5 ms·

Given that female humans are the only female mammals with this egg limitation I bet we can crack this with stem cells too In the mean time freezing is subject

Given that female humans are the only female mammals with this egg limitation I bet we can crack this with stem cells too In the mean time freezing is subject only to cultural stigma, effort and cost. Should just offer to freeze some every 20 year old’s eggs just like tetanus shots are offered to children. Younger eggs being more viable than a young 30-somethings trump card. Then people don’t have to make a conscious decision to do it and boom replacement age increases by two whole decades if we feel like it

londons_explore 7y ago
If this became common, I would be worried for the future of humans. Both sperm and eggs are produced in quantities millions of times higher than apparently necessary. Nature doesn't waste resources without good reason. There's a very good chance the large number of inactive sperm and eggs are part of an as-yet unidentified selection/evolution mechanism. Freezing eggs might break that mechanism, and we probably wouldn't see the problem for many generations until human evolution suffers...
- rolltiide 7y ago
  I mean you could argue that about actually curing cancer and extending our average longevity, maybe there is some additional cellular state we aren’t aware of that is being selected out So that’s not a good enough reason for me to say “lets not pursue these obvious ideas we already have the technology for”
saagarjha 7y ago
Is this actually only a thing inherent to humans, or is it just that we live long enough for it to be a problem?
- rolltiide 7y ago
  good questions. someone else pointed out that its not only inherent to human primates, but that it does lack research
magduf 7y ago
>Given that female humans are the only female mammals with this egg limitation I bet we can crack this with stem cells too We can, eventually, I'm sure. Biology is just a mechanism, and with enough work and knowledge, we can figure it out. However, would it make much difference? I'm thinking most women don't have children because they don't want them (or any more of them), not because they've become infertile due to age. In fact, most mothers seem to lost all interest in having more kids after having 1 or maybe 2: going through the experience shows them the grim reality of child-rearing, so once they've "done their part" with 1 or 2 kids, they've had enough. Perhaps, if we achieve biological immortality, along with eliminating age-related infertility, people will have more kids, because they could afford to wait a long time between them. They could have the first one at 30-50, after they've gotten themselves financially situated, then they could take a break for a few decades, then have another one, then take another break, etc. Maybe after 2-3 decades, they'll have forgotten what a pain in the ass the previous one was.
- rolltiide 7y ago
  Both of your paragraphs are based on a flawed assumption of not wanting any kids or any more kids. As opposed to wanting kids but not wanting to make a choice before a certain age. Some people dont want any or any more and we aren’t referring to them. I would say the population that would like the possibility of children at a later age is big enough to make a difference.
dragonwriter 7y ago
> Given that female humans are the only female mammals with this egg limitation But they aren't... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menopause#Other_animals https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menopause#Other_animals
- rolltiide 7y ago
  thanks, insightful, looks like lots of more research is necessary as they aren't even sure it only applies to captive non-human primates or not. I bet we can crack the code anyway.

londons_explore 7y ago

If this became common, I would be worried for the future of humans. Both sperm and eggs are produced in quantities millions of times higher than apparently necessary. Nature doesn't waste resources without good reason. There's a very good chance the large number of inactive sperm and eggs are part of an as-yet unidentified selection/evolution mechanism. Freezing eggs might break that mechanism, and we probably wouldn't see the problem for many generations until human evolution suffers...

rolltiide 7y ago
I mean you could argue that about actually curing cancer and extending our average longevity, maybe there is some additional cellular state we aren’t aware of that is being selected out So that’s not a good enough reason for me to say “lets not pursue these obvious ideas we already have the technology for”

saagarjha 7y ago

Is this actually only a thing inherent to humans, or is it just that we live long enough for it to be a problem?

rolltiide 7y ago
good questions. someone else pointed out that its not only inherent to human primates, but that it does lack research

magduf 7y ago

>Given that female humans are the only female mammals with this egg limitation I bet we can crack this with stem cells too We can, eventually, I'm sure. Biology is just a mechanism, and with enough work and knowledge, we can figure it out. However, would it make much difference? I'm thinking most women don't have children because they don't want them (or any more of them), not because they've become infertile due to age. In fact, most mothers seem to lost all interest in having more kids after having 1 or maybe 2: going through the experience shows them the grim reality of child-rearing, so once they've "done their part" with 1 or 2 kids, they've had enough. Perhaps, if we achieve biological immortality, along with eliminating age-related infertility, people will have more kids, because they could afford to wait a long time between them. They could have the first one at 30-50, after they've gotten themselves financially situated, then they could take a break for a few decades, then have another one, then take another break, etc. Maybe after 2-3 decades, they'll have forgotten what a pain in the ass the previous one was.

rolltiide 7y ago
Both of your paragraphs are based on a flawed assumption of not wanting any kids or any more kids. As opposed to wanting kids but not wanting to make a choice before a certain age. Some people dont want any or any more and we aren’t referring to them. I would say the population that would like the possibility of children at a later age is big enough to make a difference.

dragonwriter 7y ago

> Given that female humans are the only female mammals with this egg limitation But they aren't... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menopause#Other_animals https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menopause#Other_animals

rolltiide 7y ago
thanks, insightful, looks like lots of more research is necessary as they aren't even sure it only applies to captive non-human primates or not. I bet we can crack the code anyway.