Live data from Hacker News

What Is Aging? Most Scientists Still Get It Wrong

joshmitteldorf.scienceblog.com

11–20 of 137 posts

Re: What Is Aging? Most Scientists Still Get It Wrong

#11
Aging is encoded in our DNA with a purpose, if we will be able to fully understand how DNA works me might be able to partially disable it but will we want to? maybe when we will reach that level of knowledge we will also have the wisdom to understand the implications.

Re: What Is Aging? Most Scientists Still Get It Wrong

#12
"These compromises have been made up ad hoc to avoid the inference that aging evolved to benefit the community, not the individual."

Isn't this just group selection again? Has this view become more accepted nowadays among biologists? There are very compelling arguments against it.

Maybe a better way to phrase it would be to say that aging has evolved to benefit the offspring, which traditionally happened to make up a significant part of the community?

Re: What Is Aging? Most Scientists Still Get It Wrong

#13
post #11

Aging is encoded in our DNA with a purpose, if we will be able to fully understand how DNA works me might be able to partially disable it but will we want to? maybe when we will reach that level of knowledge we will also have the wisdom to understand the implications.

Do you want to die?

Of course we will want to. I am sure there will be lots of side effects, but almost anything beats dying.

Re: What Is Aging? Most Scientists Still Get It Wrong

#14

This is truly the most amazing time to be alive (so far). No matter what repercussions the destruction of aging might have, it awes me that we talk of dramatically extended life and the colonization of the stars not only as something feasible, but even possible within the next century.

This is truly the most amazing time to be alive (so far).

If you're in the group of people privileged to have access to those innovations, yes. For everyone else it kind of sucks seeing what the elite get to play with.

Re: What Is Aging? Most Scientists Still Get It Wrong

#15
post #13
post #11

Aging is encoded in our DNA with a purpose, if we will be able to fully understand how DNA works me might be able to partially disable it but will we want to? maybe when we will reach that level of knowledge we will also have the wisdom to understand the implications.

Do you want to die? Of course we will want to. I am sure there will be lots of side effects, but almost anything beats dying.

> Do you want to die?

IMHO this is the wrong question to ask. As long as you continue to age, and your body degrades, you'll eventually not object to dying any more, because living isn't much fun.

The much more interesting question is: do you want to age beyond a certain point?

Re: What Is Aging? Most Scientists Still Get It Wrong

#16
post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you want to die? Of course we will want to. I am sure there will be lots of side effects, but almost anything beats dying.

> Do you want to die? IMHO this is the wrong question to ask. As long as you continue to age, and your body degrades, you'll eventually not object to dying any more, because living isn't much fun. The much more interesting question is: do you want to age beyond a certain point?

Then, can we dramatically slow down the body's natural degradation mechanisms, or even better, start reversing a few of them? That'd be a very good question to answer.

Re: What Is Aging? Most Scientists Still Get It Wrong

#17
post #13
post #11

Aging is encoded in our DNA with a purpose, if we will be able to fully understand how DNA works me might be able to partially disable it but will we want to? maybe when we will reach that level of knowledge we will also have the wisdom to understand the implications.

Do you want to die? Of course we will want to. I am sure there will be lots of side effects, but almost anything beats dying.

Do you want to live forever? In a world where everyone lives forever? I'm pretty sure most people will have had enough after the first million or so years.

Someone must have written sci-fi of this.

Re: What Is Aging? Most Scientists Still Get It Wrong

#18
post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you want to die? Of course we will want to. I am sure there will be lots of side effects, but almost anything beats dying.

> Do you want to die? IMHO this is the wrong question to ask. As long as you continue to age, and your body degrades, you'll eventually not object to dying any more, because living isn't much fun. The much more interesting question is: do you want to age beyond a certain point?

Not aging implies that you won't age beyond a certain point, or do you mean something different? Also, the question you ask is relevant even today with regular aging, and it's already hotly debated looking at euthanasia. I'm guessing euthanasia will have to be legalized if we ever do find a "cure" for aging.

Re: What Is Aging? Most Scientists Still Get It Wrong

#19
post #10
post #9

I wonder what are the currently best established DIY techniques to slow aging. I know low food intake could help, but what else?

There is nothing else. Basically, calorie restriction works, and nothing else does. I recommend Fight Aging! if you are interested. https://www.fightaging.org/faq/

I'm not so sure those are the only two. I'm fairly certain high dietary intake of various vegetables, fruits, and legumes over processed foods would probably greatly add to the life expectancy of regular people. Don't have a lot of hard evidence but I have relatives who outlived their brothers and sisters by 10-20 years because they just ate significantly healthier and moved around more.

Re: What Is Aging? Most Scientists Still Get It Wrong

#20
post #10
post #9

I wonder what are the currently best established DIY techniques to slow aging. I know low food intake could help, but what else?

There is nothing else. Basically, calorie restriction works, and nothing else does. I recommend Fight Aging! if you are interested. https://www.fightaging.org/faq/

> Basically, calorie restriction works, and nothing else does

We don't even know that for sure. There were two big studies in rhesus monkeys which disagreed on that.[1] Evidence from mice, where this idea originated, is dubious at best considering the mice most studies use.

[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/02/science/a-new-salvo-in-deb...

Post reply on HN