Anti-aging, Longevity & Immortality

[nudge]

https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/09/04/1034364/altos-labs-silicon-valleys-jeff-bezos-milner-bet-living-forever/

https://futurism.com/the-byte/altos-labs-wealthy-investors

Thought this is quite a creepy and interesting topic. A bunch of billionaires investing into a biotech startup with a goal to reverse aging and prolong the lifespan of humans. Not the first one with such ideas either; there's a Google spin-off company called Calico Labs which is already working on that and are already publishing first research papers, as well as several others investing into the field. 

Thoughts?

 

[Rucksackfranzose]

48 minutes ago, nudge said:

https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/09/04/1034364/altos-labs-silicon-valleys-jeff-bezos-milner-bet-living-forever/

https://futurism.com/the-byte/altos-labs-wealthy-investors

Thought this is quite a creepy and interesting topic. A bunch of billionaires investing into a biotech startup with a goal to reverse aging and prolong the lifespan of humans. Not the first one with such ideas either; there's a Google spin-off company called Calico Labs which is already working on that and are already publishing first research papers, as well as several others investing into the field. 

Thoughts?

 

The hunt for the fountain of youth is as old as history. So I wish the researchers good luck, think they will need it.

[Azeem]

Is it scientifically proven/theorized to increase the biological lifespan of human organs ?

Apart from super filthy cultist type rich people I don't know how can anyone be interested in it. 

[Azeem]

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

I am against this, Calico Labs and these billionaires must be stopped

[Cicero]

If Bezos wants to live forever all he needs to do is find the engineers. 

[nudge]

1 hour ago, Khan of TF365 said:

Is it scientifically proven/theorized to increase the biological lifespan of human organs ?

Yes, there's definitely some solid research about aging and the possibility of halting/delaying it, repairing cell damage, as well as preventing age-related diseases, albeit it is still in early stages, mostly. Research on telomeres (the endings of a chromosome that protect it from detioriorating - the shorter they get, the less protective they are) has been particularly encouraging. Then there's also senolytics, a whole field of study dedicated to selectively removing senescent cells from the body. There's also a recent research from Israel that demonstrated how simple hyperbaric oxygen treatments (cheap and readily available) can halt the aging by preventing both the shortening of telomeres and accummulation of damaged cells in a body.

I absolutely believe that first full-scale attempts of human rejuvenation will happen in less than 30 years time. Not talking about immortality here of course, or something extreme like 50+ years added to the current average lifespan, but I do think that it will be very possible to delay the aging and aging-related diseases, thus contributing to a longer lifespan in the future. 

[nudge]

1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I am against this, Calico Labs and these billionaires must be stopped

What if it was accessible to everyone? Obviously not talking about immortality, just prevention of age-related diseases and delaying the aging, essentially adding 10-20 healthy years to one's life.

[Azeem]

1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I am against this, Calico Labs and these billionaires must be stopped

There are already some treatments and research that can be really beneficial but big pharma keep it in the pipeline because of their interests. Can't trust rich freaks with this thing. 

[CaaC (John)+]

I take it they have been reading the Bible and got jealous  

10 oldest people in the bible...

1. Methuselah 969 years old
2. Jared  962
3. Noah  950
4. Adam  930
5. Seth  912.......

https://www.oldest.org/religion/people-bible/

Answering your question though I would rather believe in reincarnation and return to earth as someone else and continue off where I left off and maybe become an astronaut and finally be able to fly to another planet.

[Dr. Gonzo]

40 minutes ago, nudge said:

What if it was accessible to everyone? Obviously not talking about immortality, just prevention of age-related diseases and delaying the aging, essentially adding 10-20 healthy years to one's life.

Nah, aging and dying is normal. Trying to stop that is too weird for me to get my head around.

[nudge]

8 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Nah, aging and dying is normal. Trying to stop that is too weird for me to get my head around.

Interesting  I could understand if it was about immortality, but why do you think adding 10-20 years (or more) to a human lifespan would be "not normal"? I mean, you would still age and die, just at a slower rate, and have more peak productive years. After all, there are other animals with lifespans much longer than that of a human, so it is not an argument against nature, either. 

[Bluewolf]

Interesting topic.... 

On one hand if it could add some extra years to your life then fine no problem as long as it meant you could actually enjoy it.. I see little point in having more years tacked on if you were in poor health because what would be the point in that... Just more suffering..  

There are times where you just despair at the world and the state it's in and the direction it's taking now and I don't think I would want to still be around when it finally folds... 

[nudge]

1 minute ago, Bluewolf said:

Interesting topic.... 

On one hand if it could add some extra years to your life then fine no problem as long as it meant you could actually enjoy it.. I see little point in having more years tacked on if you were in poor health because what would be the point in that... Just more suffering..  

There are times where you just despair at the world and the state it's in and the direction it's taking now and I don't think I would want to still be around when it finally folds... 

Nah, of course it is about adding some extra peak years by halting aging and its effects, not just extending the lifespan for the sake of it - you could technically do that already by hooking someone up to some life support machines, but that's not the point  

Wouldn't you like to hang around and see the world burn though? 

[nudge]

Kim Stanley Robinson deals with the similar thing in his Mars trilogy, a hard science-fiction book series released in the 90s. I thought it was quite interesting how his concept of lifespan-expanding treatments worked, and what consequences it had on the individual as well as on the society. 

"The longevity treatment, commonly called simply "the treatment", is a medical procedure developed in the 2040s which dramatically increased human life span.

The treatment was developed by the Acheron medical and biotechnology team on Mars, led by Vlad Taneev, in the 2040s. It was first given to those who visited the Acheron complex. It was then administered to all Martians. Sax Russell secretly passed it on to the Areophany.

On Terra it was only accessible to the rich. Transnationals used it as an argument to attract employees, who were awarded with the treatment in their contract. The resulting rift was one of the causes of World War Three.

Humanity was propelled into the hypermalthusian age and Terra suffered from overpopulation problems. A secondary impact of the unnaturally long lives as people reached and exceeded 200 years of age was memory loss.

The treatment proved it had limits when the elderly started dying without a single identifiable cause, a phenomenon called the quick decline. Sax Russell attempted to find a solution to both the quick decline and the memory loss problem. He created the memory treatment in the late 22nd century-early 23rd century. People accepted their fates with the quick decline, having lived sufficiently long lives."

[Bluewolf]

2 minutes ago, nudge said:

Wouldn't you like to hang around and see the world burn though? 

Only if I could be the one that started it...  I would put all the worlds most greedy horrible cunts on one island then carpet bomb the fucker.. 

[Dr. Gonzo]

16 minutes ago, nudge said:

Interesting  I could understand if it was about immortality, but why do you think adding 10-20 years (or more) to a human lifespan would be "not normal"? I mean, you would still age and die, just at a slower rate, and have more peak productive years. After all, there are other animals with lifespans much longer than that of a human, so it is not an argument against nature, either. 

I dunno, we already have longer lifespans than we used to a few decades ago on average. I'm just not sure what it means if we start adding more to our lifespans.

I also suspect it'd be more commonly used in developed countries, while developing nations wouldn't have the same access to it. So I do wonder what that could mean for resource scarcity for humans - would it be ethical to go ahead and use this technology and take up more of the world's resources for a countries that'll likely see their population grow from this technology?

[CaaC (John)+]

27 minutes ago, Bluewolf said:

On one hand, if it could add some extra years to your life then fine no problem as long as it meant you could actually enjoy it. I see little point in having more years tacked on if you were in poor health because what would be the point in that... Just more suffering

Aye, I have (at 72 years old) COPD, asthma, sciatica and a heart failure condition, it takes me all my time to have a normal fart without squeezing my bowels and stomach so why would I want to add extra life to suffer the latter. 

Serious though, imagine if I could let that happen (adding extra life on myself) and my wife, son & daughter were against it, I would rather pass away while they are still living than me still there when they are gone.

[nudge]

1 minute ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I dunno, we already have longer lifespans than we used to a few decades ago on average. I'm just not sure what it means if we start adding more to our lifespans.

I also suspect it'd be more commonly used in developed countries, while developing nations wouldn't have the same access to it. So I do wonder what that could mean for resource scarcity for humans - would it be ethical to go ahead and use this technology and take up more of the world's resources for a countries that'll likely see their population grow from this technology?

I agree that it has potential to increase inequality and make certain social, economical, and environmental issues even worse. On the other hand, if it's affordable and accessible to most people on the planet (a purely hypothetical scenario), a longer lifespan with more healthy productive years could also mean more and faster advancements in science, technology, medicine, etc., potentially finding better solutions to the aforementioned issues? 

[Devil]

33 minutes ago, nudge said:

Interesting  I could understand if it was about immortality, but why do you think adding 10-20 years (or more) to a human lifespan would be "not normal"? I mean, you would still age and die, just at a slower rate, and have more peak productive years. After all, there are other animals with lifespans much longer than that of a human, so it is not an argument against nature, either. 

Anything beyond 80 years of age is hardly with calling a quality of life.

Also imagine the population of the human race if you added another 20 years average to each person's life.

 

[Bluewolf]

2 minutes ago, CaaC (John) said:

imagine if I could let that happen (adding extra life on myself) and my wife, son & daughter were against it,

Could you imagine that... You can get a treatment that gives you a few extra years and the family say NO!!.. we don't want you around longer than you need to be... I would take the treatment just to spite them.. 

[nudge]

3 minutes ago, Devil said:

Anything beyond 80 years of age is hardly with calling a quality of life.

Also imagine the population of the human race if you added another 20 years average to each person's life.

I think people are misunderstanding this. It's not about just extending the human lifespan, it's about slowing the rate of aging and delaying its effects, so that you can enjoy your peak, productivity, health and high quality of life for a decade or two longer than now. So let's say, significant physical and cognitive decline starts at 80 instead of 65-70. 

Overpopulation can be a problem, yes. 

[Devil]

28 minutes ago, nudge said:

I think people are misunderstanding this. It's not about just extending the human lifespan, it's about slowing the rate of aging and delaying its effects, so that you can enjoy your peak, productivity, health and high quality of life for a decade or two longer than now. So let's say, significant physical and cognitive decline starts at 80 instead of 65-70. 

Overpopulation can be a problem, yes. 

Imagine this extended the length of time a women could reproduce....

You could end up with a pair of parents in their 60's.

 

[nudge]

2 minutes ago, Devil said:

Imagine this extended the length of time a women could reproduce....

You could end up with a pair of parents in their 60's.

 

I mean, it's just a matter of perspective - if the average human lifespan would be 100+ years, then having parents in their 60s would be the same as having parents in their 30s now  

Besides, even now I know a few men who became parents in their 60s 

[Devil]

4 minutes ago, nudge said:

I mean, it's just a matter of perspective - if the average human lifespan would be 100+ years, then having parents in their 60s would be the same as having parents in their 30s now  

Besides, even now I know a few men who became parents in their 60s 

Yeah, men are well known to be having children into their 60's but it's almost impossible for a women to stay fertile until 60 years of age. 

How much are we slowing down the aging process here, are we saying at 60 we'd still physically be in the condition of someone in their later 30's/40's

My wife's dad had her at 45 years of age and she always says she loved him with all her heart but she never felt she had the same relationship that other girls had with their days due to his age.