Scientists believe genetic tweaks could significantly extend our lifespan.

[dipsydoodle]

Could humans live to 500 years old ? Scientists believe genetic tweaks could significantly extend our lifespan.

Living to the ripe old age of 500 might be a possibility if the science shown to extend worms' lives can be applied to humans, scientists have said.

U.S. researchers tweaked two genetic pathways in the tiny lab worm Caenorhabditis elegans and boosted the creature's lifespan by a factor of five.

The research raises the prospect of anti-ageing treatments based on genetic interactions, they said.

‘What we have here is a synergistic five-fold increase in lifespan,’ said lead scientist Dr Pankaj Kapahi, from the Buck Institute of Age Research, Novato, California.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2523086/Could-humans-live-500-years-old-Scientists-believe-

[Skidmore]

1. Why would anyone want to do this?

Really? We are living in an age where people are complaining about having to provide a little support of the aged. It seems to me to be a really good vehicle to ensure that an elite class preserves a certain order over generations, should something like this become possible. You could bet your bottom dollar that this type of thing would be manipulated all to hell and that the average guy couldn't afford it.

Sometimes just because you may be able to do something doesn't mean you should do it. I wounder if Dr. Five-Fold has given any thought to the implications for population on the planet. The only practical application I could see would be for those undertaking deep space exploration.

Jesu, 500 years.

[dipsydoodle]

4. Were it to become universal

I'm guessing pension schemes would become defunct as it would become nigh on impossible to figure for how long payments would be made once retirement commenced.

[randome]

8. Living to be 5 centuries old would transform our species.

Everything about us would be different. You're trying to see this possibility through the lens of the Present.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[Skidmore]

11. It does not follow that because it would be different that it would

be better. Longevity does not bring about changes in the innate qualities of being human.

[Demo_Chris]

15. Yeah, it does, life and human rights become MORE precious. nt

[Skidmore]

16. And how do you figure this to be so?

It seems to me to be equally plausible that human rights could be come more disposable, particularly if those in positions of authority and wealth claim this technology for themselves only. Fundamental changes in the human psyche are not assured by just living longer.

[randome]

17. Take climate change, for instance.

One of the reasons individuals don't worry so much is that the effects won't be seen for most of our lifespans.

Quintuple our lifespans and we will all be much more vested in keeping the planet clean.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]TECT in the name of the Representative approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

[Demo_Chris]

22. My argument is that the personal value individuals place upon their life....

My argument is that the personal value individuals place upon their life is proportional to the anticipated quality and quantity of that life. Long life, life measured in centuries, really does change EVERYTHING from the foundations up. War, for example, becomes an almost unthinkable crime, and in many respects poverty as well. The concepts of generational wealth and even ownership become open to challenge. Looking further, such a change completely undermines the foundation that religious belief relies upon.

I have long felt that humanity is due for a NEW enlightenment, in this case a divorce from industrial age ethics and bronze age superstitions. This medical breakthrough, if it happens, could be the final spark.

[Skidmore]

25. I don't think that quantity equal quality necessarily.

Nor do I believe more is better. What do you think would happen with reproduction and the number of people on the planet in regard to sustainabity. Do you believe that people will just have less children? WIll everyone have access to this half millennia lifespan? Given what is true about the predatory component of human nature, I doubt that because there is more time there will suddenly be a golden age. The chances are equally possible that society could devolve into what we have now but on steroids. Or, would it be preferable also to somehow breed aggressiveness out of the population? That leads us to someplace a lot worse than prolonging life could take us.

[Demo_Chris]

28. Answers:

Nor do I believe more is better. What do you think would happen with reproduction and the number of people on the planet in regard to sustainabity. Do you believe that people will just have less children?

Yes. Again, I believe that something like this changes everything from the ground up.


WIll everyone have access to this half millennia lifespan? Given what is true about the predatory component of human nature, I doubt that because there is more time there will suddenly be a golden age.

Ultimately, yes. And I think something like this forces a reevaluation of how we view each other as humans. We will each be here, together, and for a very long time. More, we will be dealing with each other with the wisdom that can only come with time and experience. For example, my personal desires -- my lusts if you will -- have diminished as I have aged. I don't long for a Ferarri for example, and more I wonder about those who do. I see if rather as a work of engineering art, not something I would wish to actrually drive. The same applies to the mansion on the hill. And my tolerance for those who place these things ahead of PEOPLE declines with every year that passes. Materialism is a game for the short lived and immature. Property really does become meaningless.

Finally, I don't think oppression and inequality survives this. Consider first that much of that crap is based upon death cult religions, and you can see already where it starts to crumble. But even beyond this, human life becomes something massive and significant, and the idea that anyone anywhere would spend those centuries in bondage or poverty is unconscionable.

[Skidmore]

32. I think you have made some assumptions given what we know to be true

about human nature. You presume some sort of harmonious conversion by mankind in which every person is treated equally. That does not exist now and as long as it is a part of human nature, it will survive into the future as well. Where does all that aggression go? Will the world just be made up of a bunch of very old and inscrutably wise people sitting around surfing a cosmic zen vibe? Materialism will be present in Futureworld. As long as there is someone who doesn't have and wants or someone who has but wants more, it will be there and be a source of competition and conflict. The problem is that PEOPLE will still be present and perhaps the death cult religions just change their focus. What means would be employed to encourage those with wealth and power to relinquish their exploitation of underclasses? Revolution? What overlord would rise to take the place of the old guard? History has ever been fraught by oustings and retrenchments.

[pnwmom]

45. Quite the opposite. Scarcity makes things feel more precious,

not abundance. The idea that people would live for 500 years would make life feel more like a burden than a gift.

[lumberjack_jeff]

20. I find life to be fun. I think many people would like more of it. n/t

But yeah, the company that patents the procedure could make more money if they charged $10 million to 10000 people than $500 to everyone.

[Skidmore]

23. I'l bet that after the first century or two,

life could turn in to a bit of a grind. Of course, that longevity doesn't come with a guarantee of fewer health problems associated with aging either. I may not be a visionary in this area but I do think that there is a reason we die when we do. I just don't see a need to do this.

[lumberjack_jeff]

24. If they could give assurances of sustained cognitive capacity, I'd sign up.

But 420 years of dementia? Not so much.

[sofa king]

27. I suspect it would be a much quieter, safer world.

Nobody is going to want to have a 500 year lifespan and know that statistically, one might make it to 150 before you die in a car crash, or a plane crash, or crossing the street, or cleaning your gun, or from unforeseen long-term health complications triggered by two hundred years of chemical industry dumping in the water supply, or from food that already kills people within their current lifetimes, or from spurious wars designed for the profit of a malevolent few.

Furthermore, the people who developed the technique would likely foresee, just as countless science fiction writers have, that Malthusian collapse looms from the inevitable massive population explosion that would result from generations of people not dying as expected. Conversely, the strict population control measures needed to widely distribute the technique would directly inhibit reproductive freedom, and of course all other civil rights would be equally eroded along with that, as they already are today.

Instead, the technique would likely only be available to the most ruthlessly successful and manipulative people, and those people would live long and malevolent lives. I'll never have the chance to live 500 years, but Dick Cheney and George W. Bush might. So fuck a bunch of that. Make the treatment fatal to sociopaths, and maybe I'd be for it. But only the good die young, so there is absolutely no chance of preventing the very worst people from becoming the most powerful and longest lived, while the rest of us toil in Hobbesian squalor.

[XemaSab]

30. Henry Kissinger, Howard Phillips, and Dick Cheney would be the beneficiaries

n/t

[Shankapotomus]

49. I think it might be ideal for

for space colonies such as on the moon, Mars and orbiting biospheres since it is suspected that living beyond the Earth's atmosphere may shorten lifespans. Plus if you are capable of colonizing space, why worry about over population? It's not like you're going to run out of space at that point. Of course, resources would have to be managed adequately to support the uptick in population.

[safeinOhio]

2. Great, everything I'm

putting off until next year can now wait five years.

[NuclearDem]

3. Good to see some advancements in gene therapy.

The applications are profound, not just for life extension but for anything else that can be done with this process.

[hobbit709]

5. Now if they could only fix stupid.

[eShirl]

6. Don't worry, it will only be available to those affluent enough to afford it.

[Stargazer09]

7. Interesting

When I saw this report, I immediately thought of this short piece of fiction:
http://365tomorrows.com/11/18/mother-and-child-reunion/

The gene therapy discussed in the report sounds promising, although worms are not nearly as complex as humans.

[AngryAmish]

9. Put $10 in stock market

Pick it up in 200 years. Assuming 8% return then you got $48,389,495.85.

THis is why the thousand year trust is frowned upon by law.

Incidentally, if you get a kid, put money in the market for them right now - nothing fancy, just a no load mutual fund that does not churn. Use a trust, not too expensive. Let them have it when they are 27. Even if you only put away $10,000 that is about $68 k when they get it - downpayment on a house.

[jwirr]

10. We do not want to ear genetically modified foods but are talking about genetically modified humans.

[HappyMe]

13. Good point.

[MrScorpio]

12. Why not create a commercial application and have people purchase additional years?

A la this movie: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1637688/

[Ptah]

14. A man or woman unable to walk ten miles at a stretch will be regarded as a weakling.

Gymnastics will begin in the nursery, where toys and games will be designed to strengthen the muscles.
Exercise will be compulsory in the schools. Every school, college and community will have a complete gymnasium.
All cities will have public gymnasiums. A man or woman unable to walk ten miles at a stretch will be regarded as a weakling.

http://yorktownhistory.org/wp-content/archives/homepages/1900_predictions.htm

[IDemo]

18. Bad science fiction

The fictional part being, that the planet will somehow cooperate by yielding up more mineral and water resources to accommodate an exponentially increasing human population. And that this wouldn't result in greater atmospheric CO2 and pollution.

[randome]

19. Another vested interest that would quickly accrue to those with longer lifespans...

...is to keep the population down to a level that won't kill us all.

If people start living to be 5 centuries old, I have every confidence they won't want to spend 4 centuries of that time living in misery.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[KittyWampus]

52. Hmmm, and how to keep population down? It's called genocide and euthanization & sterilization.

[randome]

55. Only if you see things in the most dystopian light possible.

If people could actually live to be 500, there would be a much greater emphasis on simply letting 'attrition' take our numbers down.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[FarCenter]

21. Yoda was 900 years old. Will we all look like Yoda?

[JimboBillyBubbaBob]

26. Perhaps we area already...

...the 500 year old worm, in worm years that is!

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

29. I know conventional wisdom says "Life is short"...

I beg to differ.

[Egalitarian Thug]

33. How old are you now? n/t

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

35. 47

I've thought this way for years if that matters. Wish I knew I had X years to live. I've proven resilient, but that was a lot easier when I was younger. There gets to be a point when you're perceived as too old to be floundering. Also, I'm sure you can factor in things, like, never married and no children.

Don't get me wrong, I do enjoy the good times, have lots to look forward to when my life is stable, but the bad times are recurrent and wearing on me. I imagine that when I'm dying I'll look back on my life with great satisfaction and will, with my last breath, exhale with great relief.

[Egalitarian Thug]

38. Thank you. There have been far too few good times in our lives so far and it's going

to be even worse for those behind us. But I've done a fairly good job at holding onto the good memories and flushing the bad memories and people out of my life.

Come to think of it, DU is the only place left that I ever deal with these reich-wingers anymore.

Hang in, change is inevitable and it should be an interesting show when it comes.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

39. Well that was awesome!

[XemaSab]

31. I'd rather live until 80 or 90

but keep my health and my faculties for the last 30 years of it.

My grandma's been miserable for the last 20 years. I don't want to go through that.

[Silent3]

34. I have to admit I've started thinking about keeping myself healthy now...

...as a way that could help me stay alive long enough that new medical technology will keep me alive even longer.

I'm 51 now. I'm a lot healthier than my father was at the same age, and he made it to 85. If I make it into my 80s or 90s, it seems like there's a decent chance (provided that the whole planet hasn't gone to hell in a handbasket) that there will be some pretty amazing advances in medicine that could keep me going well past 100 -- and all I've got to do is stay healthy now for the best shot at holding out until then.

[Blue_In_AK]

36. I'm planning to live to 93.

By then, I imagine I'll be ready to move on.

[1000words]

37. How about we stop fucking with the natural order, and allow it to evolve at it's own pace.

[Egalitarian Thug]

41. Because we won't survive that long. We took a very bad turn about 6,000 years

ago that exposed our species' greatest strength as its greatest weakness as well. We have choice, but our brains are also terribly susceptible to early life programming and can be molded into any form we can conceive. This weakness has been exploited since the Desert God of Death's followers managed to lurch out of that desert.

[Orrex]

40. Will it help kids with progeria?

To hell with narcissistic, vanity-based longevity; if it'll help these kids then I say it's worth it.

[Nay]

42. Nice. Now rich people will live so much longer they will own absolutely everything.nt

[CFLDem]

43. Exactly

This tech isn't meant for the hoi polloi. Living 500 years is something only well off people can afford to do.

If cancer doesn't get you, heart disease or dementia will.

This is a pipe dream until we solve those first.

[markpkessinger]

44. The more you extend the average lifespan of the species . . .

. . . the more you slow the process of evolution, not only physically, but also in terms of the evolution and development of human thought. I think it is a terribly misguided idea, and that those who advocate it are exhibiting a kind of extreme, chronological arrogance.

[Springslips]

53. Evolusion doesn't have to go anywhere.

There is no end goal to it; it is just random.

Evolusion created us--smart, self-aware, flawed beings-- who developed technology--it in itself changes evolusion.

Natural evolusion ends with us. We develop ourselves now.

[Warren DeMontague]

46. Cool.

I mean, death always sounds like a great idea in the abstract, but when it comes time to pre-order the coffins at costco.com for themselves, most people aren't in a huge hurry.

I also; speaking of what is and isn't "natural"- don't see anyone clamoring to return to the days of the 30 yr. old average lifespan.

If this happens- big if- I trust Humanity will figure out a way to adjust.

Of course, we'll probably need to move onto other planets, too, another development which is sure to chafe some folks' shorts.

[Berlum]

47. "O' happy day." - Sci Enterrific Materialists

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

48. 500 years of Dick Cheney and the Koch brothers ...

... what could go wrong?

[muriel_volestrangler]

50. On the other hand, maybe this would extend human life by 5 times the lifespan of a worm

"At 20 °C, the laboratory strain of C. elegans has an average life span of approximately two–three weeks and a generation time of approximately four days" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caenorhabditis_elegans

There's no reason to suppose that the extension is proportional to the normal lifespan. Maybe they've figured out how to keep humans alive for another 6 months.

The article, of course, makes no mention of whether C elegans has 'old age infirmities' that you'd want to make sure are put off as well. 'Generation time' brings up another topic - population size. Lengthen average age, and you lengthen the total population size by the same amount. Does this genetic 'tweak' (oh, it's just a 'tweak', it must be benign, after all "I tweak, you manipulate, he mutates" is how the irregular verb goes) alter the time at which sexual maturity is reached? The length of time they are fertile? Are those milestones even comparable with those in a warm-blooded vertebrate that had a common ancestor with this worm perhaps 800 million years ago?

[randome]

54. You're asking questions that no one has the answers to.

Let's find those answers.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[Vashta Nerada]

51. That would be great.

60, 70, 80 years on this planet is far too short.