Harvard scientists reverse the ageing process in mice

[Sherbang]

The West has a negative birth rate. It is the right time for us to be looking into these things. Certain places in the world just need to catch up.

Nonsense. Where in the West is there negative population growth? Maybe a couple of countries like Germany, but not many...
(You can't really have a negative birth rate, since you can't have a negative number of babies being born)
Anyway, it's irrelevant, the world has positive population growth.

 

[Mike Hoxbig]

Nonsense. Where in the West is there negative population growth?
(You can't really have a negative birth rate, since you can't have a negative number of babies being born)
Anyway, it's irrelevant, the world has a positive birth rate.

A negative birth rate does not imply negative babies :wtf:

It means that the rate at which babies are born is decreasing as a function of time. Calculus 101 man.

 

[Geriatrix]

Yeah. You made me think. Would we have the will to continue to exist without that biological stimulation (or emulation in this case). I mean if we cant feel happiness would be want to stop living? If we can emulate how do we stop abuse of them so that our happiness does not become boring? Interesting thoughts...

I think curiosity would remain. So maybe there's some hope there. But I think it would be impossible for us to even imagine a state of living like that, its so completely out of our frame of reference.

 

[Sherbang]

A negative birth rate does not imply negative babies :wtf:

It means that the rate at which babies are born is decreasing as a function of time. Calculus 101 man.

Birth rate is a measurement of the nativity or childbirths per 1,000 people per year.
Please explain to me how this can be a negative number?
What you are describing is a declining birth rate, not a negative one.

You can have negative population growth, which means more people are dying than being born but there are very few countries that have this situation.

 

[murraybiscuit]

weird. i was just reading about human aging the other day.
i wonder if it would speed up human knowledge and technology even more?
if you consider that you spend about 1/3 of your life learning, longer lives would mean that that proportion would get smaller, making the productive part of one's life longer.

 

[Mike Hoxbig]

Birth rate is a measurement of the nativity or childbirths per 1,000 people per year.
Please explain to me how this can be a negative number?
What you are describing is a declining birth rate, not a negative one.

You can have negative population growth, which means more people are dying than being born but there are very few countries that have this situation.

You're right, I was actually referring to population growth.

 

[scotty777]

Yip, having the brightest minds live longer and so contribute more to the human race is definately a bad idea

you forgot to account for the human factor... who's going to want to let the brightest minds only have it? Why can't everyone (that will be the sounds of the revolutionary poor people ), and soon people will get more and more pissed off that they have to die sooner than the brightest minds (which will extend from that to the rich and famous, then the middle class, then it'll be a free for all).

 

[DigitalSoldier]

Don't see how this will cause over population.

We currently have more than a billion people that probably won't take the medicine as they can't wait to get to some magical place, in the sky ?

 

[Archer]

you forgot to account for the human factor... who's going to want to let the brightest minds only have it? Why can't everyone (that will be the sounds of the revolutionary poor people ), and soon people will get more and more pissed off that they have to die sooner than the brightest minds (which will extend from that to the rich and famous, then the middle class, then it'll be a free for all).

Ok, and how is that different to the current situation of the few wealthy elite vs the vast poor masses?

Don't see how this will cause over population.

We currently have more than a billion people that probably won't take the medicine as they can't wait to get to some magical place, in the sky ?

Good point, I forgot about all the religious types that are waiting in anticipation for the afterlife. And its more like 4.5 billion... Makes you wander though, how many of them will want to linger a bit longer in this life? Probably very few, I can see them up in arms already ranting on about how scientists are playing god.

 

[Palimino]

Yeah. You made me think. Would we have the will to continue to exist without that biological stimulation (or emulation in this case). I mean if we cant feel happiness would be want to stop living? If we can emulate how do we stop abuse of them so that our happiness does not become boring? Interesting thoughts...

No. With your system you can design yourself to be anything you want to be. Visualise it as a Windows dialogue box with radio buttons, tick boxes and volume control jobbies, etc. The default values would be non-suicidal and productive (you can’t go below a certain point).

How depressive a personality do I want? Tweak the volume control. At either end would be a gloomy, glass half empty type and at the other end would be a perpetually giggling fool.

Do you want to be a sex maniac or a neuter monk? Tick the appropriate box.

And so on. When you have decided on your parameters hit ‘execute’ and the entity is born.

Design yourself, play God. Coming to you soon from Godworx. Beta testers wanted.

 

[zippy]

He does have a point though.

I don't mind improving the quality of life by curing nasty diseases, but overpopulation is a concern when prolonging lifespans.

Obviously it may not be a big problem if we decided to kill off every species of land animal to make room for ourselves, but even that's a short term solution. Every ecological imbalance will eventually impact on us anyway, unless we can colonise space. That's the only real application I can see in prolonging lifespans.

I'm sure well come up with a way of reducing the population. We are pretty smart when it comes to destruction

 

[Kompete]

Did anyone actually read the article??? I dont see how this "methodology" is anything to get excited about.

They (the scientists) first bred genetically manipulated mice (by removing some enzyme) that caused the mice to age prematurely.
Then they restored the enzyme and low and behold the mice health improved.!!!

Thats like scientists claiming they have found the cure for dying from starvation; but first they have to starve you to near death then feed you and see you 'miraculously' survive and completely recover from your near death experience !

 

[scotty777]

Ok, and how is that different to the current situation of the few wealthy elite vs the vast poor masses?


Good point, I forgot about all the religious types that are waiting in anticipation for the afterlife. And its more like 4.5 billion... Makes you wander though, how many of them will want to linger a bit longer in this life? Probably very few, I can see them up in arms already ranting on about how scientists are playing god.

The poor still have access to medical care don't they? This isn't going to be seen as a 'luxury' like fast cars and easy women, it'll be seen as some bs essential thing and a bunch of numbskulls will say everyone should have it.

 

[zulgin]

Instead of perhaps looking for a solution that results in the death of all other life why not rather approach the problem more logically and look upwards? There`s more than enough space and resources out there for as many humans as you want. Also our extended lives will mean we will be able to live long enough to survive the transit between stars.

Lets say we master space exploration, how long before we overpopulate the universe and all possible plannets, draining the entire universe of its resources faster than it can create plannets. The Human race is greedy, we will always be. Then again, men age 80 or so can probably not have children anymore.

 

[Ronjay]

No, freemarket decides, can't afford, no meds, unless you are servery disabled, down-syndrome and the like. No sterilizations, they could be permanent, cause modification and everybody doesn't deserve them, some could likely do well for society by having more children, let the creative and responsible has as many children as they can. As to the rest, well they better start studing and playing fairly, the people who have spent their lives in hope of this development are not slaves.

A SKILLED older population bring a HUGE benifit to the society and the economy. remember that it costs R3 million to raise an American child, about the same in France, and that it is only in these nations where these type of solutions are found 300/mn patents, compared to SA at less than 0.5 international patents per million. An increased populaiton of the skilled would arm us with far greater tools to take care of ourselves and the planet, while a higher population of the unskilled and less creative will only create more need for basic resources and land. illionare and poor man use same amount of fuel and land, now the rich man could afford an electric car too and he will be paying for it's further development.

Either you could afford a child and are able to take care of the child (mandatory-abortion policy), or you don't hav one, such a policy would bring far enough money to the economy to make even the poorest worker afford decent medical care, as to the rest, well we don't have people stuck in horrid situations that they aren't able to pull themselves out of for all eternity. and we will always have an ample supply of the lazy too so leave them to some work.

No. The problem is that you are looking at it from a purely economic point of view. Which would be fine if humans were robots, machines that are incapable of emotion. This is not the case.

The simple fact is that if it becomes possible for humans to prolong their lives indefinitely or at least for an extended time, all humans would want to have this treatment. Also, all humans want to have children, it's a natural process called survival of the species and all animals have this need. Even when procreation becomes detrimental to the animal species because of population growth, it will not stop the need to have offspring.

And you are wrong about people being poor because they are lazy, people are poor because of education, or rather the lack there of. Think about the guy that picks up your refuse (this is probably the worst job one could get in my opinion, hate the smell of that truck) he is hard working, will always be a refuse guy (education is a little out of his wage scale) and would never afford the pills, but he is just as hard working as you are, who can afford it. But according to you, only hard working individuals should have access. So he should be allowed to as well. And what of the guy that inherits wealth? He probably never had to do a thing in his life, but if the system is based on purely economics, well, he will have access. Sounds a little unfair to me.