Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ageing accelerates around age 50 ― some organs faster than others

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 171 posts

Re: Ageing accelerates around age 50 ― some organs faster than others

#71

Post by thfuran »

barrkel wrote: post #43
jebarker wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Life expectancy much longer than 40 is a modern thing for humans though. So where would the over 40s schedule have come from? Or do you mean the schedule basically says: once you hit 50 start falling apart?

Life expectancy in the past was heavily depressed by high child and maternal mortality. For those who survived into adulthood (say, 20), dying in one's 30s or 40s was not the norm. Most lived into at least their 50s, and many reached their 60s or beyond. Hard labor and disease made very old age rarer than today, but old age itself is not a modern phenomenon. Skeletal remains and records confirm its presence throughou…

Not even 20s. Childhood mortality by five was once near 50%

Re: Ageing accelerates around age 50 ― some organs faster than others

#72

Post by crinkly »

kkoncevicius wrote: post #31
NoOn3 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe. But why in this case do we not see bugs and failures in this program, i.e. no one lived 5 times more than the average or did not live forever at all, for example? I'm not making a statement, just a guess.

Such arguments go both ways. For example, if aging is accumulation of damage and not programmed, then why don't we see lucky people who live 5 times longer. Also how come the patterns of aging are so similar between individuals and even between different species (wrinkly skin, grey hair, fragile bones).

Think this is a statistical thing. Your body is made of lots of cells. But one exceptional one wouldn’t outlive the whole system’s failure. You’d need a hell of a lot of cells to survive that long.

Re: Ageing accelerates around age 50 ― some organs faster than others

#73

Post by MaxPock »

evo_9 wrote: post #60
mellosouls wrote: post #49

I've only opened these comments in the hope somebody here will debunk these findings or at least point out they are dubious... :(

Agree - I’m 58 and still do the same workout I did in my 30s and 40s including 3 sets of 15 to 20 pull-ups depending on the day. I also still skate (hockey) 2 -3 times a week with a bunch of retired pros (echl, nhl, etc) and typically put up a bunch of points every skate (possibly slightly more assists now but I attribute that more toward enjoying that more these days and not needing to be so flashy)

You are reaping the benefits of having an active fitness regime in your 30s . The average 50 year old who starts exercising today will never get to your fitness level .

Re: Ageing accelerates around age 50 ― some organs faster than others

#74

Post by Lyngbakr »

snowwrestler wrote: post #65
mellosouls wrote: post #49

I've only opened these comments in the hope somebody here will debunk these findings or at least point out they are dubious... :(

You’re not going to find a reliable “debunking” in HN comments of a scientific paper published in Cell. But this paper is about analyzing tissue samples from internal organs. Which is generally not what people feel when they “feel” aging. In fact most internal organs can’t be felt at all (no nerve endings), which is how people get surprised with Stage IV cancer diagnoses like pancreatic cancer. What people generally…

    > And the truth is, there is a lot a person can do to adjust or mitigate these things, through simple lifestyle changes like diet and exercise.
This is spot on. I'm 46 and I've been fortunate to be healthy and in decent shape my entire life; however, a check up that was fine but trending in the wrong direction prompted these lifestyle changes.

I lift run or lift daily, have reduced my carb intake significantly, stopped drinking, perform a short yoga routine each morning, and spend some time on the cushion each evening. I only wish I'd done this earlier because I feel so much better than I ever have.

Re: Ageing accelerates around age 50 ― some organs faster than others

#75

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

There was another recent study that made the front page of HN (would have to search to find it) that found two "peaks" of aging, at 44 and 60. As someone in my late 40s, I certainly identified with that.

I was in fairly good shape and feel like, despite some grays and some crows feet, my body was relatively the same from my early 20s to my early 40s. 44 really did hit me like a ton of bricks though - working out got considerably harder, and my face started to show more permanent signs of aging, like loss of facial fat and neck banding. Can't say I was thrilled to later discover I was "right on schedule".

Re: Ageing accelerates around age 50 ― some organs faster than others

#76

Post by wrs »

SoftTalker wrote: post #16
wonderwonder wrote: post #12

I felt incredibly old from ~36 - 42. Then I started seriously working out, took control of my diet (it had very much always controlled me) and started aggressively pursuing a "better living through chemistry" approach to life. I feel 25 years younger now. My BP and cholesterol are under control and I roll out of bed actually feeling rested (probably due to not snoring anymore).

I started weight training at about age 54. I had never done any form of regular exercise in my life. Attempts here and there, but nothing ever stuck for very long. I am stronger now than I ever have been.

Same here, though I think I started a bit younger. Now 58 and in the best shape of my life! The trainer who set up my program asked what my fitness goals were, and I said “I just want to be able to stand up from a chair when I’m 90”. He said, “we can do that”.

Re: Ageing accelerates around age 50 ― some organs faster than others

#77

Post by spwa4 »

antonvs wrote: post #69
snowwrestler wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re not going to find a reliable “debunking” in HN comments of a scientific paper published in Cell. But this paper is about analyzing tissue samples from internal organs. Which is generally not what people feel when they “feel” aging. In fact most internal organs can’t be felt at all (no nerve endings), which is how people get surprised with Stage IV cancer diagnoses like pancreatic cancer. What people generally…

> In fact most internal organs can’t be felt at all (no nerve endings) That might be technically true, but I think it's worth noting that many internal organs can produce pain, e.g. kidneys, gallbladder, pancreas, prostate, urethra, stomach, intestines, bladder, heart.

Only through chemical means which triggers relatively far away neurons to produce pain. This has the consequence that the pain is not felt at it's source.

E.g. a doctor will become very nervous if you report dizziness with a pain moving from your chest into your left shoulder or neck. Such pain originates along the path of the vagus nerve, which includes your lungs and heart (and half the digestive organs, and even the womb, kidneys and gall bladder sometimes). It's very tricky to diagnose, and usually extremely serious (as in ignoring it may cause death).

Re: Ageing accelerates around age 50 ― some organs faster than others

#79

Post by piombisallow »

petters wrote: post #57
piombisallow wrote: post #8

It's very likely that aging is driven by some kind of scheduled gene program. It makes perfect sense to phase out individuals from a group-level selection point of view.

I don't think it makes perfect sense. For one, group selection isn't widely accepted by evolutionists.

Yes it is: "Group selection, which was once widely rejected as a significant evolutionary force, is now accepted by all who seriously study the subject." (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3110649/)

Re: Ageing accelerates around age 50 ― some organs faster than others

#80

Post by andy99 »

adamors wrote: post #37
jebarker wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Life expectancy much longer than 40 is a modern thing for humans though. So where would the over 40s schedule have come from? Or do you mean the schedule basically says: once you hit 50 start falling apart?

No, it’s not a modern thing, you’re conflating average life expectancy at birth with how long people lived in general. > Back in 1994 a study looked at every man entered into the Oxford Classical Dictionary who lived in ancient Greece or Rome. Their ages of death were compared to men listed in the more recent Chambers Biographical Dictionary. Of 397 ancients in total, 99 died violently by murder, suicide or in battle…

Wouldn't those still be modern humans? Have we undergone significant evolution since then? I would think the earliest relevant comparison would be much earlier.
Post reply on HN