Living to be a Thousand

[Gman]

Many scientists are currently working on way to slow and possibly stop the aging process. Some believe that in the next 20 years we will find a way to live to be a thousand years old. The process has been theorized and many believe a simple alteration of a few genomes could stop the aging process. This experiment has already been tested on worms who's lifespan has tripled. The exciting thing though is that the gene that was altered is a gene the Humans also have.

Even without this alteration scientists believe that humans that were born in the late 20th to 21st century have a life expectancy of around 150 years, mainly due to the idea of cloning. Need a new heart? Have one made from protiens located in your current heart. This could also be advanced to having an entire replica of you made and put into cryogenic freeze untill needed. One brain transplant later and you have new body in perfect health. So in the not so distant future you could have your body augmented to be immortal or switch to a new body every eighty or so years.

Do you belive it will happen or have we reached a plateu in human lifespans?

[Puck]

If we all live to be a thousand then the world will die in war. Children would continue to be born but the old will not die, Recourses will become scarce, the rich would get richer, and the poor would get pooer, and more numerous. The poor in their vast numbers would rise up against the rich and then against each other, explosions would rock the world, animals and plants would become extinct en masse. The last of these animals to go extinct would be humans. Earth does niot have the resources to allow people to live that long, if we try then the world will be thrown into a turmoil that there will be no waking from.

I am feeling optimistic today =]

[Liquid Fire]

Didn't scientists 30 years ago say we'd have robotic house mates too? I think most people struggle to live to be 100, 1,000 seems SO far off I'd doubt it even being possible in 200 years time. Also as far as cloning goes, not quite sure growing a clone to steal their organs would be going around either, think of the human rights involved.

I just don't see a human living to be 1,000 anytime this century.

[Sage of Earth]

Curing aging is the same as curing cancer - nigh impossible. Cells have a set division limit often, and after so many they just die. Cancer cells are theoretically immortal I believe, since they don't just die, and so they basically break the body apart from the inside from my understanding. So you'd have to find a way to regulate the division, but make them immortal similarly.

Don't take my word as solid fact, that's just my understanding of what little I've learned from biology.

But, if it's true that the good die young, then I shall live forever. Screw your science.

[The Great Panda]

As far as I'm concerned, I think scientists should focus on other more important projects. Personally, I'm all for augmenting the body, ala Halo. That seems to be a bit more feasible than living to 1000, no? Besides, as Puck said, the planet really isn't meant for beings that have such long lives. The only way this could be feasible is if it were used for space travel/interstellar colonization.

[Power Shot]

Power Shot wouldn't want to be 1,000. Imagine how much stuff he would have to learn to keep from being bored for that length of time.

[Luke Groundwalker]

Personally I'd love to live this long. It'd be awesome, I just hope the world would live this long.

But yeah it's a pretty bad idea. Overpopulation would just...****, it'd **** up everything.

[Razekial]

It'd be cool to have such a long lifespan, but the earth would not be able to sustain the human race if that were to become a reality. We'd effectively eliminate ourselves.

[Eternal Legend]

Originally Posted by Puck

If we all live to be a thousand then the world will die in war. Children would continue to be born but the old will not die, Recourses will become scarce, the rich would get richer, and the poor would get pooer, and more numerous. The poor in their vast numbers would rise up against the rich and then against each other, explosions would rock the world, animals and plants would become extinct en masse. The last of these animals to go extinct would be humans. Earth does niot have the resources to allow people to live that long, if we try then the world will be thrown into a turmoil that there will be no waking from.

I am feeling optimistic today =]

^ I agree with you Puck. It really is a massive blow to allow every single person on this planet to live to a 1,000 years old. We will have to use up more room, more resources and there will be more people dying of starvation in the developing countries.

I think something like this isn't that possible until possibly the next 200 years or so. Where is the cure for cancer? What about the room for other species of animals? What about food resources and the biggest threat of Global Warming that is already costing heaps of the World's economy?

Sure would be nice to live longer, but we need to think of the consequences before we jump into these experiments.

[morval]

Actually, studies have shown that in Europe (possibly the US too) the educated classes are reproducing less and less. Since it is usually the educated class that generate more than a middle class income, what we would probably see is a new societal rift rather than overpopulation. Since this health care would presumably be costly then the poor would continue to die while the upper class continue to live. This could be potentially volatile, and as long as the healthcare is not accessible to exclusively one country then it would probably lead to massive rioting on an international level. Heck, it could be the thing that triggers a global communist regime.

However, if countries manage to fix the health care system and make this accessible to all working citizens then rioting would be less of an issue, while overpopulation could become a potential one. China has been addressing the overpopulation problem for some time now, so other countries would simply have to take their lead. This could cause problems for the people of the Catholic and Mormon faiths, who tend to encourage large families.

Also, this gives an interesting twist to the anti-biblical argument that biblical characters could not have lived to be as old as the bible reports (I believe Noah was reported to have lived over 200 years.)

[ShadowLink92]

Originally Posted by Sage of Earth

Curing aging is the same as curing cancer - nigh impossible. Cells have a set division limit often, and after so many they just die. Cancer cells are theoretically immortal I believe, since they don't just die, and so they basically break the body apart from the inside from my understanding. So you'd have to find a way to regulate the division, but make them immortal similarly.

Don't take my word as solid fact, that's just my understanding of what little I've learned from biology.

But, if it's true that the good die young, then I shall live forever. Screw your science.

It's true that most humans' cells have a set limit to the number of divisions, but there is a gene that can replenish cells so they can, theoretically, live forever. It has already been observed in humans that live to be over 100.

That said, it would be a mistake to exploit this gene. As Puck stated, overpopulation would consume the planet. It may be feasible once humans have spread to other planets, but at the moment it would destroy humanity.

[Sage of Earth]

Plus you might cure aging, but you can't cure death. If I shoot one of these uberhumans in the head they'll still die. So why bother?

[Gman]

Originally Posted by Sage of Earth

Plus you might cure aging, but you can't cure death. If I shoot one of these uberhumans in the head they'll still die. So why bother?

By your reasoning we shouldn't bother with extending Human lives at all, even within the natural limit. Let's all just revert back to the 1750's when the life expectancy was around 35 five years.

And to all of you saying that "immortals" would just eat up all our recourses, you make it sound like these people wouldn't do anything for themselves and just cry for food and shelter like infants. I'm sure that anyone who could live to be 1,000 could use all that time to solve this problem. Besides, 1,000 years is at the very limit of possibility. More likely we would get people living to be about 300 years. Which isn't a extreme as you'd expect because many people agree that the life expectancy will be 150 years in the next 20 years. Due to cloning organs.

Originally Posted by Liquid Fire

Also as far as cloning goes, not quite sure growing a clone to steal their organs would be going around either, think of the human rights involved.

We wouldn't actually need to clone entire humans. We could make an exact and perfectly healthy copy of your heart without making an entire copy of you. Don't believe it? Well, it has been proven possible with a copy machine. If you take a small amount of heart cells, put them in an ink cartridge and copy it, you'll get heart tissue that actually beats! Give 20 years time to advance this science, and we'll be copying entire organs in a matter of minutes. Brains however, will not be copyable, well they will but the wont function like the original, having no experiences or memories like the first one did. So, you can make your body immortal, but once your brain ages, it's over.
But the brain has been shown to age very slowly, and if Alzheimer's or brain cancer or some other brain ailments can be cured, we could live for a very long time indeed.

[Administrator Breen]

All cells have a set division limit, no matter how large, and after a set limit, they simply use up resource but contribute nothing back.

Mass organ transplants would only be plausible for around 200 years or so. After that time, the skin cells would start dieing, and not replicating. Can you imaging dieing because the skin is falling off your body? I don't want to.

And for people saying a full body transplant is plausible, don't believe everything you see on Ghost in the Shell.

[Andross]

I support any or all efforts to reach such a goal. Well, as long as we don't fall in to communism. I'd much rather live forever in a capitalist society than in a boring communist society.

Who wants to lose their own existance? Not me; and I'm pretty sure every human being, no matter how much they are ethically and/or morally against it, has some level of desire to continue living, and not die.

Oh, and there's a simple solution to the problem of overpopulation- have less kids. The thing is, people have too many kids; two or three should be the maximum. Also, discouraging reproduction, and, instead, encouraging education and/or entrepreneurship is another good way to help solve this problem.

All cells have a set division limit, no matter how large, and after a set limit, they simply use up resource but contribute nothing back.

Of course, with science and medical technology, we could find a way to alter the cell division process. People once thought artificial intelligence, genetic engineering, cloning, and so forth were impossible- but, as time shows, all of these ideas that would be found only in sci-fi media are coming true. Technology and science can allow us to become gods; it will take time, but there is no reason to doubt that the so-called impossible can be made possible. We've done it before; we can do it again.

[Kouten]

Originally Posted by The Metal

Many scientists are currently working on way to slow and possibly stop the aging process. Some believe that in the next 20 years we will find a way to live to be a thousand years old. The process has been theorized and many believe a simple alteration of a few genomes could stop the aging process. This experiment has already been tested on worms who's lifespan has tripled. The exciting thing though is that the gene that was altered is a gene the Humans also have.

Even without this alteration scientists believe that humans that were born in the late 20th to 21st century have a life expectancy of around 150 years, mainly due to the idea of cloning. Need a new heart? Have one made from protiens located in your current heart. This could also be advanced to having an entire replica of you made and put into cryogenic freeze untill needed. One brain transplant later and you have new body in perfect health. So in the not so distant future you could have your body augmented to be immortal or switch to a new body every eighty or so years.

Do you belive it will happen or have we reached a plateu in human lifespans?

Maybe, but the sad thing is that the human race can't afford this, especially with our population spiking out of control. Like Puck said, where are we going to get the resources we need? And when some countries are already starving? Can we make room for people to live that long? So it doesn't really matter if it can be done. It only matters if it should be done.

[Aralith]

I actually remember reading a study recently that says that there is some, though hardly conclusive, evidence that humans are biologically immortal. If you don't know what that means, it's basically that once an organism gets to a certain age, it stops biologically aging. Now while things such as disease and trauma can still cause death, aging alone cannot. The effect has been observed in single celled organisms and some larger creatures, but the fact that humans might be is quite incredible. For those that will inevitably ask for a source on this information (and so you should), here it is: Late Life: A New Frontier for Physiology

[Igna]

Multiple problems with this.

Reiterating what Puck already said, such a long life expectancy would pretty much destroy all of our resources.

I highly doubt this would happen in the next twenty years. I haven't been on this planet for very long, but I've quickly learned that there are always a group of scientists who take one discovery and say that they can apply it in about 100x the scale and complexity without breaking a sweat. This is one of those cases.

On the plus side, if it did miraculously work, it would probably be so costly and complex that it would be limited to a select few, thus not theoretically dropping our overpopulation problem from a bowl of lukewarm soup into the depths of hell.

[Kouten]

Originally Posted by Andross

Oh, and there's a simple solution to the problem of overpopulation- have less kids. The thing is, people have too many kids; two or three should be the maximum. Also, discouraging reproduction, and, instead, encouraging education and/or entrepreneurship is another good way to help solve this problem.

That doesn't solve it at all. Disregarding third world countries, if everyone lives on average to at least 75, and each person has only one kid when he or she's 25, then by the time that one person passes on, there will be three people born during the life span of one (I think I did the math right; if not, let me know). Even when factoring in chances of dying before then, you have the rest of the world to think about. Ever study exponential growth? At our population, even one kid per family is going to do damage, just not as much. But still, this doesn't solve it as much as we want it to.

Originally Posted by Aralith

I actually remember reading a study recently that says that there is some, though hardly conclusive, evidence that humans are biologically immortal. If you don't know what that means, it's basically that once an organism gets to a certain age, it stops biologically aging. Now while things such as disease and trauma can still cause death, aging alone cannot. The effect has been observed in single celled organisms and some larger creatures, but the fact that humans might be is quite incredible. For those that will inevitably ask for a source on this information (and so you should), here it is: Late Life: A New Frontier for Physiology

I disagree. Biological studies show that the skin will continue to age and die, even if you, oh say, lived in a sterile bubble for your entire life with no chance of being shot, killed, mamed, infected, etcetera. And not just skin. Cells in general have a set replicating limit as mentioned earlier. That also means that your heart, lungs, intestines won't always be able to heal themselves or continue in perfect health. So really, the simple aging factor dooms us. At least, that's how I figure it.

Originally Posted by Igna

On the plus side, if it did miraculously work, it would probably be so costly and complex that it would be limited to a select few, thus not theoretically dropping our overpopulation problem from a bowl of lukewarm soup into the depths of hell.

Yeah but we're talking about if it would turn out to be used on a large scale. Though I agree.

[Sage of Earth]

Originally Posted by The Metal

By your reasoning we shouldn't bother with extending Human lives at all, even within the natural limit. Let's all just revert back to the 1750's when the life expectancy was around 35 five years.

Well considering overpopulation is a problem as is, and people are still incredibly fragile anyway, curing aging would just be more of a problem. I think curing diseases should come priority to curing aging, since the only people who'd really benefit from that are models who are scared of getting wrinkles.

It's not death we're worried about, it's suffering in the process.

[Gman]

Originally Posted by Sage of Earth

Well considering overpopulation is a problem as is, and people are still incredibly fragile anyway, curing aging would just be more of a problem. I think curing diseases should come priority to curing aging, since the only people who'd really benefit from that are models who are scared of getting wrinkles.

It's not death we're worried about, it's suffering in the process.

But don't you see? Curing diseases is step one of curing aging.

Edit: OMFG 666th post :O