GameBanshee Forums

Here's the BBC story.


'We will be able to live to 1,000'
By Dr Aubrey de Grey
University of Cambridge

Life expectancy is increasing in the developed world. But Cambridge University geneticist Aubrey de Grey believes it will soon extend dramatically to 1,000. Here, he explains why.

Ageing is a physical phenomenon happening to our bodies, so at some point in the future, as medicine becomes more and more powerful, we will inevitably be able to address ageing just as effectively as we address many diseases today.

I claim that we are close to that point because of the SENS (Strategies for Engineered Negligible Senescence) project to prevent and cure ageing.

It is not just an idea: it's a very detailed plan to repair all the types of molecular and cellular damage that happen to us over time.

And each method to do this is either already working in a preliminary form (in clinical trials) or is based on technologies that already exist and just need to be combined.

This means that all parts of the project should be fully working in mice within just 10 years and we might take only another 10 years to get them all working in humans.

When we get these therapies, we will no longer all get frail and decrepit and dependent as we get older, and eventually succumb to the innumerable ghastly progressive diseases of old age.

We will still die, of course - from crossing the road carelessly, being bitten by snakes, catching a new flu variant etcetera - but not in the drawn-out way in which most of us die at present.

<snip>


Who'd want to live forever? I, for one, certainly wouldn't mind.

I guess living forever wouldn't be bad.Then people can't complain and say "Life is short".God,I hate that line.Last time I checked life was the longest thing you did.

I don't know about living for ever but adding a millenia to my life would at least be interesting.

What would we look like if we were 1000 years old?
I would guess like a old, dryed out wooden stick with beard or hair.

[QUOTE=Fiberfar] What would we look like if we were 1000 years old?
I would guess like a old, dryed out wooden stick with beard or hair. [/QUOTE]
No you wouldn't Read the article - they are looking to prevent ageing not death itself.

"Aubrey de Grey leads the SENS project at Cambridge University and also runs the Methuselah Mouse prize for extending age in mice."

would this only be at Cambridge or are they Cooperating with someone?

Colonizing in outer space better happen soon then. Over-population lies in a small corner.

1000 years will seem just as short as 80 on your dying day...

[QUOTE=Brynn]1000 years will seem just as short as 80 on your dying day...[/QUOTE]
But you wouldn't know what your dying day is. According to the article, practically the only way to die is to suffer some sort of an accident.

Colonizing in outer space better happen soon then. Over-population lies in a small corner.

Either that or strict population control right here on Earth...

The issue is most certanly overpopulation, i dont think many humans would bare to live 1000 years, its human nature to seek new things, find new ideas, chalanges and inventions, once the well of creativity is dried out, the issue of beeing bored to death could become a reality. I wouldnt mind living over 100 thats for sure but 200 is where i would draw my line, life cant be short, as someone said lifes the longest thing you'll ever do.

also the "and eventually succumb to the innumerable ghastly progressive diseases of old age." will claim lives as to why he doesn't say we'd live forever...

I have no idea how valid the science behind this guy's article is, but nevertheless....

I would not care to live to 1000, not one bit. Life would not be more enjoyable, we would just adapt to fit our enjoyment into a much longer time. Life is only lived as fully as we are conscious of having a life to fill. If we have 1000 years, we will pour our lives into it slowly - A waste of time IMO. I believe that the purest pleasure of life is in its moments. As Zeno's paradox shows, any length of time holds infinite moments, and therefore a 1000 year life of precious, lived, aware, savoured, moments is no more glorious than a 23 year life of such moments.

I'd sign for it, you can always commit suicide if you think it's enough.

[QUOTE=frogus23]I have no idea how valid the science behind this guy's article is, but nevertheless....
[/QUOTE]

I have. There have been experimental trials starting with drosophilia and C Elegans and moving over to more complex organisms such as mice, rats and monkeys. There are several lines of research which will take a long time to explain, but in brief the strategies concern 1. calorie restriction (possible decrease of antioxidants) 2. genetic manipulations at different levels (working with networks of genes) 3. telomere/telomerase manipulations (telomeres are genetic material at the end of the chromosomes, and their shrinkage is believed to be associated with aging) 4. Growth factor manipulations. 5. Apoptosis (programmed cell death)

Most of the discoveries concering aging have come from cancer research. Since cancer is cells that divide uncontrolled in a far too fast pace, it is not surprising there has also been discoveries concerning the aging and death of cells. Some knowledge comes from the science of cloning (the telomere hypothesis for aging) and some findings are serendipities, ie have been discovered by chance.

The genes regulating longevity in C Elegans has been identified and can be manipulated to increase the worm's lifespan about 6-8 time IIRC. However, experiments on mammals have demonstrated there may be complicated trade offs involved in increasing longevity. Examples are reduced fertility (well good, the overpopulation problem would be partly solved then) and increase of cancer, especially during childhood.

The quest to increase human longevity is very, very theroretical so far. I fear for the day when it becomes a real possibility, because I am sure the implications will be more problematic than constructive.

Long ago (3.5 years maybe) when the first life span prolonging experiements on C Elegans was published, I and some others posted my thoughts about it here at SYM, I'll see if I can dig it up.

EDIT: Just found it, the prolonging of starts with my long post somewhere in the middle of this page, and continues to the next page.
http://www.gamebanshee.com/forums/showt ... =life-span

I personaly wouldn't want to live so long, first no1 would do **** all, we would be too afraid to die and risk losing a few centuries, and without risks what would be the point of existence? it would be boring as hell if you ask me

[QUOTE=C Elegans]I have. <snip>[/quote]

It is quite handy to have our own forum-scientist around like this


OnTopic: I'm not sure I would want to live forever at all. I'm not even sure I would want to live 1000 years. Possible if life was better towards me and the human race was less destructive it could be fun....
Possible I would like to live 200 years or so.

Like others here, I would view what amounts to immortality with extreme reservation. It is unlikely the planet's resources will be able to withstand human rapaciousness for much longer as it is now.... I hate to imagine what increasing the human lifespan would do.....
And then there are other ethical issues.... such as *who* would benefit from such treatment..... Currently, wealthier nations have far better access to healthcare than the developing world. Would this still be the case? Or.... would the unimaginable have happened? Would there exist a more equitable distribution of wealth, and would these treatments actually be generally available?

I have. There have been experimental trials starting with drosophilia and C Elegans <snip>

Firstly you shouldnt allow people to experiment on you CE Secondly living for a 1000 years will be cool. Imagine how much of history can be recorded from different perspectives and recorded correctly at that. I would live for a 1000 years as long as I did not need to genetically re-engineer my body or body parts. Medicine is fine. But chemicals which alter my body would certainly not be a good idea.

[QUOTE=dragon wench]Like others here, I would view what amounts to immortality with extreme reservation. It is unlikely the planet's resources will be able to withstand human rapaciousness for much longer as it is now.... I hate to imagine what increasing the human lifespan would do..... [/QUOTE]
Look at it from a different prespective - people's actions now will affect their own lives. Global warming will no longer be a problem for future generatoins. Neither will the depletion of our resources. If that doesn't provide an incentive for conservation, I don't know what will...

Well, currently my life sucks, and if I lived forever, it would still suck. So I don't have a problem with living forever.

And in 1000 years time we would probably me more willing to attempt to colonize the universe..so overpopulation might not really be too horrible as long as we are constantly sending out stuff to other planets to make em all livable and whatnot.