Humans; fit and health to 140

Discussions on scientific and technological advances, both old and new.

Humans; fit and health to 140

Unread postby UnwantedSunbeam » Thu Jul 08, 2010 6:05 am

Bacillus F trapped in glacial ice for thousands of years could help humans live to 140, scientists claim.
One day Alice came to a fork in the road and saw a Cheshire cat in a tree. "Which road do I take?" she asked. "Where do you want to go?" was his response. "I don't know", Alice answered. "Then", said the cat, "It doesn't matter.”
User avatar
UnwantedSunbeam
 
Posts: 812
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 1:31 pm
Reputation point: 1287

Re: Humans; fit and health to 140

Unread postby DarthRavanger » Thu Jul 08, 2010 8:28 am

I wonder if I'll ever see the benefits of that, or is it going to be too expensive for anyone that isn't a millionaire to afford?

Secondly, it'd be cool if they could put that bacteria into the tap water and still produce the desired the effect.
Last edited by DarthRavanger on Thu Jul 08, 2010 8:28 am, edited 2 times in total.
According to robots, we taste like BACON! http://www.wired.com/table_of_malconten ... identifie/

The Throne of Heaven was built my man to serve as the pedestal for nothing.
User avatar
DarthRavanger
Mod Group Leader
Mod Group Leader
 
Posts: 658
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 12:47 am
Location: D.C metro Area
Reputation point: 1912

Re: Humans; fit and health to 140

Unread postby UnwantedSunbeam » Thu Jul 08, 2010 9:53 am

In tap water would be a cool idea, the thing that has not been expanded on is what happens with multiple injections. Wonder if this was the fabled 'fountain of youth' bacteria in water?
One day Alice came to a fork in the road and saw a Cheshire cat in a tree. "Which road do I take?" she asked. "Where do you want to go?" was his response. "I don't know", Alice answered. "Then", said the cat, "It doesn't matter.”
User avatar
UnwantedSunbeam
 
Posts: 812
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 1:31 pm
Reputation point: 1287

Re: Humans; fit and health to 140

Unread postby DarthRavanger » Thu Jul 08, 2010 3:40 pm

UnwantedSunbeam wrote:In tap water would be a cool idea, the thing that has not been expanded on is what happens with multiple injections. Wonder if this was the fabled 'fountain of youth' bacteria in water?

Maybe. As for multiple injections, I guess it would depend on the specifics of how the bacteria effects the body. If multiple injections result in a stronger effect, then the question would be, how much longer can they make us live?


Though it is nice to see that we're getting a little bit closer to a near immortal human race that will enslave the universe and rule over it as the supreme form of life.
According to robots, we taste like BACON! http://www.wired.com/table_of_malconten ... identifie/

The Throne of Heaven was built my man to serve as the pedestal for nothing.
User avatar
DarthRavanger
Mod Group Leader
Mod Group Leader
 
Posts: 658
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 12:47 am
Location: D.C metro Area
Reputation point: 1912

Re: Humans; fit and health to 140

Unread postby UnwantedSunbeam » Thu Jul 08, 2010 9:05 pm

DarthRavanger wrote:Though it is nice to see that we're getting a little bit closer to a near immortal human race that will enslave the universe and rule over it as the supreme form of life.


LOL fueling Darth's megalomania one breakthrough at a time.
One day Alice came to a fork in the road and saw a Cheshire cat in a tree. "Which road do I take?" she asked. "Where do you want to go?" was his response. "I don't know", Alice answered. "Then", said the cat, "It doesn't matter.”
User avatar
UnwantedSunbeam
 
Posts: 812
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 1:31 pm
Reputation point: 1287

Re: Humans; fit and health to 140

Unread postby HalloweenWeed » Fri Jul 09, 2010 8:26 pm

"They also noticed that the fries seems to be fitter and healthier," :lol: LOL (typo)

Wow, look at the decline of the human body condition as we age now, and the cost of living past 90. What would that do to our economy? To have 3 generations of descendants just living to support you (and their young children). My in-laws have had a knee replacement and a hip replacement, and they are only in their 70s. How many replacements are necessary to live to 130? And how expensive are they? Can our medical economy support it?

I guess if this also extended our quality time of life, then that would be great. But if we live in constant agony, or extreme disability, we can't afford this, nor would I partake. Sorry if I rain on your parade with a bit of reality. It is quite the news though.
"Religion is just mind control." "Atheism is a non-prophet organization." - George Carlin
"If God existed, why would he care about any of the us fools contributing to the end of the earth as we know it?" - HalloweenWeed
User avatar
HalloweenWeed
 
Posts: 435
Joined: Sat Jun 06, 2009 3:22 am
Location: Maine, USA
Reputation point: 1989

Re: Humans; fit and health to 140

Unread postby UnwantedSunbeam » Fri Jul 09, 2010 11:05 pm

I agree what are the consequences of living longer? However if what the current information suggests is true then 90 year olds could have the make up of 50ish people (again assuming the fruit 'fries' example) then working will not be big problem. Perhaps if this discovery is as good as it sounds, and is applied early, then knees and hips will not be expiring until one is 120. Or maybe the whole lot is snake oil, who is to know?
One day Alice came to a fork in the road and saw a Cheshire cat in a tree. "Which road do I take?" she asked. "Where do you want to go?" was his response. "I don't know", Alice answered. "Then", said the cat, "It doesn't matter.”
User avatar
UnwantedSunbeam
 
Posts: 812
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 1:31 pm
Reputation point: 1287

Re: Humans; fit and health to 140

Unread postby DarthRavanger » Sat Jul 10, 2010 10:04 pm

HalloweenWeed wrote:"They also noticed that the fries seems to be fitter and healthier," :lol: LOL (typo)

Wow, look at the decline of the human body condition as we age now, and the cost of living past 90. What would that do to our economy? To have 3 generations of descendants just living to support you (and their young children). My in-laws have had a knee replacement and a hip replacement, and they are only in their 70s. How many replacements are necessary to live to 130? And how expensive are they? Can our medical economy support it?

I guess if this also extended our quality time of life, then that would be great. But if we live in constant agony, or extreme disability, we can't afford this, nor would I partake. Sorry if I rain on your parade with a bit of reality. It is quite the news though.

I can think of a worse example, my father, who is in his 50's, has had, I think four hip replacements so far? Of course, he broke his hip in a parachuting accident, but still, that's four hip replacements and he's not even sixty.

(and yes, he has had more hip replacements than hips, and all on the same hip too)
Last edited by DarthRavanger on Sat Jul 10, 2010 10:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
According to robots, we taste like BACON! http://www.wired.com/table_of_malconten ... identifie/

The Throne of Heaven was built my man to serve as the pedestal for nothing.
User avatar
DarthRavanger
Mod Group Leader
Mod Group Leader
 
Posts: 658
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 12:47 am
Location: D.C metro Area
Reputation point: 1912

Re: Humans; fit and health to 140

Unread postby Intercourseman72 » Sun Jul 11, 2010 5:32 am

I remember seeing an experiment done on the discovery channel where they prolonged the age of fertility in bees by preventing them from mating. Within several months they were able to prolong the average life-span of these bees or whatever bugs they may have been by a factor of 3. With all these women not wanting to have kids until their 30s or 40s may mean that humans will necessarily have to live longer on average (hopefully this won't mean we will have way more people with down syndrome or whatever).

In that same program, they also explained that by preventing the degradation of our chromosomes through their continual replication, they could basically drastically slow down the aging process. I can't remember what tests they had done with this, but it seemed very logical and plausible. But why don't we have this beverage of youth yet? I doubt it's because it would taste that horrible.

Anyway, there has been plenty of talk about how to slow down the aging process and prolonging human life. Most of this stuff, however, just ends at the talk. What we have seen to have worked throughout history and across different cultures is that improvements in medicine, injury treatment/rehabilitation, knowledge and practice of nutrition, and a decrease in the amount of violence has drastically contributed to the increase in average life-span.

The places where people live to be 100+ years most often have access to all of these things and actively practice all of these things. There is this one episode of TED where they discuss the life-styles of the people in specific locations of Okinawa, Sardinia, and I think Arizona or some state near there. And no, these people are not some great burden on their decedents with knee replacements, Alzheimer treatments, radiation therapy, etc. They simply live long, healthy lives and die of old age and have their great-great-grand children attend their funerals. Think of Thomas Jefferson and John Adams during the 18th century. They lived more than twice the national average life-span, yet they didn't have diabetes, didn't have series of heart-attacks or strokes, they just died of old age. I would assume that the very few people who live from 110-the record of 122 did not have a diet mainly of sausage, ramen noodles, pop-tarts, ice cream, big macs, and dildos and most likely didn't work in coal mines for 30 years while taking cigarette brakes every 3 hours. And these are fossils go all the way back when central heating and plumbing were luxuries. Before the late-19th century, life for the average person was a battle against starvation. The miracle with this life-expectancy thing through the last few centuries has been an increase in economic sensibility at its root and scientific discovery as the fruit. Remember that Ramses the Great of Ancient Egypt was said to have lived to be between 91 and 96. That's a remarkably old age now, but still only has about 15 years over the average life-expectancy of most OECD nations. It was probably more than triple the average life-span of most Egyptians back then.

The key to humans living longer is not some miracle out of a bottle, fountain, capsule, w/e. It's through advancement in society. This includes increasing the standard of living for everyone in real, not artificial, terms, improving medicine, eliminating poor nutrition and toxins, and reducing violence. The violence issue can be seen by comparing the average life-expectancy of the people in the US compared to japan, luxembourg, denmark, canada, spain, etc. Kind of hard to have the highest life expectancy when you have the most soldiers in active combat, the most police patrolling and combating the most violent drug gangs (save columbia, mexico, etc) while having the highest prison population by far, and having a violently horrible food culture.

As of now, we can see fit and healthy through about 100-115 maybe in the most gifted societies. 100 years ago (some Sardinians can report this via eye-witness account), people were fit and healthy through possibly their 20s and died by their 40s in most places including the most wealthy nations. Now it's only the poorest places where infant morality and child birth are the major causes of death(much of the world of course). In richer nations, we are past this but still have a long way to go before seeing our average vital potential. No need for some glacial microbes or tortoise urine just yet.
read the words of a wise intercourseman
User avatar
Intercourseman72
 
Posts: 424
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 4:57 am
Location: Austin, Texas
Reputation point: 541

Re: Humans; fit and health to 140

Unread postby Azmodan Kijur » Fri Jul 16, 2010 11:59 am

Human aging is a matter of degeneration in all bodily systems, a slow countdown toward cellular death. Assuming that the outside environment does not "get" you in one manner (accident) or another (disease), your own systems tend to turn against you over time. I remember hearing once that humans regularly die of slow poisoning - caused by even the healthiest of diets. One eats materials that in small concentrations are harmless, but over a lifetime may come to collect and poison you. True or not, it is an interesting take on the idea of our life spans.

Our lifespan is not much longer than the spans of our ancestors. Most of the ages they give are in the 20's and 30's before they are in "old age". This is nonsense - humans lived into their fifties and sixties for thousands of years. The key is to remember that they are referring to the average human lifespan and there is one thing that, even today, forces that number to be lower than it could or should be - infant mortality. When a baby is birthed and dies moments later, you have a human aged 0 die. This drives the averages way off. Third world nations today have members of the populace in their nineties, but have life expectancies in the late forties. Their infant mortality is so low that it makes it seem like life is short in those places. It isn't, but the odds of surviving birth to grow old are much lower there than here.

This is one of the reasons that these diet plans and other supplements to "increase maximum age" are bullshit. Once you survive being born, you are generally guaranteed to live 70 - 90 years notwithstanding any disease or accident that takes you before hand. Extreme calorie restriction, caveman diet, the all natural lifestyle - all meaningless. You survived birth, that is generally all that matters. What you do in life may modify the number back and forth by a few years. Maybe.

Our cells are one of the main reasons that we end up having maximum lifespans. The chromosomes that make up our DNA have a length of code at the top and bottom called telomeres. These strips of code are repetitious sequences that protect the actual DNA from damage. In each subsequent re-generation of a cell, the length of the telomeres are reduced as the process of replicating the DNA during the cell division sequence has the effect of losing some of the sequence in the process. The telomeres are only so long. Once it has been used, cellular division stops meaning these cells are the last batch of that type. They will not continue to regenerate your various body functions. This is basically the maximum age the cell can be used, meaning a finite lifespan.

Of course, this bacteria might be a partially solution, if it slows the degradation. The other potential source of new length is new stem cells which have fully intact telomeres that give a system new life. Who knows what they might figure out in the next 10 - 30 years?
Azmodan Kijur
Chat Moderator
Chat Moderator
 
Posts: 290
Joined: Sat Jun 06, 2009 11:29 pm
Reputation point: 2055

Next

Return to Science and Technology



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest

cron
[Valid Atom 1.0]