https://archive.is/45ZuW Study: https://www.cell.com/cell/abstract/S0092-8674(25)00749-4
Worth noting the restricted range of the model sample: 76 people ages 14-68.
Ageing accelerates around age 50 ― some organs faster than others
91–100 of 171 posts
Re: Ageing accelerates around age 50 ― some organs faster than others
#92I've only opened these comments in the hope somebody here will debunk these findings or at least point out they are dubious... :(
From what I gather, the good news is there is a way, but the bad news is if you haven’t been keeping an active and healthy lifestyle your whole there is nothing you can do, you simply can’t cram decades worth of exercise and nutrition benefits into a few short years all at once and expect to reap benefits.
It's a bit like changing the oil on a car engine. You need to keep up with it. Sure, some neglect is partially recoverable but generally it's "wear and tear". You only have so many telomeres and many processes are irreversible.
Re: Ageing accelerates around age 50 ― some organs faster than others
#93There 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…
44 was around the time I started to experience random things hurting for no reason, so that definitely tracks.
Re: Ageing accelerates around age 50 ― some organs faster than others
#94There 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…
Well, shit, I just turned 44 a few weeks ago. Great, that's what I have to look forward to this year...
Re: Ageing accelerates around age 50 ― some organs faster than others
#95Earlier 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.
Because the whole system is quite resilient and self-repairing, and probably requires a great deal of consistency between the various genes? Aging is quite fundamental to life, and a "bug" in that area would almost certainly cause severe problems in other areas, probably death. Cancer might be an example. And systems of many components tend to narrow the standard deviation of the composite. But that's just guessing.…
aging doesn't seem fundamental to life to me. There is known complex life that doesn't age. I expect age is a huge driver of evolution in many cases so it makes sense that most life has it.
Re: Ageing accelerates around age 50 ― some organs faster than others
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this argument only makes sense on the surface level. If it was the case that humans hit some hard limit to growth (perhaps running out of 'room' to grow, or losing the ability to process new energy, etc), then I think it could make sense to do this sort of 'graceful decommissioning' behavior, which we'd come to know as aging. But is there a hard limit we hit, aside from the aging process itself? None is obvio…
AFAIK most cells can only divide a limited number of times, because the dna gets shorter with every copy. There is a finite bit of padding at the end (that you're born with) and once that's used up through too many copies, the cell can no longer divide (supposedly).
but we can just make another human with new cell timespans? something doesn't add up. also, men without kids age slower but die early while men with kids age faster and live longer.
Re: Ageing accelerates around age 50 ― some organs faster than others
#97Re: Ageing accelerates around age 50 ― some organs faster than others
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
I weight trained until having a toddler and a new house at 50. 3 months later and I get up from a chair like I'm 75 and all my joints hurt.
Happened to me too. First 10 years I was a wreck.
Would recommend getting back on the horse asap, its a long way back if you leave it for to long.
Re: Ageing accelerates around age 50 ― some organs faster than others
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
This would be an optimistic scenario and introduce a possibility for the "scheduled gene program" to be controlled or turned off. The current thinking in the field seems to favour the idea that aging is a complex combination of programmed changes, stochastic damage, as well as various adaptations to help cope with the damage.
Menopause is also an obvious planned partial shutdown (vs males who can reproduce when they're 80) and we're no closer to "curing" it, turning it off.
I don't think there is much interest in stopping menopause. So you are right we can't cure it. But I don't think that's a good indication.
Re: Ageing accelerates around age 50 ― some organs faster than others
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 .
I don’t think I’m convinced of that. Most fitness measures saturate as you approach a limit. For example, you can build muscle mass rapidly in the first couple of years but it slows dramatically as you approach your genetic limit. It only takes a few years of consistent training to get to that asymptotic level. So on that measure, you can basically “catch up” to your hypothetical “always trained” self.
While you might not be able to get to the exact same level of fitness as if you had trained for years, I think you can get fairly close. And without a doubt, you can drastically improve from wherever you’re starting.