5 ms·

do they have special genes? ... the answer is no That's not true. In Sardinia and Okinawa studies have shown that genetics play a significant factor in longevi

do they have special genes? ... the answer is no That's not true. In Sardinia and Okinawa studies have shown that genetics play a significant factor in longevity. For example, Sardinians have historically tended to reproduce later in life. This has favoured genes that contribute to longevity, or at least it has selected against those that contribute to early mortality. A healthy lifestyle will contribute to a longer life, but it's misleading to imagine that everyone could achieve 100 if they just made the effort.

derefr 17y ago
Wait, wait... so you're saying that all we have to do to make ourselves live longer as a species, is to not let anyone procreate until they hit whatever that generation considers "old age"? Interesting; I'm surprised this has never been a part of any sci-fi description of a utopia...
- jerf 17y ago
  The Heinlein "Howards Families" comes pretty close: http://sciencefictionbiology.blogspot.com/2007/07/heinlein-and-human-breeding.html http://sciencefictionbiology.blogspot.com/2007/07/heinlein-a... That link doesn't reference your exact idea, but I thought that was part of that. However, since I can't grep my collection I can't prove if that's actually something Heinlein said, or a confabulation on my part.
- davi 17y ago
  Not sci-fi, for flies at least: Genetics of life history in Drosophila melanogaster. II. Exploratory selection experiments. Genetics. 1981 Jan;97(1):187-96. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6790341?ordinalpos=139&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6790341?ordinalpos=139&#3... ...and a long line of work following from there.
- jimmybot 17y ago
  I'm not sure it's a utopia. An increase in longevity coupled with an increase in age at which you have kids would put enormous pressure on government welfare systems. Actually, this is already happening in many places in the world--Europe, Japan, Taiwan... China, with their one child policy will be in a very tight spot much sooner than might be thought as well. Besides these more direct effects, I wonder what other unintended effects mass-increased longevity would have. Imagine everyone retiring around 75 instead of 65, 30+ years of retirement instead of 20. The younger generation, either through private sense of obligation or government taxes are going to be facing a huge burden. With that kind of economic burden, there may be even less incentive to have children, especially at younger ages, and thus even fewer tax payers to support the retired masses. At the same time lot of the jobs that would've been available to younger rising stars remain occupied by a group that is retiring later and later. So there would be a squeeze on both the expenses front and the income front. For an individual, especially if you could _expect_ and _plan_ for a longer life, it may be individually fulfilling, but on the whole, I'm not sure that it would result in some kind of ideal society, especially in the transition.

derefr 17y ago

Wait, wait... so you're saying that all we have to do to make ourselves live longer as a species, is to not let anyone procreate until they hit whatever that generation considers "old age"? Interesting; I'm surprised this has never been a part of any sci-fi description of a utopia...

jerf 17y ago
The Heinlein "Howards Families" comes pretty close: http://sciencefictionbiology.blogspot.com/2007/07/heinlein-and-human-breeding.html http://sciencefictionbiology.blogspot.com/2007/07/heinlein-a... That link doesn't reference your exact idea, but I thought that was part of that. However, since I can't grep my collection I can't prove if that's actually something Heinlein said, or a confabulation on my part.
davi 17y ago
Not sci-fi, for flies at least: Genetics of life history in Drosophila melanogaster. II. Exploratory selection experiments. Genetics. 1981 Jan;97(1):187-96. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6790341?ordinalpos=139&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6790341?ordinalpos=139&#3... ...and a long line of work following from there.
jimmybot 17y ago
I'm not sure it's a utopia. An increase in longevity coupled with an increase in age at which you have kids would put enormous pressure on government welfare systems. Actually, this is already happening in many places in the world--Europe, Japan, Taiwan... China, with their one child policy will be in a very tight spot much sooner than might be thought as well. Besides these more direct effects, I wonder what other unintended effects mass-increased longevity would have. Imagine everyone retiring around 75 instead of 65, 30+ years of retirement instead of 20. The younger generation, either through private sense of obligation or government taxes are going to be facing a huge burden. With that kind of economic burden, there may be even less incentive to have children, especially at younger ages, and thus even fewer tax payers to support the retired masses. At the same time lot of the jobs that would've been available to younger rising stars remain occupied by a group that is retiring later and later. So there would be a squeeze on both the expenses front and the income front. For an individual, especially if you could _expect_ and _plan_ for a longer life, it may be individually fulfilling, but on the whole, I'm not sure that it would result in some kind of ideal society, especially in the transition.