4 ms·

> ... if you cure aging... That's a big if. We've spent millions of year evolving to last long enough to reproduce and care for our young. Beyond that, our b

> ... if you cure aging... That's a big if. We've spent millions of year evolving to last long enough to reproduce and care for our young. Beyond that, our bodies break down in all sorts of ways ("aging"), and "curing" all of them seems unlikely. Shortening telomeres, reduced muscle and bone mass, slower metabolism, macular degeneration, worn cartilage, arterial plaque... The ultimately smart thing to do would be to make our current 80 or so years of life as healthy as possible.

im3w1l 7y ago
From what I have learned the most important cause of aging is cancer defense. As we get older DNA gets more and more damaged and cancer a bigger and bigger risk. To prevent cancer, the body slows down cell division. But cell division is very important. It's through cell division that our body renews itself and heals. With a slower division rate we become frail. So if we could strike at the root cause, and heal DNA damage, then we wouldn't have to worry about cancer, and we would be able to turn cell division up and become more youthful. Or alternatively if we could develop better cancer cures, we could turn cell division up and deal with problems as they arise. Now DNA damage isn't the only thing we would have to fix. For instance some poisons and junk cannot be eliminated by the body and stay with us permanently. We would need to find ways to clean them up.
- mrmonkeyman 7y ago
  For some reason people see aging as an illness, some unfortunate byproduct of natural processes. It is not. It is tuned to pefection. You are _made_ to die, it is builtin, it is a feature. Notice how from 0 to 20 you don't "age", you just get stronger and better. How? Some species are considered young in their 40s. You consume enough nutrients and energy to constantly fix yourself. You won't. Why? You need to die for evolution to work. Just die already.
  - toasterlovin 7y ago
    We have not evolved to die. Rather we have not had enough selection pressure to evolve ways to make us live longer. Big difference.
    - ajmarcic 7y ago
      Elders' need for care may have burdened the success of their living descendants. In this sense we may have evolved to die. A counterargument is that past generations lived too rarely to the point of natural death ("Intrinsic senescence") to experience selective pressure. I feel the burden of proof is in showing this. An interesting discussion is whether or how an encoded trait that's negatively selected for is different than one that was never factored into the equation.
  - TomMarius 7y ago
    It might've been a feature originally, however I changed my mind which is another thing we evolved for.

im3w1l 7y ago

From what I have learned the most important cause of aging is cancer defense. As we get older DNA gets more and more damaged and cancer a bigger and bigger risk. To prevent cancer, the body slows down cell division. But cell division is very important. It's through cell division that our body renews itself and heals. With a slower division rate we become frail. So if we could strike at the root cause, and heal DNA damage, then we wouldn't have to worry about cancer, and we would be able to turn cell division up and become more youthful. Or alternatively if we could develop better cancer cures, we could turn cell division up and deal with problems as they arise. Now DNA damage isn't the only thing we would have to fix. For instance some poisons and junk cannot be eliminated by the body and stay with us permanently. We would need to find ways to clean them up.

mrmonkeyman 7y ago
For some reason people see aging as an illness, some unfortunate byproduct of natural processes. It is not. It is tuned to pefection. You are _made_ to die, it is builtin, it is a feature. Notice how from 0 to 20 you don't "age", you just get stronger and better. How? Some species are considered young in their 40s. You consume enough nutrients and energy to constantly fix yourself. You won't. Why? You need to die for evolution to work. Just die already.
- toasterlovin 7y ago
  We have not evolved to die. Rather we have not had enough selection pressure to evolve ways to make us live longer. Big difference.
  - ajmarcic 7y ago
    Elders' need for care may have burdened the success of their living descendants. In this sense we may have evolved to die. A counterargument is that past generations lived too rarely to the point of natural death ("Intrinsic senescence") to experience selective pressure. I feel the burden of proof is in showing this. An interesting discussion is whether or how an encoded trait that's negatively selected for is different than one that was never factored into the equation.
- TomMarius 7y ago
  It might've been a feature originally, however I changed my mind which is another thing we evolved for.