It’s Mathematically Impossible to Beat Aging, Scientists Say

I was going to say, "But lobsters!" Apparently though they seem to somewhat prove the point as well:

 

The sea anemone apparently missed this memo about cells ageing.

 

Then I'll be a jellyfish and live forever.

It's fine with me. Life has an expiration date. Might as well have a kick ass time while you're alive! If you never die, what's the point? You could always go to Paris next year... Or the year after that. Fuck it. Do it as soon as you can. Live, you fools!

 

So don't get rid of them, instead rejuvenate them at a quantum and electrical level. Fucking hell the assumptions for clickbait scientific media are insane.

 

I'm by no means anything even resembling an expert, but I find this somewhat hard to believe. I happily acknowledge the issues that they bring up. However, I have to think that there's some way that you could eventually be able to alter cells to regenerate or resist aging in the first place, and still resist viruses/cancers. Maybe with the tech and thought processes we have now it's not possible, but I have to think people will continue to get smarter, learn new things, and eventually figure this out. (if it should even be figured out in the first place)

People that say things like this are impossible are usually proved wrong at some point. Maybe it's a ploy to get grant money to prove something that will take many years to prove.

 

well some may disagree with that :- https://futurism.com/gene-therapy-reportedly-used-reverse-biological-aging/

 

Bbbbbbbut what about my retirement plan?

I agree. Enjoy it. I am learning to do that a bit better each day. Tonight I will be rolling with my wagon, cooler of beer for myself and partaking parents, and a bucket of candy for the kids while we are on the move. Enjoyment

 

You need to get one of those "pedal bar" things. You could pedal from one house to the next, while drinking at the bar with friends.

 

But.....I don’t want to go to Paris.

 

If I get a big inheritance or hit the lotto, will do.

https://www.hammacher.com/Product/Default.aspx?sku=12225

 

I'd rather go to Nice, but Paris would do in a pinch.

 

Holy shit I would so jump in on that if I saw that rolling down my street lol.

 

They have baguettes. And coffee.

I guess there is always Pyongyang.

 

DNA, Gods DRM.

 

If I age like Clint Eastwood, all is well.

 

Bah, I'll just have my memories implanted in to my youth aged clone of myself. Problem solved.

 

This seems flawed.

 

This is silly. The idea was never to stop the aging process, it's to reverse aging to a point where as person doesn't get older.
We know that by reproduction it's possible to create new cells without any aging issues.

 

consciousness transfer to prepared clone. Silly mathematicians, can't think outside the equation.

 

It's cell replication that's the issue not cell aging.

 

I'm gonna jack the Valkeries when they come after me and the crew, and steal their horses.

We'll see from there.

 

I can go a lot of different places that have bread and coffee. Or I can go to Dublin and have potatoes and whiskey and Guinness instead.

Frankly I’m concerned that you equate not having an interest in Paris with being similar to deciding to travel to Pyongyang.

 

Not sure they know what the words "impossible" and "mathematically" mean.

 

You age because cells replicate/repair themselves non-stop, and each replication/repair, there are minor differences. Like copying a copy of an original, several millions of times. The end result is a blurry copy. The only way to stop this aging process, is to have fresh copies. A great source of these originals are from yourself as a newborn.

 

Agreed!

The thing with their claims are that they're looking at the issue myopically. Yes there is an inherent link between ageing and cancer and we're not arguing that. We're also not arguing if you bluntly change the lifespan of a cell (e.g. telomere operation) you open yourself up to cancer not being stopped.

Where I disagree with the article is that they're arguing their methodology for expanding lifespan is the only one - or that the natural cancer prevention of the body is the only thing that can prevent cancer. What about fixing DNA within the cell, roving nanobots fixing cells on the fly, killing cancer in the process?

I accept that there are many engineering and scientific challenges to "fixing" the ageing process, but they are challenges and can only impossibilities when science and research have hit a wall that they cannot pass. No solution has been discovered but that doesn't mean you can assume such a wall exists, that's not how science works. Mathematics looks as probability, which uses past data to forecast future performance in a reductive manner.

I'd bet that there will be gene therapy before 2030 extending lifespans (people who look 60 years old will actually be 80 years old. Another 10-15 years later and we'll start to see manipulation of our cells by persistent or semi-persistent artificial mechanisms that will do the cellular defragging and error correction at a basic level. Add another 5-10 years and this process will get to the point that we hold off ageing, and then in another 5 years we'll start to reset cells and revert to 25-28 year olds. Mental illnesses will remain a challenge.

 

Fresh copies are good, or many many copies to identify errors would work. Think of it as 50 million copies of the same book that we hand out to people and they can each make a thousand changes from words, sentences to chapters. The original copy of the book is easiest to get the truth, but from the 50 million books you'll be able to pattern match the original format - and even failing that fill in the gaps using our future understanding on genetics.

 

Frankly I'm concerned you're taking me that serious.

You should go visit the Canary Islands. They're nice this time of year. (please don't take serious either. I have no idea how it is this time of year! I've never been!)

 

Once they tell me what the square root of -1 really means, then I'll listen to them.

 

42.

 

Why is there a cup holder for the driver? The driver really shouldn't be drinking.

 

bullshit.

and here's my evidence.

 

Every time I hear someone ask why I would want to live forever?, I ask why would you want to die?

 

So, you've never met my mother in law...

 

Overpopulation would be an issue if it were everyone. If it were just me, I'd watch everyone I love live and die. Rinse and repeat. I couldn't do it. I'd want to die eventually. It sucks, and I don't WANT to die. But, it'd eventually become hell if you couldn't die...

 

There’s plenty of reasons people want to die. They might not be good reasons, but trust me people have them.

 

don't worry about aging, you're going to live forever. The question is .... where?

 

You liberal nazi.... You......

 

blanket statements about stuff being impossible, are stupid.

 

Wow, calling me a "liberal?" That's just totally uncalled for man.