wife died a few months ago having been on oxygen for over a decade and herself experiencing advanced dementia at the end. I stand by what I said, I'd rather go out at 40 than spend a few, or several, decades miserable.

JamesBarney 8y ago

If you look at most people in the 100's they had a far higher quality of life in there 50s/60s/70s than people who died in their 70s/80s. So I think the dichotomy you're presenting is a false one.