Live data from Hacker News

Naked Mole Rat’s Longevity Gene Gives Mice a Longer Life

scienceswitch.com

71–74 of 74 posts

Re: Naked Mole Rat’s Longevity Gene Gives Mice a Longer Life

#71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Arguably longevity may not be very meaningfully beneficial if you have a slim chance of getting old in the first place. You also must consider human reproductive design where eggs aren't produced on demand.

Ah, that's a good one, yeah. So you need a lack of natural predators and stable environment. That's true about reproduction as well, so evolutionary fitness of longevity favors males, but not, necessarily females after menopause. Part of human longevity may also be to extend female fertility...if women want that!

Menopause and longevity are not necessarily at odds: see the Grandmother hypothesis.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grandmother_hypothesis

Re: Naked Mole Rat’s Longevity Gene Gives Mice a Longer Life

#72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who said anything about infinite cancer free lives? Some animals live longer than us. Many of them have lower cancer rates than us too. Seems like a good idea to investigate the possibility of having longer and healthier lives.

Those animals (e.g. tortoises, lobsters) with longer lives combined with less cancer have significantly lower metabolisms and a far less ... intense ... lifestyle. Higher cellular respiration introduces higher chances for mutation / inflammation / cell damage. Likewise, high rates of cellular reproduction do the same. Every incidence of that is a roll of the dice for cancer. Extend the lifetime, and you will for sure…

It is naive to think that human biology has already found the globally optimal trade off between longevity, cancer and metabolism.

Sure we don't understand it all yet, but there's no harm in trying to.

Re: Naked Mole Rat’s Longevity Gene Gives Mice a Longer Life

#73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, that's a good one, yeah. So you need a lack of natural predators and stable environment. That's true about reproduction as well, so evolutionary fitness of longevity favors males, but not, necessarily females after menopause. Part of human longevity may also be to extend female fertility...if women want that!

Menopause and longevity are not necessarily at odds: see the Grandmother hypothesis. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grandmother_hypothesis

Aaaah, that's cool! That makes sense.

It's amazing what you can explain with evolution. I wonder how much of it is real and how much of it is, "well, it sounds like it makes sense."

But this definitely makes sense.

I'm not sure how you could explain "career woman" tho, who chooses not to have kids. Tho I'm sure there's like a civilizational advantage to that behavior (aside from the obvious "economic" ones).

I suppose an argument could be made that, people prefer other people who share similar genes, so a powerful woman who rises in the business world, can then favor those with whom she shares genes (and increase their reproductive fitness, if not her own directly), thereby increasing the survivability of their offspring. The same could be said for a man, however. I don't think that makes a difference. In a sense, those who eschew their direct line to accrue worldly power may end up benefiting their "genes" in a different way to those who reproduce conventionally.

Not to take a negative slant at all, but humorously, a sort of post-modernist "deconstructed" nepotism, I suppose, haha!

What was Fukuyama's argument in end of history, again? I don't know, but I suppose at some point you get an "end of evolution" where civilization takes over and there's no obvious "reproductive fitness" any more to explain behaviors, it's more like "civilizational fitness". But, looking at the above, it seems that our genes may run rings around such suppositions already! Our clever genes! So very selfish!

One note in your link: I saw It also fails to explain the detrimental effects of losing ovarian follicular activity but I disagree, I think that physical decline provides opportunities for relatives to provide care, which likely increases social bonds, and enhances the Grandmother's "genetic nurturing" Effect. So if we assume the original hypothesis is true, physical decline would be a development that supports and enhances that effect, and so likely to occur. A truly noble sacrifice, on the part of the Grandmother, and all at the hands of the selfish genes, haha!

Re: Naked Mole Rat’s Longevity Gene Gives Mice a Longer Life

#74
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ignore that response, theyre just being a jerk. There are other mammals who live much longer than humans. Evolution optimized for continuation of the species, not longevity of the individual. So there is absolutely optimization room for increasing human lifespan.

> There are other mammals who live much longer than humans. This didn't ring true to me so I did a bit of reading. AFAICT there's one[0] species of mammal that can live much longer than us. We're at least tied for second-longest lifespan of all mammals. 0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bowhead_whale

Therr are multiple whale species that live 100+.

Also take into account that human lifespan in the wild without medical tech is ~40

Post reply on HN