Originally Posted by dizzybomb
With the help of science and medicine, we have already increased the average age of death in males and females. I guess that number will keep increasing as long as we keep investing in science.
-----
To clarify, I do think there will be an eventual limit to our age. I just don't know when.
I believe the Hayflick limit puts that upper limit at around 120-130 years. Obviously there's going to be outliers, but for the most part that's going to be the most that human cells are capable of dividing without external intervention/engineering.
Originally Posted by scorpionma
if you are big enough u would understand what i said
Sorry, but when a document contradicts itself in numerous places, I find myself a little disinclined to believe it. Especially when it's purported to have come from a "higher power." I bet you're one of those people who believes that God wrote it, aren't you?
Unless you're talking about physical size. How big would my feet need to be before you believed me?
Last edited by hanz0; Feb 4, 2013 at 12:22 AM.
"i wish i could do that ken watanabe face where his eyes are really wide" -siku 2015
DONSELUKE, MASTER OF LAWSUIT
if you love america please sign this petition
B&B&B&
Originally Posted by hanz0
I believe the Hayflick limit puts that upper limit at around 120-130 years. Obviously there's going to be outliers, but for the most part that's going to be the most that human cells are capable of dividing without external intervention/engineering.
Sorry, but when a document contradicts itself in numerous places, I find myself a little disinclined to believe it. Especially when it's purported to have come from a "higher power." I bet you're one of those people who believes that God wrote it, aren't you?
Unless you're talking about physical size. How big would my feet need to be before you believed me?
those numbers could easily grow through the millenium.
I spelt narwhal wrong. DEAL WITH IT!
Originally Posted by ImmortalCow
There are various methods for bypassing the hayflick limit, so even though we know of the limitation, we are aware that it can be bypassed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immortalised_cell_line
Oh, sure, but bypassing the limit in vivo is where the challenge lies. Most of the current techniques for inducing immortality in a cell line wouldn't be so awesome if done to a person.
Originally Posted by Turtlenecks
Depends on how you define life. Kurzweil and other futurists reckon' that we'll live on indefinitely through our brains being copied/transferred into digital format. Technology's evolving at an almost asymptotic pace. Could happen.
The Futurist perspective is interesting (though it obviously raises some interesting questions of personhood). Consider: To continue being "you," would the computer need to replicate every little nuance of your brain? Also, I think the word you're looking for is "exponential," as in it approaches a vertical asymptote. "Asymptotic growth" could just as easily describe logarithmic growth, which is quite the opposite.
Originally Posted by DeakManiac
Well, indians used to live to be 150-200 years old. Technology, at how fast it is going, is just making humans more lazy thus not getting the exercise they need. In order to live long, you have to think smart, and play smart and stay in shape and eat healthy. I know a 80 year old who is built like a 21 year old and do as much as a 21 year old can.
[citation needed]
Originally Posted by iNarwal
those numbers could easily grow through the millenium.
As I've told scorpionma, unless you're actually capable of supporting your claims, please do me a favor and stop. If you're confused about something, ask and I'd be happy to try and explain. But when you start speculating out of the blue without backing yourself with anything, that becomes a problem.
Last edited by hanz0; Feb 4, 2013 at 03:39 PM.
"i wish i could do that ken watanabe face where his eyes are really wide" -siku 2015
DONSELUKE, MASTER OF LAWSUIT
if you love america please sign this petition
B&B&B&
Originally Posted by hanz0
Oh, sure, but bypassing the limit in vivo is where the challenge lies. Most of the current techniques for inducing immortality in a cell line wouldn't be so awesome if done to a person.
"Introduction of a viral gene that partially deregulates the cell cycle"
Sounds pretty legit. I'm sure nothing bad would happen if you filled your body with E1A!
Originally Posted by ImmortalCow
"Introduction of a viral gene that partially deregulates the cell cycle"
Sounds pretty legit. I'm sure nothing bad would happen if you filled your body with E1A!
I mean, I'm not saying it couldn't be done, just that our current understanding is rather limited as far as the consequences of trying to do in vivo immortalization goes. I do know that there have been mice studies on telomerase gene therapy which seemed pretty promising (Actually, the lab I work in is pretty heavily focused on telomeres and telomerase, though we're more on the biochemistry side), but obviously there's the whole "mice-are-not-humans-and-humans-are-not-mice" thing. Also the fact that current gene therapy techniques are a bit iffy, at best. I'll elaborate if you want, but it'd probably get a bit too technical for most other users.
Last edited by hanz0; Feb 4, 2013 at 03:22 PM.
"i wish i could do that ken watanabe face where his eyes are really wide" -siku 2015
DONSELUKE, MASTER OF LAWSUIT
if you love america please sign this petition
B&B&B&
