Rethinking this question a lot recently in light of the recent passing of my step-grandfather. I wasn't there during his final days but his son shared a bittersweet anecdote during the time that his Father was in palliative care. He described his Father as never having lost his spirit for life. So much so, when pleading to his son that he actually wanted to go home, he apparently instructed his son "attach the mattress to the rear tow bar of your car and hit the accelerator." He hated being helpless or feeling useless which actually summed up how I feel about life at my relatively young age. I want to live long enough that I can still have mobility of my body: sure, i'm not always going to be able to go to the gym or go on steep walks. But, at the very least, long enough to still push myself up out of bed and walk down to my favourite local cafe or to a favourite book shop. If I can't even do that where my livelihood is restricted to a room or even a building...frankly, i think i'll lose the will to live.
Ron Howard Can you imagine a future when humans live 200 years or longer? Yes, but interestingly, the goal isn’t simply to extend life. It’s entirely about the extension of quality time, of years when someone can be highly productive and apply what he or she knows and has learned in a very active way. The research really focuses on delaying the onset of the diseases of aging, like heart disease, diabetes, cancer, and Alzheimer’s. That’s the way to enrich lives. You mean making older people feel young? Yes. One of the points that one of the researchers makes is that it’s not just a question of people living longer or feeling better longer, but that there’s a productivity value that can be assigned to this. Imagine if the people who have lived and learned still had the vitality to act upon the hard learned lessons, and not just share in a conversation, but lead.
Extraordinary breakthroughs in anti aging research will happen faster than people think “Science fiction has become science,” said the UK-based anti-aging biotech’s CEO about the company’s completing its $100 million Series B round of financing last week. “I think the world is going to be shocked,” he said in an interview. In total, Juvenescence has now raised $165 million in just 18 months to fund longevity projects with the lofty goal of extending human lifespans to 150 years. competition, including: Life Biosciences, the Boston-based company founded in 2016 by scientists David Sinclair and Tristan Edwards to invest in the eight pathways of age-related decline. “In January, Life Biosciences raised $50 million in a Series B financing – twice its original target Investors are also closely watching Rejuvenate Bio—the start-up, co-founded by Harvard Medical School professor George Church, Market Watch reports. The company is testing 60 different age-reversing gene therapies. “The company, which carried out initial tests on beagles, claims it can reverse aging in animals by adding new DNA instructions to their bodies,” Bailey said with the company’s PureStem® cell-based technologies, it has the ability to generate pluripotent or self-renewing stem cell-derived young cells of any type to potentially cure a range of age-related degenerative diseases. For example, the company hopes to one day be able to inject the cells locally into the damaged portion of an individual’s heart or spinal cord. “They would be one-day old cells, not 70-year-old cells,”
2.5 years regained I guess this qualifies as the first total body result though it is a small clinical study.
In 20 years they'll probably be two foot tall with cloudy grey eyes and thick scales on their back. I'd only slurp that stuff once I know its long term effects.
I'm sure it's a stock saying, but my 91-year-old father-in-law is fond of saying: "Jeder will lang leben. Niemand will alt werden."
poor people like to choose not to have health insurance, which is a poor choice. That's why it's often made by poor people. Rich are the people who would never make such poor choices.
A cocktail of drugs reverses aging It's a small study of only 9 people. That's all their budget could afford.
This reminds me of how the last member of the Crimean War only died “recently” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_(tortoise) How long turtles can live has always amazed me. Anyway for me personally so long as you have your mind about you and you can talk I’d be happy enough although I don’t see humans at least without artificial help being able to “live” past 150 hell maybe even that isn’t possible.
worth a read. beautiful, sad, all of the above: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/12/23/the-art-of-dying
The vid starts with the interviewer injecting himself with yellow liquid, probably piss, to the tune “forever young”. Unintentional comedy gold.
Well, not exactly, kind of. Michael Fossel commented that such products are not snake oil but they are not the real deal to give people some sort of open ended life span. Faloon does not pretend they do. I suppose most of what he sells can be found in some form in a Vitamin Shoppe store(including his own label.) There is currently I think 2 products that actually extend telomeres. One comes from Bill Andrews but that is $800 a bottle. The other is Epitalon which can be found for cheaper but one has to be sure to get one that does not say "for lab use only". Here's a lil something about Faloon.
They're literally marketed by the "Life Extension Foundation" excuse, me as of a year ago it's the "Biomedical Research and Longevity Society" which, incidentally, co-owns and operates a "museum" which equates the FDA and the Nazi party because Faloon got raided back in the 1980s and he's still pissy about it. Researchers have repeatedly called out his drugs for being purported as "life extending" despite such claims being dubious at best, totally debunked at worst. Everything the man does is just a transposition of skills carefully honed by generations of "preachers" to rip-off death-fearing presbyterians to the general death-fearing public. He deserves no respect or deference. Edit: Ironically the article you linked puts it best:
It's why I chose that article. But, "It’s based on the faith that human technology will get to the point where you can actually live forever. But there’s no scientific basis for that at all.” The problem with this line is that it's wrong. Sort of. It always breaks into this semantic debate, casual talk versus hyperbole and so forth. The first "immortal" skin cells were made in 1999. Recently the lifespans of mice were doubled for the first time by George Church. All kinds of animals have had their lifespans increased. And not one researcher says we are all going to live forever in serous conversation. They don't even like to use the word "immortal" as it rings of superpowers. So the author did not take care on the matter, just blurts out as if Church and de grey and the like are going to turn us into Kryptonians.
500% The new research uses a double mutant in which the insulin signaling (IIS) and TOR pathways have been genetically altered. Because alteration of the IIS pathways yields a 100 percent increase in lifespan and alteration of the TOR pathway yields a 30 percent increase, the double mutant would be expected to live 130 percent longer. But instead, its lifespan was amplified by 500 percent. “Despite the discovery in C. elegans of cellular pathways that govern aging, it hasn’t been clear how these pathways interact,” said Hermann Haller, M.D., president of the MDI Biological Laboratory. “By helping to characterize these interactions, our scientists are paving the way for much-needed therapies to increase healthy lifespan for a rapidly aging population.”