…
I have other uses beyond distributing my DNA.
Having fun. Being nice to people. Exploring new ideas.
closed quotation tags - UB
[Edited by UncleBeer on 11-23-2001 at 03:03 PM]
…
Welcome to the territory of the 21st century where we have the Gift of Life and the genetic sentence to the gallows at age 80 went away with the last century.
closed quotation tags - UB
[Edited by UncleBeer on 11-23-2001 at 03:04 PM]
I dunno SW, you seem to easily flippantly discount that science could find a away to tack on another 100 years.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by SexyWriter *
**
…
How could it be false to say one believes something?
My statements are true. I believe we will find a way to stop genetic mortality. I believe most of us will stay around long enough to see that. Check out the research at Geron.
closed quotation tags - UB
[Edited by UncleBeer on 11-23-2001 at 03:04 PM]
…
Achingly close? I’m excited, not aching.
Vote for funding research.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by clairobscur *
**
**
…
OP believes it. Within our lifetime.
What possible benefit would there be for not believing it?
Care to list those benefits, anyone?
Curing old age doesn’t stop traffic fatalities, though, or excessive lifestyles that promote heart diseases and cancer.
Drive safely, eat healthily, exercise, reduce stress and stay around long enough for it to be a reality.
closed quotation tags - UB
[Edited by UncleBeer on 11-23-2001 at 03:05 PM]
…
It can be worthwhile to point out all negativity. Otherwise it remains festering within one’s own subconscious and is acted out by being careless with one’s lifestyle.
The assumption that one will only live a few decades, regardless of how well one behaves promotes negativity. Its like, so what, I’m out of here soon anyway so why take care of myself.
On the other hand if one thought of losing hundreds of years of enjoyable, exciting, productive, compasionate, experiences, one might not waste time festering in negativity.
Just a theory. Since I haven’t been around 6 centuries to back that up.
closed quotation tags - UB
[Edited by UncleBeer on 11-23-2001 at 03:06 PM]
I’ve often pondered the consequences of an ageless society. In many ways, it could be a lot cheaper, tax-wise.
Medical care will likely have lower costs (per capita per year). Ageless people (like today’s young people) would have quite resilient constitutions and would need relatively little medical attention compared to today’s elderly.
Pension will become obsolete. One will be able to have a productive career for one’s entire life, or at least until one saves up enough to retire without a pension (living off of the interest of mutual funds, GICs, etc.).
Education will likely have lower costs per person per lifetime and therefore per taxpayer per year. If each person would still need about 20-25 years of education to have a good career, it could be followed by a career that could be several centuries long rather than several decades. The amount of taxes collected over such a long career would dwarf the amount of tax money needed to fund said person’s education, even with socialized university education.
Of course, reproduction would be a bad idea. With the death rate being so low, you’re going to run into overpopulation problems. Also, the first 300 years are fun, but then malaise sets in…you can only do and see things so often. Immortality can get boring.
We’re all doomed anyway at the heat death of the universe. 
I agree.
However, if we subtract 50 productive years (e.g. by spending that time on a message board), then we’ll be poorer. 
Perhaps if you live another couple hundred years you’ll figure out how to use vBulletin’s tags. I suggest you look here, before attemtping use of them again. Actually it’s very simple. For every “open” tag, you need an equivalent “close” tag.
Thank you
I believe it’s exactly the opposite. As of right now, we know that the human life span is finite. We know that by taking care of ourselves, we can spend the time we have on this planet in a pleasant manner, free from diseases and difficulties brought on by poor fitness and other habits.
If you’re going to live “forever” why take care of yourself? Why not procrastinate?
Sure, it would be great to have a few more years. Unfortunately, I don’t see any links to information that this is within the realm of possibility in our lifetime.
It is my opinion that it’s much more beneficial and worthwhile to learn to spend the time we have here well and happy, rather than struggling to prolong it. Chances of adding years is much slimmer than the chances of learning to use your years wisely.
-L
[Extraneous quote tag removed – MEBuckner]
[Edited by MEBuckner on 12-06-2001 at 08:34 PM]
…
The Disease of Aging
Dilman intuited that all of the diseases of aging are characterized by three similar metabolic changes.
The modern neuro-endocrine theory of aging was first conceived by Russian Gerontologist, Professor Vladamir Dilman in 1954. His precocious theories were not appreciated here in the West until his works were translated in 1992!
Dilman’s theory is that aging is caused by a progressive loss of sensitivity by the hypothalamus and related structures in the brain to negative feed back inhibition
[Fixed vB coding – MEBuckner]
[Edited by MEBuckner on 12-06-2001 at 08:40 PM]
Spending time well and happy is not incompatible with adding years. It is probably a necessary condition to adding years.
Not sure where the concept of ‘struggling’ to prolong life came from. ‘Struggling’ tends to decrease lifespan. ‘Struggling’ carries the connotation of unpleasantness.
The recommended concept would be to embrace the possibility of unbridled life extention with enthusiasm and adventure by living happy and well. Living stressed out and depressed and sickly and out of shape physically and unmotivated shortens life expectancy.
Therefore, spending time well and happy is actually increasing life expectancy hopefully long enough for scientists to make technological breakthroughs.
It is not suggested that the participants of this forum go to science labs to help develop technologies. It is suggested that we open our minds to the concepts and be willing to promote support for the researchers through group funding. Those would be corporate, foundations, financiers, politicians, and academic groups.
[Cleaned up vB coding and quote attributions – MEBuckner]
[Edited by MEBuckner on 12-06-2001 at 08:43 PM]
Moderator’s Note: a03, once again, please review the rules for vB coding (quoting people, bold and italic text, etc.) If you have any questions about how the message board software works, please start a thread in the About This Message Board forum.
Thank you.
If you read Anne Rice’s Vampire Chronicle series starting with “Interview with the Vampire”, you might get some ideas on what living forever is like :).
Actually, i heard the human body has the potential to live for 350 years. But this is probably wrong.
Scientists have found many of the core causes of aging. For example, (i probably wont explain this very well), there is a “cap” on the dna of every cell, that cap falls off, the dna detiorates. (It’s probably not DNA, but it has something to do with the cell.) But, if scientists can find a way to stop the cap from coming off, our cells can go on indefinately.