6 ms·

Pardon my skepticism but this reads like a fairy tale where the author was promised a lot of money to conduct a study that does not need sources because all the

Pardon my skepticism but this reads like a fairy tale where the author was promised a lot of money to conduct a study that does not need sources because all their strange conclusions are on the abstract and therefore are the hypothesis (and conveniently does not require sources). Amazing, you found the fountain of youth and you just need 1 million dollars to conduct the experiment and it will take <insert my average maximum lifespan here> years? Sign me up, I'm sure it will never run late after all my life depends on it! > Leading demographers claim that human lifespan is fixed at a natural limit around 122 years. However, there is no fixed limit in animals. Not only do the (unknown) experts are all certain of something that requires proof, they also write it in invisible ink! Damn! > In animals, anti-aging interventions (dietary restrictions, rapamycin, genetic manipulations) postpone age-related diseases and thus automatically extend maximum lifespan. So you are saying that animals anti-aging interventions are: - Dietary restrictions - Rapamycin* - Genetic manipulations > In humans, anti-aging interventions have not been yet implemented What an innovative idea! Have you ever heard of this thing called Rapamycin*? it is already approved for use in human patients since 2010: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/bies.200900171 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/bies.2009001... Sorry, this article and this "implicit" conclusion that we can live forever are what people laugh as crazy conspiracy theorists and some of them are flat earthers so they sure as fuck know what they are talking about. Proof first, speech later. \rant Not to sound too irrationally angry but this is as foundationless as a floating city.

epicureanideal 5y ago
I think you make some good points, but I also think it's useful that this article was published. It's important to get the idea out there that human lifespan can be extended, so more funding can be directed to that.
- robbiep 5y ago
  But ideas in junk journals don’t ‘help’ that idea, and it isn’t a novel idea in the first place, there are literally senescence institutes studying this problem
- BrazzVuvuzela 5y ago
  > It's important to get the idea out there that human lifespan can be extended, so more funding can be directed to that. The jump from "could" to "should" seems questionable at best. What's so great about the rich elite living to be 200 years old? Would you like a bunch of people from the 19th century still around, influencing politicians with their money today? It would slow down the rate of social progress. It would also increase wealth inequality, since money hoarded by one generation tends to be squandered by the subsequent. There's also an argument to be made that science advances one funeral at a time; keeping people around loong after their expiration date would likely slow down the rate of scientific progress as well.
  - andai 5y ago
    Sounds like we should aim to reduce lifespan, then?
    - BrazzVuvuzela 5y ago
      Or just leave it the fuck alone?
      - ben_w 5y ago
        No, what you’ve listed are all reasons for shorter lifespans. There are other reasons for longer lifespans, but you’re implicitly saying all of them combined are not enough to counter the reasons you give. Now, I’m not certain either way about the broader social impacts — I personally very much want to live longer, and yet I am also aware that my personal interests are not always aligned with group interests, e.g. tragedy of commons, Nash equilibrium, prisoners’ dilemma — but it is extremely unlikely that any negative consequences are perfectly balanced to positives either personally or collectively, so I am absolutely certain that the one thing we should not do is leave lifespan as is.
        BrazzVuvuzela 5y ago
        If you want to take my arguments as extolling murder, that's on you buddy. I'm arguing for nonintervention, based on the precautionary principle. This technology has substantial potential for social harm and should not be pursued until all of those concerns are addressed.
- Joker_vD 5y ago
  But it's already known and is being actively researched? E.g. low-calorie, high-nutrient diet has been demonstrated to improve life span in several species including (non-human) primates, and that was all done already before 2000. Today's almost 2022.
- mensetmanusman 5y ago
  A future where we are approaching 75% of Americans being obese suffering from related health ailments and where the ultra-wealthy are living for millennia. Seems more reasonable every day.
- nradov 5y ago
  That's like saying that it's useful for alchemists to publish articles so that more funding can be directed to transmuting lead into gold. This is just pseudoscience woo.
vmception 5y ago
Which animals? Octopus have a glitch where their digestive tract shuts upon reaching sexual maturity, so they starve to death yet keep passing that gene on, just a few years into their lifespan. F for Failure (At least we dont have to compete on this planet with older smarter octopi)
- sdenton4 5y ago
  Are you sure it's a glitch? Humans are useful to one another past childbearing age because we're social animals: caring for grandchildren helps them survive. Octopods, otoh, are notoriously solitary animals. Once they're done reproducing, surviving adults would mainly be in competition with the young.
  - vmception 5y ago
    All natural selection is a glitch and pure happenstance with no meaning, only retroactively applied to have a purpose. Octopus may well have genes to make them more social as they get older, but at 3 years old it hasn't developed.
bryanrasmussen 5y ago
>Not to sound too irrationally angry but this is as foundationless as a floating city. Laputa was a wonder of the world!
- HPsquared 5y ago
  While we're on the subject, floating cloud cities are a potential method of colonizing Venus (the dense atmosphere means buoyancy is more powerful). Brings a new meaning to "on the cloud". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonization_of_Venus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonization_of_Venus
- mensetmanusman 5y ago
  Just showed this to our kids, then they drew robots the next day on their own accord. Was beautiful to see!

epicureanideal 5y ago

I think you make some good points, but I also think it's useful that this article was published. It's important to get the idea out there that human lifespan can be extended, so more funding can be directed to that.

robbiep 5y ago
But ideas in junk journals don’t ‘help’ that idea, and it isn’t a novel idea in the first place, there are literally senescence institutes studying this problem
BrazzVuvuzela 5y ago
> It's important to get the idea out there that human lifespan can be extended, so more funding can be directed to that. The jump from "could" to "should" seems questionable at best. What's so great about the rich elite living to be 200 years old? Would you like a bunch of people from the 19th century still around, influencing politicians with their money today? It would slow down the rate of social progress. It would also increase wealth inequality, since money hoarded by one generation tends to be squandered by the subsequent. There's also an argument to be made that science advances one funeral at a time; keeping people around loong after their expiration date would likely slow down the rate of scientific progress as well.
- andai 5y ago
  Sounds like we should aim to reduce lifespan, then?
  - BrazzVuvuzela 5y ago
    Or just leave it the fuck alone?
    - ben_w 5y ago
      No, what you’ve listed are all reasons for shorter lifespans. There are other reasons for longer lifespans, but you’re implicitly saying all of them combined are not enough to counter the reasons you give. Now, I’m not certain either way about the broader social impacts — I personally very much want to live longer, and yet I am also aware that my personal interests are not always aligned with group interests, e.g. tragedy of commons, Nash equilibrium, prisoners’ dilemma — but it is extremely unlikely that any negative consequences are perfectly balanced to positives either personally or collectively, so I am absolutely certain that the one thing we should not do is leave lifespan as is.
      - BrazzVuvuzela 5y ago
        If you want to take my arguments as extolling murder, that's on you buddy. I'm arguing for nonintervention, based on the precautionary principle. This technology has substantial potential for social harm and should not be pursued until all of those concerns are addressed.
Joker_vD 5y ago
But it's already known and is being actively researched? E.g. low-calorie, high-nutrient diet has been demonstrated to improve life span in several species including (non-human) primates, and that was all done already before 2000. Today's almost 2022.
mensetmanusman 5y ago
A future where we are approaching 75% of Americans being obese suffering from related health ailments and where the ultra-wealthy are living for millennia. Seems more reasonable every day.
nradov 5y ago
That's like saying that it's useful for alchemists to publish articles so that more funding can be directed to transmuting lead into gold. This is just pseudoscience woo.

vmception 5y ago

Which animals? Octopus have a glitch where their digestive tract shuts upon reaching sexual maturity, so they starve to death yet keep passing that gene on, just a few years into their lifespan. F for Failure (At least we dont have to compete on this planet with older smarter octopi)

sdenton4 5y ago
Are you sure it's a glitch? Humans are useful to one another past childbearing age because we're social animals: caring for grandchildren helps them survive. Octopods, otoh, are notoriously solitary animals. Once they're done reproducing, surviving adults would mainly be in competition with the young.
- vmception 5y ago
  All natural selection is a glitch and pure happenstance with no meaning, only retroactively applied to have a purpose. Octopus may well have genes to make them more social as they get older, but at 3 years old it hasn't developed.

bryanrasmussen 5y ago

>Not to sound too irrationally angry but this is as foundationless as a floating city. Laputa was a wonder of the world!

HPsquared 5y ago
While we're on the subject, floating cloud cities are a potential method of colonizing Venus (the dense atmosphere means buoyancy is more powerful). Brings a new meaning to "on the cloud". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonization_of_Venus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonization_of_Venus
mensetmanusman 5y ago
Just showed this to our kids, then they drew robots the next day on their own accord. Was beautiful to see!