Telomere shortening rate predicts species life span • Hacker News Board

Re: Telomere shortening rate predicts species life span

#61

Post by copperx » Tue, Jul 09, 2019, 7:36 PM UTC

mrfusion wrote: post #40

function_seven wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, you shamed me into doing it :) So, this is really rough napkin math, but here goes: Assuming that... ... a sedentary person (Donald) has a resting BPM of 80. ... an active runner (Justin) has a resting BPM of 60, and a peak BPM of 180 (while running) If Justin runs for a solid 2 hours, five times a week, he will have 158*60*60 + 10*60*180 = 676,800 beats per week While Donald, who doesn't run, but averages 1 ho…

Thanks for doing the math. I’d say 130-140 would be better than 180 for someone in shape. Most people can’t even hit 180 after their 20s.

No wonder I dread going to the gym, I find it really strenuous. I'm 37, unfit, and try to hit 180 while running on a treadmill. I was using the same target BPM that I used in college.

Thanks! I'll try 160 BPM next time. Running 45 mins should be more doable.

Re: Telomere shortening rate predicts species life span

#62

Post by medion » Tue, Jul 09, 2019, 9:28 PM UTC

PhilWright wrote: post #5

The total number of heartbeats also predicts lifespan, although apparently not as accurately. So is the heartbeat total just a coincident or still a factor somehow?

Is this also a Buddhist belief?

Re: Telomere shortening rate predicts species life span

#63

Post by jariel » Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 11:12 AM UTC

kuprel wrote: post #54

pawelmurias wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you lived longer still you might father more children.

There's probably pressure for species to not have longer lifespans. Youthful thinking and fresh perspectives are important. Wise old perspectives can get deeply ingrained and can't be changed easily. The free market for example experiences similar phenomenon where a new startup will outcompete a big old corporation. An industry that moves quicker (tech) evolves faster than one that doesn't (healthcare).

New companies don't beat older one's because they inherently have 'fresh perspective' the older one's are incapable of.

'Old companies' are entrenched and incumbent gears in the system and are effectively mining economic rent. They don't want change because change will disrupt the cash cow.

Newer companies have to break into the system and have to do that, at which time they'll want to sink their claws into the system as well.

There are plenty of newer ideas at big companies, but systematically they tend to be averse to them in favour of other strategies.