Genome Pioneer, X Prize Founder Tackle Aging
An anonymous reader writes "Hot on the heels of Google's spin-off company Calico, another major contender has emerged in the race to develop technologies for extending healthy human lifespan. Dr Craig Venter, who was first to map the entire human genetic code and the first to engineer a synthetic lifeform, has teamed up with founder of the X-Prize, Dr Peter Diamandis, to create Human Longevity Inc. 'Your age is your No. 1 risk factor for almost every disease,' said Dr. Venter. 'Using the combined power of our core areas of expertise—genomics, informatics, and stem cell therapies, we are tackling one of the greatest medical/scientific and societal challenges — aging and aging related diseases,' said Dr. Venter. 'Between 1910 and 2010 improvements in medicine and sanitation increased the human lifespan by 50 percent from 50 to 75 years.....our goal is to make 100-years-old the new 60,' said Diamandis."
What pension? You're still getting fired one month before retirement. But the good news is, your corporate overlords are getting another 40 years of labor out of you.
It's about time. As for all the Death Cultists posting previously about the horrors of remaining alive, bite me.
our goal is to make 100-years-old the new 60,' said Diamandis."
And where are we gonna get the water, gas , food etc for all these 12 Billion people ? .. maybe the longetivity is only for the rich .
Oh wait
We're probably all going to die of old age around the same time we would regardless. But this sort of thing might eventually solve the aging problem.
Yes, that might lead to other issues such as over population etc... but its worth it.
Think of what percentage of the population is capable of high levels of education.
Then what percentage of that percentage actually gets it.
Then what percentage of that percentage that does anything useful with the education.
Then what percentage of their lives are left for productive work after they have been educated.
We have men that are useful for maybe 20 years tops after going through about 14 years of education and even during that 20 years there is follow up education to keep them current.
Imagine if they didn't age... if they could be kept productive indefinitely.
Imagine a whole population of polymaths as people learn at their own pace over 100s of years. 20 years as a bar tender. 20 years as a carpenter. 20 years as a fishermen. Life time on life time bleeding into each other.
Its a good thing.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
You sound suicidal. Many of us greatly enjoy life and do not want it to be involuntarily taken away from us or those we love.
What the hell is point of medicine if not to extend life, anyway?
Improving quality of life is more important than length of it. There's little point in extending life into the 100s, if those years are spent being unwell.
And who wouldn't want to be healthier and live longer?
Somewhere between 70 and 80 would do me nicely.
Sure you get a lot of loudmouths who speak before they think blurbing about Malthusian crises
It's a perfectly valid concern. This planet is finite, and the day when there's somewhere that would be pleasant to live that's off this planet seems like it's a very long way away.
It seems ridiculous now, but in earlier times, due to increasing population, people were worried that the streets would be clogged up entirely by horse manure, since all these extra people would need horses to transport them around.
The point is, the future is very hard to predict. But there are two things we know for certain:
1: Aging and death and the suffering that these almost always bring are an absolutely horrible fate that any sane person wants to avoid.
2: Humans are very very good at solving problems and just generally remaking their world.
Just the fact that we may be on the threshold of substantially increasing lifespan shows how good we are at solving problems. Not long ago the possibility of extending lifespan would have been viewed as ridiculous, but now we're seeing billions of dollars invested in it - it is a very serious business.
If a problem as big as death and aging are potentially in our grasp to overcome, why would we not think that we may also be able to deal with any problems that may come along with an extended lifespan?
Me? I'm optimistic. I know that within a few generations we've gone from horses, to cars, to planes, to spacecraft. I know that we've gone from word of mouth, to telegraph, to telephone, to television, to internet.
I don't want to be subject to involuntary death and the diseases of aging. I don't want my loved one's to be subject to involuntary death and diseases of aging. In fact, I don't want any decent human being to be subject to these horrors.
We need to stop defending aging and death. When aging and death were completely beyond possibility of cure it may have served us as a helpful and comforting psychological crutch to try to derive some meaning and benefit from these horrors, but now this psychological crutch could hold us back from developing the necessarily technologies to overcome them.
Step bravely forward. Otherwise, you don't just have something to lose, you have EVERYTHING to lose. There are few unintended problems that come along with extended lifespan that could possibly be worse...