quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

So the process may not be unstoppable but might be decellerated with the proper techniques. Hmmm, heard that somewhere.

Now just how would one go about doing that ? Well they can already manipulate DNA, even build it, so what's the problem ? Get on with it and we can all live to be 199 years old. BUT, there is one problem. People now who age normally die because of illness, more than half the time brought on by environment, either something they got in the environment or something they DIDN'T.

So these 100 year olds are going to be rolling around in their power scooters, blind, unable to hear or speak, or walk or take care of normal bodily functions, oblivious to the world around them but they will look 25.

Cellular degeneration is NOT the only aspect of aging.

Now some of my people trend not to accelerate our metabolism, and as a result some really do appear younger and actually in some ways are healthier than their normal counterparts. However none of us are immune to anyhting and there are heart attacks and so forth. These are caused and they are not caused by aging. In fact your article specifically alludes to the fact that heart disease is not under the scope of what they are asserting, like those few other "invisible" things.

If people did not artificially accelerate their metbolic rate, this cellular decay would be irrelevant. But people generally eat about four times the food they need and are lucky if they can shit it all out. The rest get fat. And the food is so fucked up that fat people are usually malnourished. This has been known for decades. You know that stevia, that new organic sweetener that hasn't yet been approved ? It's been around since 1979 !

So back to the cells. You can do what you want for the cells and that is all fine and good. But if a person is not properly nourished it is a waste of time.

And that is that.

T^T

quote:

telomeres

quote:

ORIGINAL: DeviantlyD

I'm expecting this thread to die a quick death, but I still can't help hoping I'll be surprised. :)

The following is an awesome article about telomeres. One of my classmates in school did her research project on this subject and I've had an interest for it ever since. :) I can't help think that if they can resolve the issue of telomeres shortening, the fountain of youth can't be far behind. Of course there are numerous other factors involved. But still...the promise of this type of study is very exciting. At least for me it is. ;) Can you imagine living 1000 years??? NO!!!!!! (Please don't bring up the bit about the world being over-crowded, etc., etc. This whole thing is fantasy at this point. What I'm addressing are the exciting possibilities in and of themselves and not the undesired consequences of an overpopulated world.)

http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/begin/traits/telomeres/

quote:


A prominent explanation suggests that inheriting longer telomeres would cause increased cancer rates (e.g. Weinstein and Ciszek, 2002). However, a recent literature review and analysis suggests this is unlikely, because shorter telomeres and telomerase inactivation is more often associated with increased cancer rates, and the mortality from cancer occurs late in life when the force of natural selection is very low

quote:


Human somatic cells without telomerase gradually lose telomeric sequences as a result of incomplete replication (Counter et al., 1992). As human telomeres grow shorter, eventually cells reach the limit of their replicative capacity and progress into senescence or old age. Senescence involves p53 and pRb pathways and leads to the halting of cell proliferation (Campisi, 2005). Senescence may play an important role in suppression of cancer emergence, although inheriting shorter telomeres probably does not protect against cancer.

quote:


Telomeres protect a cell's chromosomes from fusing with each other or rearranging — abnormalities that can lead to cancer — and so cells are destroyed when their telomeres are consumed. Most cancers are the result of "immortal" cells that have ways of evading this programmed destruction. -Elizabeth Blackburn winner of the 2009 nobel prize for her discovery of how telomeres protect chromosomes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DeviantlyD
I wouldn't mind 1000 years, as long as all of it were healthy years. :)

I bet it would go by quickly. And just think of all of the change one would see in that time.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech

Telomerase is the "stop here" mark in DNA replication.  As one ages, the telomeres seem to wear out and cell reproduction doesn't work as well and we age.  In cancer, the telomeres fail to stop reproduction and you get runaway cell growth.

I remember learning this in biology class back in the 1970s. Nothing new there.

Now methods to slow or reverse degradation of telomeres has been going on for decades.  The problem is that in a diverse organism, it usually causes some form of debilitating cancer as well.  It can work well in a homogenous cell culture.  i.e. there is a sample of human muscle tissue that has been kept alive in a beaker since the 1940s.

Targeted viral DNA therapy seems to hold some promise but if it ever becomes viable it will probably only be available for multimillionaires.

Stefan