3 ms·
Not really. It’s more of a “how do you eat an elephant” problem. Answer: one bite at a time. We’re doing that, even without the anti-aging label. E.g., things
by AuthorizedCust 5y ago
Not really. It’s more of a “how do you eat an elephant” problem. Answer: one bite at a time.
We’re doing that, even without the anti-aging label. E.g., things we now call “preventable deaths”. Even within that label, there’s a lot of opportunities that are far more tractable than others.
- citizenpaul 5y agoThat onky gets us so far. Mostly just extending us to the limits of our natural lifespan with aging included. There will have to be direct work on tje processes that lead to aging. Audrey degray has a good ted talk on what he belives are the primary processes that cause aging. Seven of them i think and all of them are vastly complex
- xixixao 5y agoNot really. Longevity research is about significantly extending the healthy lifespan. What we’ve done so far is increased the likelihood that an individual will live as long as the longest living human. But we haven’t meaningfully increased the lifespan of the longest living human. Theoretical human lifespan is about the same it has been thousands of years ago.
- cameronh90 5y agoI don't feel like you can treat aging as simply a sum of its parts. Sure, there are some major causes of age related deaths like heart disease that we can work on and potentially expand average lifespan by a few years. However, the core problem of aging is probably best thought of as a disease in and of itself, where the things that actually kill you are symptoms. We need to make progress on the underlying mechanism that makes us more brittle over time.