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

New research reveals longevity gains slowing, life expectancy of 100 unlikely

lafollette.wisc.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 535 posts

Re: New research reveals longevity gains slowing, life expectancy of 100 unlikely

#371

Post by silver_silver »

ACCount37 wrote: post #276
DrBazza wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't forget that the recipient countries of immigrants are brain-draining the countries they're leaving. Arguably those motivated individuals are precisely those that should stay in their country and make it less 'bad'.

That's for them to decide, not you. I don't have enough cruelty in me to demand that someone should stay in Sudan and try to "fix" what's happening there.

The middle path is limiting (not ending) migration while actually trying to help these counties (in particular victims of one’s past colonial ambitions) through aid, investment, and free/subsidised education for their youth.

I say this as a someone who immigrated from a dangerous country to the first world.

The only way the current plan even approaches sustainability is if the brain drain on source nations is sufficient to keep them stuck and suffering. That should make it very clear that the humanitarian impact is a side effect and not the goal.

Re: New research reveals longevity gains slowing, life expectancy of 100 unlikely

#372

Post by ACCount37 »

Levitz wrote: post #357
ACCount37 wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's for them to decide, not you. I don't have enough cruelty in me to demand that someone should stay in Sudan and try to "fix" what's happening there.

Do you have enough cruelty to promote immigration, grabbing the best people a country has to offer, leaving it in the gutter?

That would be an upgrade, really.

Selecting "the best people" is the often-overlooked step. A lot of countries just want to import cheap labor and get easy economic growth today, damned be the consequences.

Re: New research reveals longevity gains slowing, life expectancy of 100 unlikely

#373

Post by wongarsu »

bradley13 wrote: post #359

Genetics required. Natural evolution has zero interest in old people, so there has been no evolutionary pressure to extend lifespan. Possibly even the opposite. We could apply that pressure, either through selective breeding over generations, or through direct genetic modification. Maybe we aren't quite there yet, but it won't be long. Experiments on insects with selective breeding have easily tripled lifespans. How…

In modern society there is little evolutionary pressure to extend lifespan, but that's a very recent phenomenon. If my parents watch my kids and do the cooking so I have more time to hunt or work the field that improves the survival chances of my children, and my children share 25% of their DNA with their grandparents. The grandparents living a long productive life is good for the survival of their grandchildren, and thus for the reproduction of their DNA, causing evolutionary pressure. It's mostly the unproductive years (dementia, debilitating illness, severely limited mobility) that are a detriment.

You could argue the same forces are still at play at societal levels. People around the age of 50 have a vast economic impact, having accumulated experience and relationships over many decades. And the average age of soldiers in Ukraine is somewhere around 40-45. If one country had a population that stayed at the mental and physical fitness of a 50 year old for another 20 years that would be a drastic advantage, both in terms of skilled workforce and in terms of military capability. Even just another 5 productive years are a big deal in a world where the time you spend productively working is about twice the time you spend "growing up" and getting an education. And my nation doing well means my children can afford more children, spreading my DNA, making it favored by evolution

Re: New research reveals longevity gains slowing, life expectancy of 100 unlikely

#374

Post by Balgair »

oezi wrote: post #149
simianparrot wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But immigration is the only thing that can replenish their workforce. Unchecked immigration of people who do not share the majority of the destination’s cultural values leads to a monoculture that is terrible for everyone. Multiculturalism doesn’t work when everyone’s culture is equal everywhere. And unless it wasn’t obvious, I firmly believe in multiculturalism, but I believe we (here in Europe in particular) have…

As another European I don't understand your argument because Europe has seen so much internal migration over the hundreds of years that it is weird to argue it is leading to monoculture. Also unchecked migration to Europe is down to 200.000 people per year so less than 0.1% of population.

>it is weird to argue it is leading to monoculture.

As an outside that has visited your large continent a fair few times, yeah, you guys are pretty monocultural.

I know that such a statement is just literal nonsense to y'all and quite unbelievable.

And yes, you all have a different flag, and a different language.

But the day-to-day details are very similar.

Every day y'all wake up at pretty much the same time, everyone eats a light breakfast of some pastry or another and a lot of caffeine and nicotine. Then off to work on pretty much the exact same road in the same little cars. 10 rolls about and y'all fuck off to grab an espresso (Yes UK, you too, the tea thing is BS, you love coffee, we all see it) and a cigarette. You raff about for 30 min. Then back to work for a bit. Lunch rolls on by and it's carb and protein time for the men and salads for the women. By this I mean potatoes and something with a french sauce. More caffeine and nicotine. The afternoon is then set for either sleeping, or pretending not to (I love this about y'all). Work fucks off at about 4-5 depending, nothing on Fridays though. You all then fuck off to a place to get more nicotine and then alcohol or a few hours. Dinner comes after round 2-3, more carbs and meat this time, maybe pasta. Half cocked, you all end up in the same small homes. (yes, yes, but everyone is like this too!. No, you all do it the same way at the same pace, all of you.)

It's all the same sports (football), the same seasons, the same lives. Yes, you all think that your life is so different for your neighbor, but I'm telling you, the pace, the styles, the food, the drinks, the drugs of choice, the houses, the children, Europeans may not be brothers, but you are very close cousins. The rest of the world think you all mad that you hate each other so much when you're living in the same house, acting the same way. It's the same Euopean culture.

Re: New research reveals longevity gains slowing, life expectancy of 100 unlikely

#375

Post by abricot »

melling wrote: post #366
lemoncookiechip wrote: post #347

I find it a tough sell to add another 20 years to life expectancy, considering that by the time you reach 70, most people are already in decline (some worse than others), and the drop from 70 to 80 tends to be steep for many. Those who make it past 80 into their 90s or even 100s often aren’t living particularly fulfilling lives, if you can even call it living at that point. Losing your vision, your hearing, your mobi…

The president of the United States is almost 80. Bernie Sanders is 83. The Stones are still touring, … Ed Thorpe is well into his 90s. Here’s an interview with him at 89. Seems quite healthy: https://youtu.be/CNvz91Jyzbg?si=VNj61A256ZOBM977 This 10 minutes deals directly with fitness and longevity: https://youtu.be/dzCpUbkC1dg?si=LqV-tUFyxyYMW0qC

Mentioning the president is a bit like saying the pope is old. They are both selected/elected old.

Re: New research reveals longevity gains slowing, life expectancy of 100 unlikely

#376

Post by 4gotunameagain »

whodidntante wrote: post #279
4gotunameagain wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apart from the complex topic of political complicity, I am talking about events and actions that the majority of the local population supported. I would of course have to reveal quite a bit about me in order to be more specific. But even if I were an immigrant to the US from Venezuela or any of the tens if not hundreds countries that the US destabilised, I would indeed think of the majority of US's population as comp…

There are plenty of countries to go to that are not complicit in your home countries issues if your issue is with the US. Russia and China have well above average lifestyles based on PPP. So do many South American countries, as well as Japan, and South Korea and other Asian countries. Also a number of countries in the middle east. Yes, I understand the US is a very very bad country. I am also a very very bad person b…

Oh rest assured, I am not in the US. I would never do that. I find the mentality there insufferable. The mentality that you laid bare in your comment. About the land of opportunity, as long as the cost is externalised.

Re: New research reveals longevity gains slowing, life expectancy of 100 unlikely

#377

Post by r_singh »

Eextra953 wrote: post #364
r_singh wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that mistrust is at its highest that it has been. Science and evidence have been used as political tools in the recent past... and it has started becoming clear to more and more people. Either that or to protect financial interests of some legacy chaebol... so people are losing faith. In my country people both believe and have some evidence that those that live in an orderly fashion, learn to be emotio…

No amount of good vibes, energy, or flow states are going to guarantee one lives to 100+.

For sure, they won’t guarantee being a centenarian but will increase the odds for it to happen in my opinion

The word forward escape is borrowed from author Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi which as I understand it means just doing what you like and is good for you both as opposed to doing what you like but is bad for you aka vices which he refers to as backward escapes.

Re: New research reveals longevity gains slowing, life expectancy of 100 unlikely

#378

Post by ACCount37 »

meeks wrote: post #358
lemoncookiechip wrote: post #347

I find it a tough sell to add another 20 years to life expectancy, considering that by the time you reach 70, most people are already in decline (some worse than others), and the drop from 70 to 80 tends to be steep for many. Those who make it past 80 into their 90s or even 100s often aren’t living particularly fulfilling lives, if you can even call it living at that point. Losing your vision, your hearing, your mobi…

I think this is a huge misconception and I don't think it works this way. have you heard people say 50 is the new 40, etc.? The same thing would work at older ages. Sure the last 10 years are a decline, but you are pushing those years out not adding more of them.

This. Expecting a "150 years lifespan" to look like "90 years of aging normally and then staying at 90 for another 60 years" is simply unrealistic.

The very reason you're expected to die in your 90s is that your body has decayed into a complete mess where nothing works properly anymore and every single capability reserve is at depletion. You die in old age because if you spend long enough at "one sliver away from the breaking point", statistics make going over it inevitable. Even a flu is a mild inconvenience to the young, but often lethal to the elderly.

To make it to the age of 150, you'd pretty much have to spend a lot more time as a healthy, well functioning adult.

Re: New research reveals longevity gains slowing, life expectancy of 100 unlikely

#379

Post by [deleted] »

ModernMech wrote: post #354
r_singh wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that mistrust is at its highest that it has been. Science and evidence have been used as political tools in the recent past... and it has started becoming clear to more and more people. Either that or to protect financial interests of some legacy chaebol... so people are losing faith. In my country people both believe and have some evidence that those that live in an orderly fashion, learn to be emotio…

> Science and evidence have been used as political tools for a while... and it has started becoming clear to more and more people. Yeah, they noticed when their lives kept getting longer and longer thanks to science and evidence-backed policy.

[deleted]

Re: New research reveals longevity gains slowing, life expectancy of 100 unlikely

#380

Post by lemoncookiechip »

melling wrote: post #366
lemoncookiechip wrote: post #347

I find it a tough sell to add another 20 years to life expectancy, considering that by the time you reach 70, most people are already in decline (some worse than others), and the drop from 70 to 80 tends to be steep for many. Those who make it past 80 into their 90s or even 100s often aren’t living particularly fulfilling lives, if you can even call it living at that point. Losing your vision, your hearing, your mobi…

The president of the United States is almost 80. Bernie Sanders is 83. The Stones are still touring, … Ed Thorpe is well into his 90s. Here’s an interview with him at 89. Seems quite healthy: https://youtu.be/CNvz91Jyzbg?si=VNj61A256ZOBM977 This 10 minutes deals directly with fitness and longevity: https://youtu.be/dzCpUbkC1dg?si=LqV-tUFyxyYMW0qC

People thought the President had died just yesterday because of how rapidly his health has declined since taking office in January. Bernie Sanders, for example, has had multiple health emergencies over the past few years.

Using a few famous people as examples is hardly a reliable metric. My aunt is still alive at 103 and will likely make it to 104 if nothing changes. She has fewer health problems than other family members in their 60s if you discount the fact that she’s basically blind, can't hear well, is stuck in a bed 24/7, and has severe dementia that prevents her from recalling things seconds after being told, aside from some specific memories from her youth. Meanwhile, almost all of her children died under very poor health conditions in their 70s and 80s. Her oldest daughter looked like she was a corpse at 80.

Some people just get lucky with their genes, and it doesn’t always pass on to their children or grand-children.

PS: For reference, she had 11 children, almost all dead now while she's alive and can't recall their names or ever having children.

Post reply on HN