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

531–535 of 535 posts

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

#531

Post by ecb_penguin »

exe34 wrote: post #337
ecb_penguin wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Do you believe this limit on lifespan is a uniquely human condition? or do you believe that it's impossible for any animal whatsoever to have a long lifespan (let's say 400 years for the sake of argument here).

> Do you believe this limit on lifespan is a uniquely human condition

No

> or do you believe that it's impossible for any animal whatsoever to have a long lifespan

Let's pick an arbitrary timeframe and declare that as long

No, I don't think anything is impossible when you pick dates "for the sake of argument"

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

#532

Post by exe34 »

ecb_penguin wrote: post #531
exe34 wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you believe this limit on lifespan is a uniquely human condition? or do you believe that it's impossible for any animal whatsoever to have a long lifespan (let's say 400 years for the sake of argument here).

> Do you believe this limit on lifespan is a uniquely human condition No > or do you believe that it's impossible for any animal whatsoever to have a long lifespan Let's pick an arbitrary timeframe and declare that as long No, I don't think anything is impossible when you pick dates "for the sake of argument"

if you claim to think that 4x your current max-ish lifespan isn't long, then you're not having an argument in good faith, are you?

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

#533

Post by whodidntante »

4gotunameagain wrote: post #500
whodidntante wrote: post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US has a lot of history to deal with - genocide of Native Americans, slavery, treatment of women, to name a few. A number of horrible wars since the aftermath of WW2. We are also going through significant challenges right now - social, political, economic, foreign relationships. We may or may not survive as a country. We may have a positive or adverse effect on the rest of the world as we go through what we must…

Maybe you feel the need to equate everyone in order to feel better with your complicity, but it is simply not true. Every empire has committed atrocities, sure. Not every country or ethnic group though. Some have been historically non aggressive and grossly mistreated by greedy emperors, conquerors and politicians. "Europe" has nothing to account for. Western Europe ? Sure.

I do not make excuses for what the US did/does, I acknowledge it. Nor do I minimize what it has done or is doing because others have done similar/worse. It is you who singles out US and Western Europe as bad, and make excuses for everyone else.

Eastern Europe is also "complicit", Eastern Europe countries have committed genocide and ethnic cleansing, and have continued to do so even recently.

The entire middle east is "complicit", and it is currently paying for the sins of 1200 years of empire that only ended 100 years ago.

Maybe you come from a small country that has never been part of an empire or has never been "complicit" in such crimes, but has been historically suppressed and taken advantage of. If so, I sympathize. I come from a combination of people who have been enslaved for centuries and people who have been historically kept under apartheid, ethnically cleansed, or simply killed for who they are.

Am I "complicit" ? My parents and ancestors certainly were not. Maybe I am simply for living in the US and enjoying its benefits. I do have to live somewhere.

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

#534

Post by nradov »

estearum wrote: post #519
nradov wrote: post #418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Several people in the Netherlands have died through MAID who had only psychiatric conditions with no serious physical problems. And these were not people mired in poverty and addiction who were failed by society. We can argue the merits of particular cases but many people would consider that an abuse. https://www.theguardian.com/society/article/2024/may/16/dutc... https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/fulla…

Why is a psychiatric problem less "deserving" of MAID than a physical problem?

It's not a matter of "deserving" but rather the greater potential for abuse. Most psychiatric conditions have no objective signs and so diagnosis depends largely on observed symptoms, which are often patient reported. Most of those psychiatric conditions can be treated to an extent, or patients can learn to manage them: they aren't comparable to something like untreatable stage-4 cancer.

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

#535

Post by nradov »

r_singh wrote: post #499
mcswell wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People who do live long and well, chose the right parents.

DNA is conditioned too, it’s not immutable. Parents hand us probabilities, not fixed outcomes.

DNA is immutable (absent technologies such as CRISPR). But gene expression is impacted by many factors.
Post reply on HN