- Sep 14, 2004
Don't tell my blood boy.
All cancer really is at the end of the day is uncontrolled cell replication. In theory, programmed cell death gets around this, as most cancers will simply kill themselves off within a few generations. For cancer to propagate, two things need to go wrong: The cell itself needs to become damaged, and pre-programmed cell death needs to be inhibited. This is likely why pre-programmed cell death evolved in the first place, as suppressing cancer is good from an evolution standpoint. Keep in mind, living much past 50 has been a thing for only about 100 years; cancer wasn't a huge problem until we pushed life expectancy WAY to the right.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.
Yeah, this isn't news. It's been known for what? 20 years? not just conceptually, but the actual mechanism.Pretty much clickbait. This has been part of the discussion since the beginning. Nothing new here.
You should note those are her CANCER cells. Cancer tends to have total disregard for normal cell rules.Henrietta Lacks doesn’t agree with this headline.
One of my very favorite movies encompasses something of that very theme: "Bicentennial Man" (Robin Williams). Also one of the very rare cases in which the screenwriters add something (romance) to an already good book that didn't even address any of that part of life at all.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...
Frankly, I'm concerned that you took our comments so seriously.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.
It's based on a short story from the same author. The short story is good. The movie... while entertaining in some silly ways, really isn't. The Neuromancer trilogy of books is still incredible. I read them every few years or so.I've never seen it. Looks like a ripoff of Neuromancer.
Pseudo scientific. Well 99% of mainstream media is pseudo scientific, they're not capable of fact checking even high school level stuff.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.
Good point. I'm actually 40 units of Earth time measurement based on revolutions around the central star of our solar system. I actually feel better now (at least that's how I perceive how I feel now) than when I was younger. I'm sure part of it is real, and part is perception, but I'm in about the same health, do all the goofy stunts and other wackiness I've always done. I don't think there's some set amount of time for certain things to occur. Furthermore, I'm of the opinion that they could be altered, mixed, matched, etc. once we have the advanced forms of the required skills, knowledge, and disciplines.Age is just a number. Remember if you lived on another planet you'd be a different age number than here on Earth.
But your cells would live roughly the same amount of ‘time’ if time could be measured the same way. I remember reading once that our bodies are genetically predetermined for a lifespan and short of an accident or some atypical disease contraction you’d live +- 5 years from what you had in your genetic code. That no matter if you ate perfectly and excersised regularly and never consumed alcohol or smoked vs ate unhealthy and were inactive (within reason) —- that delta didn’t effect your expected lifespan as much as the mainstream advocacy would suggest.Age is just a number. Remember if you lived on another planet you'd be a different age number than here on Earth.
I don't know how accurate that is, but within reason, and barring any extreme health-hazards, I think it sounds fairly reasonable. It's why you get 90+ year olds that have smoked two packs of cigarettes a day for 75 years, or people that live in hot desert conditions that don't have skin issues from it, etc. Genetic code whether that's evolved over time, or part of whatever base a particular culture or individual is derived from, probably determines more than the environment alone (even though the environment obviously impacts that evolution)But your cells would live roughly the same amount of ‘time’ if time could be measured the same way. I remember reading once that our bodies are genetically predetermined for a lifespan and short of an accident it some atypical disease contraction youd live +- 5 years from what you had in your genetic code. That no matter if you ate perfectly and excersised perfectly and never consumed alcohol or smoked vs ate unhealthy and we’re inactive (within reason) that delta didn’t effect your expected lifespan as much as the mainstream advocacy would suggest.
Plus or minus 5 years.
Plus or minus 5 years is the difference between 75 and 85. Most people would consider 85 to be pretty old; and imho at least going out at 75 would be too early. So yeah, if one has the ability to increase their life by 12% by toning down the unhealthy stuff and taking care of themselves, that's got to be worth it.…
Plus or minus 5 years.
I think there are some of those still busy legislating in congress now......be a jellyfish and live forever.
Also working in nursing, and I'm 61. It's still cool. When you can no longer do all the things like you used to, you'll find NEW things to do, and new ways of doing them. Hawking apparently thinks it's still cool even in the body that he has. The mind is a great thing as long as we can still use it.Working in skilled nursing, I have seriously reconsidered the value I place on simply making it to old age. Keep me in my 33 year old body, though, and I think it'd be cool.
True. Longer life doesn't make us invincible. It would just be one less thing to worry about. There are still plenty of ways to hurt ourselves.But, you know; when scientists figure out how to make us humans live to be 150, 200, or even 300 years - we'll encounter some jacka$$ like Kim Jong Un that wants to start WW VII, and we all die anyway!