Post: #126

I remember this song from my childhood:





Can you imagine when this race is won?
Turn our golden faces into the sun

It's so hard to get old without a cause
I don't want to perish like a fading horse
Youth is like diamonds in the sun
And diamonds are forever

So many adventures couldn't happen today,
So many songs we forgot to play
So many dreams swinging out of the blue
We'll let them come true

Forever young,
I want to be forever young

Post: #127

Cool invention, but some of the fucking baby boomers need to roll out first.

Post: #128

Relevant to the thread this an example of showing that these ideas are starting to become widespread. These guys are just a couple of stoner comedians, they do however as comedians often do make some great social observations and cover many events that will come to pass in the future and how the general public will react.

As someone who is a closer follower of this futuristic mindset (next 20 years) than most I start laughing at myself when I get pulled into stuff like Trump, feminism, where is the city with the best women?

Having $ for genetic enhancements, body repair, futuristic automation tools and robots will make all major current events utterly trivial.

Post: #129

(04-22-2015 09:50 AM)R Smoov Wrote:  Cool invention, but some of the fucking baby boomers need to roll out first.

Yes, because your generation is significantly different than us lol.

Post: #130

Post: #131

It would be insane of cryo body freezing became perfected as longevity interventions just start coming out, but aren't yet good enough.

If you knew longevity methods would be perfected in the next 40 years, would you take a risk and freeze yourself if you are older to avoid death until they come out? Talk about a decision!

Post: #132

I volunteer at a medical clinic sometimes, and as a result I get to see what old age really means. It's sobering to see people walk in, often people not much older than 40, who at first appear to be in relatively good shape, but then start to talk and detail their ills and issues.

The joints, man, the joints really scare the shit out of me. Granted, this is an outpatient clinic and the people who go there walk in under their own power, which means I don't get to see terminal cancer, end-stage renal or heart failure, or putrefying digestive systems. But out of the things I do get to see, the joint issues really take the wind out of my sails and cause me to mind the biomechanics of my movements and posture for a good hour after I leave. The there are the bad cases of varicose veins, the issues with urination, the skin problems, and that's just talking about the slim people who don't suffer from diabetes and other complications of being fat fucks.

I'm still in my mid 20's and I feel appreciative of the seeming perfection of this machine that carries my brain and its hopes and ambitions through the world. Just the ability to break into a mad sprint or launch myself over chest-high fences is priceless. I like my unlined face and perfectly lubricated joints. I like the absence of even a hint of back-pain. I like that I can sit for 5 hours in front of a computer doing a wiki-loop and quickly understand and assimilate material I have encountered for the first time. And on it goes.

What I don't like is the certitude that with each passing second, entropy is slowly but surely going about its work of destroying this perfect machine. Already I have millions of fewer neurons than I did at age 20. I haven't felt any changes in my joints, but I have no doubt that a thorough MRI would reveal imperfections in the cartilage of the knees, ankles and shoulders that will slowly and gradually wreak havoc, like a grain of sand in a gearbox, until 10 years from now I will feel them when I straighten out my leg or land from a height. I cannot see it or feel it, but I know that there is now plaque in my arteries and veins. The very DNA in my cells has deteriorated over the hundreds of cycles of growth and division, increasing my chances of developing the tumors that can arise at any time and put an end to the best laid plans.

There are certainly things I look forward to about getting older, but they revolve around the accumulation of money and accomplishments through the passing of time, not the transformation from my current physical manifestation to a frail troll followed by death. There is literally nothing I would want more of on this planet than more youth. I certainly hope "they" discover a way to stop and roll back this terrible process by which we slowly decay into ugly shadows of our former selves. Even if only a few will get to benefit, I'd rather have the chance to work my way up to being one of those few than the certitude of dying regardless of my worldly accomplishments.

Post: #133

(07-27-2015 01:07 AM)Fast Eddie Wrote:  I volunteer at a medical clinic sometimes, and as a result I get to see what old age really means. It's sobering to see people walk in, often people not much older than 40, who at first appear to be in relatively good shape, but then start to talk and detail their ills and issues.I'm still in my mid 20's and I feel appreciative of the seeming perfection of this machine that carries my brain and its hopes and ambitions through the world. Just the ability to break into a mad sprint or launch myself over chest-high fences is priceless. I like my unlined face and perfectly lubricated joints. I like the absence of even a hint of back-pain. I like that I can sit for 5 hours in front of a computer doing a wiki-loop and quickly understand and assimilate material I have encountered for the first time. And on it goes.

Robert Kiyosaki, despite being a fucking con man, had one good exercise to make young people care about their retirement funds: he would have them get a piece of string, loop one end around their neck (not tightening), then loop the other end around their waist at such a length that the string connecting the two loops went taut. Then he had them walk around for five minutes with that on. At the end of that exercise, he would say to them (supposedly): "That's what old age feels like."

It proved rather effective at making people think about old age.

I once spoke to a physiotherapist about elite athletes and whatnot. He outright snorted at me. "Yeah, you see those guys on the TV screens until they hit 28 or 30 or so. Then you never see them again. But I see them. I see them a lot as their bodies pay them back for all the damage they did to them in their youth."

Having said that, this is even more reason to do, and keep up, physical fitness including weight training. I have a sedentary job, and I had occasional lower back pains -- until I took up lifting and started doing exercise regimes that included working those muscles. Over a month or two, those back pains vanished -- most likely because I was now exercising those muscles (and others) properly. Building the muscles helps to protect the very joints you're worried about -- so long as you do the exercises correctly, work the muscles correctly, and don't overdo it.

I would recommend to anybody, before getting into serious physical exercise, to get some solid advice about good form. Getting all the pussy in the world thanks to having chiselled abs is going to mean fuck all if you have a couple of discs permanently fucked.

Post: #134

A good question to ask is: if there is a paradigm shift in aging, what can we do now to be on top of the curve when it.happens?

Certainly entertainment will be huge. As will education.

Post: #135

There are many opportunities now and in the next years to be on top of the waves
of technology and medicine curing aging and rejuvenating human bodies.

Of course at this moment it is just gathering momentum, after Mark Zuckerberg as well said that he is interested in getting humans to live forever:




Also a very new video shows the possibilities of curing aging:

Post: #136

(07-27-2015 06:21 AM)storm Wrote:  A good question to ask is: if there is a paradigm shift in aging, what can we do now to be on top of the curve when it.happens?

Certainly entertainment will be huge. As will education.

Get enough money now so it works for you until there is no more real economy.

I wouldn't want to be able to live to let's say 150 and to still work and worry about bills.

Investments.

Post: #137

^ I am happy that video mentions SENS.

Google and Human Longevity Inc. no matter how noble their intentions, are still private companies.

Out of any technology on the planet this should be public knowledge every step of the way to increase public awareness get huge government funding as soon as possible.

Post: #138

(07-27-2015 08:12 PM)Travesty Wrote:  ^ I am happy that video mentions SENS.

Google and Human Longevity Inc. no matter how noble their intentions, are still private companies.

Out of any technology on the planet this should be public knowledge every step of the way to increase public awareness get huge government funding as soon as possible.

I don't agree. I think whenever the government sticks their nose in things like this it fucks it all up. The government panders to the masses and this specialized research should be led and controlled by specialists the creme de la creme away from any political "democratic" influence.

And Google doesn't need government money. In fact, it's the other way around, the government needs Googles money.

Post: #139

Zuckerberg's question on the mathematics of human relationships is an interesting one, and one which I've considered at length for a few years now. But the way he put it...most likely he is basically asking...how do I understand game in terms of mathematics...which I think is a passive aggressive way of saying...how do I get my beast of an asian wife to put out...with only chalk and slate...

Regarding them being private companies... do you really think that if someone figured out the secret to immortality, anything short of nation state level security will save them from corporate espionage? Even then the clock is ticking. Let them stay private. It will get the job done faster, and then someone will put it on the pirate bay or at least auction it on the DeepWeb™.

Post: #140

(07-27-2015 09:05 PM)storm Wrote:  Zuckerberg's question on the mathematics of human relationships is an interesting one, and one which I've considered at length for a few years now. But the way he put it...most likely he is basically asking...how do I understand game in terms of mathematics...which I think is a passive aggressive way of saying...how do I get my beast of an asian wife to put out...with only chalk and slate...

Regarding them being private companies... do you really think that if someone figured out the secret to immortality, anything short of nation state level security will save them from corporate espionage? Even then the clock is ticking. Let them stay private. It will get the job done faster, and then someone will put it on the pirate bay or at least auction it on the DeepWeb™.

I noticed that too in Zuckerbergs response.

I think being able to answer social dynamics in terms of mathematics is the fantasy of nerds everywhere. However, I think relationships defies mathematics and Artificial Intelligence. Unless AI is somehow able to create emotions, that is.

Post: #141

(07-27-2015 09:04 PM)monster Wrote:  And Google doesn't need government money. In fact, it's the other way around, the government needs Googles money.

Me too I wish that Calico would do more for curing aging.

You would think humans would be a little more concerned about the greatest threat to their well-being: death.

But it takes guys like this to raise awareness to an otherwise sleepwalking population resigned to degenerating into a pile of wrinkles and misery.

Post: #142

^ I think people think they need the dramatic shot clock of life.

They need that to get out of bed in the morning, that rush to get out. I have always been the opposite in mind. That shock clock approach more than anything makes me want to relax and get away from it to enjoy life.

Post: #143

Post: #144

(07-27-2015 01:07 AM)Fast Eddie Wrote:  I volunteer at a medical clinic sometimes, and as a result I get to see what old age really means. It's sobering to see people walk in, often people not much older than 40, who at first appear to be in relatively good shape, but then start to talk and detail their ills and issues.

The joints, man, the joints really scare the shit out of me. Granted, this is an outpatient clinic and the people who go there walk in under their own power, which means I don't get to see terminal cancer, end-stage renal or heart failure, or putrefying digestive systems. But out of the things I do get to see, the joint issues really take the wind out of my sails and cause me to mind the biomechanics of my movements and posture for a good hour after I leave. The there are the bad cases of varicose veins, the issues with urination, the skin problems, and that's just talking about the slim people who don't suffer from diabetes and other complications of being fat fucks.

I'm still in my mid 20's and I feel appreciative of the seeming perfection of this machine that carries my brain and its hopes and ambitions through the world. Just the ability to break into a mad sprint or launch myself over chest-high fences is priceless. I like my unlined face and perfectly lubricated joints. I like the absence of even a hint of back-pain. I like that I can sit for 5 hours in front of a computer doing a wiki-loop and quickly understand and assimilate material I have encountered for the first time. And on it goes.

What I don't like is the certitude that with each passing second, entropy is slowly but surely going about its work of destroying this perfect machine. Already I have millions of fewer neurons than I did at age 20. I haven't felt any changes in my joints, but I have no doubt that a thorough MRI would reveal imperfections in the cartilage of the knees, ankles and shoulders that will slowly and gradually wreak havoc, like a grain of sand in a gearbox, until 10 years from now I will feel them when I straighten out my leg or land from a height. I cannot see it or feel it, but I know that there is now plaque in my arteries and veins. The very DNA in my cells has deteriorated over the hundreds of cycles of growth and division, increasing my chances of developing the tumors that can arise at any time and put an end to the best laid plans.

There are certainly things I look forward to about getting older, but they revolve around the accumulation of money and accomplishments through the passing of time, not the transformation from my current physical manifestation to a frail troll followed by death. There is literally nothing I would want more of on this planet than more youth. I certainly hope "they" discover a way to stop and roll back this terrible process by which we slowly decay into ugly shadows of our former selves. Even if only a few will get to benefit, I'd rather have the chance to work my way up to being one of those few than the certitude of dying regardless of my worldly accomplishments.

I am at 40's doorstep and I am here to tell you that eating right, working out, getting a lot of sleep , and backing off the drugs did wonders until I went back to professional school at 38. Before this I was the strongest I had ever been but once medical school started I had to pull 12 hour days and could not work out like I wanted and it has been hell on my body. I know that you are young and your brain does not stop developing until you are 25-26 so you are good until then, after that keep using your brain and it will continue to function well. Recovery just takes longer the older you get, so don't fall off in the first place and you will be good.

Post: #145

(06-08-2014 06:31 PM)speakeasy Wrote:  Part of what makes life valuable is knowing it will end.

That´s not true at all.

It took 6 billions of years for you to exist, to be alive, to experience the miracle of being alive.

This is what is valuable.

on the opposite - death or eternal nothingness / void after you are dead... losing everything, all your memories, all your emotions, - that is sincerely the worst thing,

and as long as you are careful when you cross the street in order to avoid getting killed by a car,
you should also fight against death through aging, as idealistic and as unusual
as it may sound

Post: #146

Ok so here is Aubrey absolutely intellectually trouncing this nutrition scientist. Her focus is on nutritional improvement to extend lifespan which unless you are a fatass or smoker is pretty much a heap of bullshit.

The main fact is for all you health nuts out there is that if you:

Just stay thin, don't smoke, not malnourished

vs.

Exercise with discipline and adequate recovery, eat every fruit, vegetable, mineral, supplement possible, plenty of sleep, massages, red wine

On average you *may* get 2-3 years at maximum more on your life on average. Yes you will feel better day to day. You will most definitely not live much longer if at all. Kael and blueberries will not save you much time. Genetics and metabolism which you cannot stop determine your destiny.

She does however bring to light the important point which I never knew, by doing cryotherapy or if you are cheap ice baths, ice showers you can lower your inflammatory levels which help you age more slowly, on the opposite end it weakens your response to infectious disease such as the flu or pneunomia, especially in old age. So it is a personal trade off to take. There is still much more research to be done on this, more people are becoming fans. Joe Rogan touts going to cryotherapy 5 days a week. Looks like this is good to do when younger and chance for infectious disease killing you is much lower. Still it seems like this method also would not add a significant amount of time. I take cold showers myself and they feel great afterwards, big fan.







The only real solution is cellular intervention and will not come from nutrition or exercise.

Metabolism is a bitch. Breathing oxygen kills you.

Post: #147

Interesting article about attempts to get the FDA to approve trials aimed at delaying aging:

http://news.sciencemag.org/biology/2015/...back-aging

Quote:Barzilai now believes the answer is to design a drug trial that, rather than targeting aging per se, tries instead to delay the onset of “comorbidities”: the chronic diseases whose incidence rises sharply as people get older. “Basically, I think the FDA will be more willing to accept something called ‘comorbidities’ than it is to accept something called ‘aging,’” Barzilai says. “Even in our mind, in my mind, aging is not a disease,” he adds. “It’s, you know, humanity! You’re born, you die, you age in between … I’m kind of saying, ‘I don’t care what they want to call it, if I can delay it.’”

The comorbidity strategy is key to a concept known as the “longevity dividend,” first proposed by a group of public policy and health care experts in 2006. The idea is that slowing down the process of aging, even modestly, would have enormous benefits for quality of life and the economics of health care. “We’re not arguing—and we’ve never argued—that we’re trying to achieve life extension,” says Olshansky, who has pushed the concept while criticizing some of the more outlandish claims in the aging field, such as British gerontologist Aubrey de Grey’s prediction that human life spans of 1000 years are possible. “We’ll probably live a little longer if we succeed, but that’s not the goal,” Olshansky says. “The goal is the extension of the period of healthy life.”

"I'd hate myself if I had that kind of attitude, if I were that weak." - Arnold

Post: #148

"End? No, the journey doesn't end here. Death is just another path, one that we all must take. The grey rain-curtain of this world rolls back, and all turns to silver glass, and then you see it." - [/i]Gandalf The White

Post: #149

NY Times Article: First Big Scientific Meeting at Harvard Medical School To Create First Synthesized Human Genome

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/14/scienc....html?_r=1

A human genome is about 3 billion DNA letters long. Right now the technology can reliably pair up to 200 in sequence quickly for production. That technology to splice and pair DNA is improving exponentially though.

They have made a synthesized bacteria genome that overtook its host cell at 1M pairs, and are working on yeast which will be 12M currently.

---


Scientists are now contemplating the fabrication of a human genome, meaning they would use chemicals to manufacture all the DNA contained in human chromosomes.

The prospect is spurring both intrigue and concern in the life sciences community because it might be possible, such as through cloning, to use a synthetic genome to create human beings without biological parents.

While the project is still in the idea phase, and also involves efforts to improve DNA synthesis in general, it was discussed at a closed-door meeting on Tuesday at Harvard Medical School in Boston. The nearly 150 attendees were told not to contact the news media or to post on Twitter during the meeting.

Organizers said the project could have a big scientific payoff and would be a follow-up to the original Human Genome Project, which was aimed at reading the sequence of the three billion chemical letters in the DNA blueprint of human life. The new project, by contrast, would involve not reading, but rather writing the human genome — synthesizing all three billion units from chemicals.

But such an attempt would raise numerous ethical issues. Could scientists create humans with certain kinds of traits, perhaps people born and bred to be soldiers? Or might it be possible to make copies of specific people?

“Would it be O.K., for example, to sequence and then synthesize Einstein’s genome?” Drew Endy, a bioengineer at Stanford, and Laurie Zoloth, a bioethicist at Northwestern University, wrote in an essay criticizing the proposed project. “If so how many Einstein genomes should be made and installed in cells, and who would get to make them?”

Dr. Endy, though invited, said he deliberately did not attend the meeting at Harvard because it was not being opened to enough people and was not giving enough thought to the ethical implications of the work.

George Church, a professor of genetics at Harvard Medical School and an organizer of the proposed project, said there had been a misunderstanding. The project was not aimed at creating people, just cells, and would not be restricted to human genomes, he said. Rather it would aim to improve the ability to synthesize DNA in general, which could be applied to various animals, plants and microbes.

“They’re painting a picture which I don’t think represents the project,” Dr. Church said in an interview.

He said the meeting was closed to the news media, and people were asked not to tweet because the project organizers, in an attempt to be transparent, had submitted a paper to a scientific journal. They were therefore not supposed to discuss the idea publicly before publication. He and other organizers said ethical aspects have been amply discussed since the beginning.

The project was initially called HGP2: The Human Genome Synthesis Project, with HGP referring to the Human Genome Project. An invitation to the meeting at Harvard said that the primary goal “would be to synthesize a complete human genome in a cell line within a period of 10 years.”

But by the time the meeting was held, the name had been changed to “HGP-Write: Testing Large Synthetic Genomes in Cells.”

The project does not yet have funding, Dr. Church said, though various companies and foundations would be invited to contribute, and some have indicated interest. The federal government will also be asked. A spokeswoman for the National Institutes of Health declined to comment, saying the project was in too early a stage.

Besides Dr. Church, the organizers include Jef Boeke, director of the institute for systems genetics at NYU Langone Medical Center, and Andrew Hessel, a self-described futurist who works at the Bay Area software company Autodesk and who first proposed such a project in 2012.

Scientists and companies can now change the DNA in cells, for example, by adding foreign genes or changing the letters in the existing genes. This technique is routinely used to make drugs, such as insulin for diabetes, inside genetically modified cells, as well as to make genetically modified crops. And scientists are now debating the ethics of new technology that might allow genetic changes to be made in embryos.

But synthesizing a gene, or an entire genome, would provide the opportunity to make even more extensive changes in DNA.

For instance, companies are now using organisms like yeast to make complex chemicals, like flavorings and fragrances. That requires adding not just one gene to the yeast, like to make insulin, but numerous genes in order to create an entire chemical production process within the cell. With that much tinkering needed, it can be easier to synthesize the DNA from scratch.

Right now, synthesizing DNA is difficult and error-prone. Existing techniques can reliably make strands that are only about 200 base pairs long, with the base pairs being the chemical units in DNA. A single gene can be hundreds or thousands of base pairs long. To synthesize one of those, multiple 200-unit segments have to be spliced together.

But the cost and capabilities are rapidly improving. Dr. Endy of Stanford, who is a co-founder of a DNA synthesis company called Gen9, said the cost of synthesizing genes has plummeted from $4 per base pair in 2003 to 3 cents now. But even at that rate, the cost for three billion letters would be $90 million. He said if costs continued to decline at the same pace, that figure could reach $100,000 in 20 years.

J. Craig Venter, the genetic scientist, synthesized a bacterial genome consisting of about a million base pairs. The synthetic genome was inserted into a cell and took control of that cell. While his first synthetic genome was mainly a copy of an existing genome, Dr. Venter and colleagues this year synthesized a more original bacterial genome, about 500,000 base pairs long.

Dr. Boeke is leading an international consortium that is synthesizing the genome of yeast, which consists of about 12 million base pairs. The scientists are making changes, such as deleting stretches of DNA that do not have any function, in an attempt to make a more streamlined and stable genome.

But the human genome is more than 200 times as large as that of yeast and it is not clear if such a synthesis would be feasible.

Jeremy Minshull, chief executive of DNA2.0, a DNA synthesis company, questioned if the effort would be worth it.

“Our ability to understand what to build is so far behind what we can build,” said Dr. Minshull, who was invited to the meeting at Harvard but did not attend. “I just don’t think that being able to make more and more and more and cheaper and cheaper and cheaper is going to get us the understanding we need.”

Post: #150

Interesting Craig Venter talk on YouTube he is talking about building synthetic life, it is very dry - this is the Einstein of genetics though so I forgive his plain delivery.

They are providing synthetic cells that replicate themselves out to lab students all over the world to have a contest to add working parts to the cells to reenact evolution. No joke. Recreating life out of life.

Some examples in video: reducing tumors in young boy from cells taken and fixing mutations and injecting back into him, being able to screen for cancer with an MRI and no biopsy needed. Catches symptomless cancers before it a tumor can grow too big and you won't know until it is too late.

Start at 8:28 where it gets more interesting.




Not sure how I never posted Aubrey's interview with Joe Rogan over a year ago: