Tweaked Genes Can Double Worm's Lifespan

jlechem writes ">New Scientist is reporting that U.S. scientists have doubled the life span of nematode worms with no apparent physiological side affects. Before scientists were able to double the worms lifespan but they were unable to reproduce. The breakthrough was achieved by turning certain genes on and off at certain times during the development cycle of the worms. While limited to worms right now, the researchers believe this could eventually lead to longer human lifespans. So what happens to those people who don't want to live forever?"

Comments

not living forever

[hitzroth]

So what happens to those people who don't want to live forever?

Suicide?

There may be a reason...

[Simon Field]

...

If the daf-2 gene has the same effects in fruit flies and mice (and presumably humans), and it controls two separate pathways (reproduction and longevity) in all those organisms, there may be a good reason why the linkage between the two systems is preserved across millions of years of evolution.

Suppose longevity is limited in order to make room in the ecosystem for the next generation, so that older critters (with damaged DNA, or an inability to reproduce) don't crowd out the young?

If only a few young survive, then there may not be enough to perpetuate the species.

Perhaps the two systems are linked because when the link is lost, the species dies out, because there are not enough resources to support both an aged population and a large enough reservoir of young reproductively active critters to ensure against decline?

Is this the whimper that T. S. Eliot wrote about?

Thats simple

[bpb213]

"So what happens to those people who don't want to live forever?"

Only the people who want to live forever will pay to have it done.

(id imagine this cant be cheap for a while)

(and besides, 200 years isnt forever).

2x the life but no reproduction sounds good to me

[dh003i]

I don't know about all of you, but I'd gladly settle to live twice as long for the "sacrafice" of not being able to have children.

Re:Fixed point solution

[Yokaze]

Ah, that's why the young people are so cautious, fearing the abrupt end of their long productive life, while the old ones, facing the imminent death, are the adventurous ones.

To be more serious:
Young people are more adventurous, they're less aware that they can die. Death is an "Others People Problem". When people get older, they become more aware that life is quite fragile and suddenly have an eye on their health.

The absence from a death by ageing could make people even more adventurous. The abundance of a thing usually makes one less aware of its value.

Imagine a possible biography of an practicably immortal and compare it to a typical one from today.

further implications

[Scaebor]

This sets me to thinking about a true, built in dividing line that has the potential to divide humanity physiologically into classes of "haves" and "have nots." While the inhabitants of wealthy nations may be able to afford the kind of genetic tailoring necessary to lead to increased life spans those in poorer nations will almost certainly be unable to implement these kinds of measures for their children. THe end result could be an even greater disregard among wealthy nations such as the US for the well-being of the inhabitants of poor nations.

Instead of merely sloughing off undesireable industries to these nations with only cursory safety protocols, these protocols may be seen as unnecessary, as, in comparison to the genetically tailored upper class of the world, the longevity of these "lesser" humans is seen as unimportant as a result of their already "inferior" lifespans. In other words, a decade plus or minus is inconsequential.

Take these words as you wish, but i can see this as a possibility in some kind of future world with this kind of advanced biotech.