Slashdot Mirror
Scientists Reverse Aging In Human Cell Lines
Eloking writes: Professor Jun-Ichi Hayashi from the University of Tsukuba in Japan has discovered the regulation of two genes involved with the production of glycine are partly responsible for some of the characteristics of aging. With this finding he has been able to "flip the switches on a few genes back to their youthful position, effectively reversing the aging process." The Professor's findings cast doubt on the mitochondrial theory of aging, which proposes that the accumulation of mutations in the mitochondrial DNA are responsible for aging.
Time
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
I wrote a PL/I compiler for Tsukuba's IT department. Yes, that was a long time ago. The university stood alone among rice fields at the time; now it's the centerpiece of Tsukuba Science City, which researches a little of everything.
I guess that means the current pricks running things will run things forever...yay
As expected, the older cells had reduced cellular respiration, but the older cells did not show more DNA damage than those from children. This discovery led the team to propose that the reduced cellular function is tied to epigenetic regulation,
So it seems like the aging process of reduced cellular respiration comes from gene expression, that is, which genes are active, rather than their inability to perform.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
I'm going to associate it with that cool food art. My life has now improved significantly!
Thank you University of Tsukuba!
Google wants to patent everything, including the means to reverse aging. Don't be evil Google!
Reversing it twice is bad!
If this works, the monied and in-power will make this as illegal as LSD and heroin.
It's certainly possible that, as a person gets older, epigenetic regulation of (nuclear encoded) mitochondrial genes can get messed up in a way that impairs mitochondrial function.
But lots of things get messed up as a person gets older. Obviously a person accumulates a lot of damage that never gets repaired - e.g. because the repair mechanisms that would be needed don't even exist. But a person's cells are also on this amazing developmental program that takes a person from a single cell to full adult. While much of this program shuts down once a person reaches adulthood, there are almost certainly parts of this developmental pathway that continue to operate at a low level - slowly causing changes that over time increasingly make a person less healthy.
Bottom line, there ain't no silver bullet on aging. Eventually it will be possible to design a new species that looks and acts human but that has the necessary repair mechanisms and developmental programs to be able to live indefinitely. And humanity may then choose to (voluntarily) go extinct allowing themselves to replaced by this new species. But any such species would be vastly different genetically than modern humans. Living forever is fundamentally and pervasively incompatible with our genetics.
Excellent! I want my age 19 wanker back!
Table-ized A.I.
We have always valued saving people's lives and old people are people too.
If everyone has at most 1 child, then every generation is half the size so that population would stabilize even if no one ever died. Since people do die of other causes than old age, the average could be perhaps be even slightly higher than 2 and population could still stabilize eventually. Yes, retirement would be different, no, that would in no way destabilize economies - it would be a tremendous economic boon not to have to support all those old people who could then take care of themselves.
I am 43 and starting to feel the effects of aging. I need this stuff pronto!
>If everyone has at most 1 child
Yes, that would be incredibly easy to enforce.
Yes, retirement would be different,
You would probably work for a while, retire for a while, work some more, retire some more, try something different, and keep going until you got hit by a car.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
So what happened to the theory that the shortening of telomeres was responsible for aging?
Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
If this works, the monied and in-power will make this as illegal as LSD and heroin.
Not necessarily.
If the anti-aging drug(s) make people healthier, reducing the drain on the government pensions and enabling the government to push the retirement age out over the horizon, so the people will be working and taxed, they might prefer to have the drugs put into use.
Heck, they'd probably add them to the water.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
This in no way immortality. Does it save you from dying of accident? Cure cancer? etc. However this kind of research may help you to live a better life at the old age, stay active and enjoy life.
I hope it gets patented. Properly. As in it can easily be replicated from the patent. They can sue me afterwards for patent infringement if they like, I'll have time.
If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
Why does this shit get spewed forth every fucking time. By that logic we should never treat anyone for anything. After all artificially long life spans are clearly evil and will cause the downfall of all that is good. Just like comics, pron, video game, cell phones, self driving cars, robotics, AI... in fact crawl back the your cave while you still can.
If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
We have seen that with modern medicine we live longer and longer. The body is slowing down in the ageing process but the BRAIN is not. It is not the longevity of life that counts. It is the quality.
Humans, like all life on planet earth, depend on evolution to improve the species. The old die, the new survive, and humanity improves. Achieving immortality would be akin to freezing humanity in time.
Unscientific and irrelevent. Evolution (mostly) happen on offspring and unless you think we'll stop having babies if we achieve immortality then, global warming jokes apart, humanity will not "freeze". Unless you pull a China on us claming "One-child policy" or something which won't happen even if we get stop getting old.
Elok
Actually, without any 'enforcement' at all, the average woman in the U.S has a fertility rate of 1.6, which is actually less than the replacement rate need for a stable population even if we eliminate old age. If it wasn't for immigration we'd be losing population. Virtually all 'advanced economies' are the same.
The force that blew the Big Bang continues to accelerate.
Immortality would realistically cause the collapse of human civilization. Massive cullings would have to be undertaken. Riots, revolts, revolutions would all ensue. Economies would destabilize as the retirement system would lose all meaning. Jobs would never be vacated.
Seriously. If there is anything that might have wiped out all other intelligent species in the galaxy, it's the scientific achievement of immortality.
Ok I'll take a shot.
Our civilisation (mostly) depend on economy. And what's the biggest thread of economy in devellopped country right now? Population ageing. We get more and more older, health cost rise and rise and the economy crash deeper and deeper. Get my drift?
Idealy, economically speaking, people would work, make money and stay healthy until they die. The basis of our retirement system depend of having more income from the young than expence from the old and, currently, we're clearly not heading in the right direction.
Elok
Immortality would realistically cause the collapse of human civilization. Massive cullings would have to be undertaken. Riots, revolts, revolutions would all ensue. Economies would destabilize as the retirement system would lose all meaning. Jobs would never be vacated.
Seriously. If there is anything that might have wiped out all other intelligent species in the galaxy, it's the scientific achievement of immortality.
Or it will jumpstart human exploration and settlement of the universe. If a person can comfortably and productively live for centuries then it will be much easier for us to send manned missions to the rest of the planets in our solar system as well as enable us to explore outside our solar system. Who needs ftl travel when you can live 500-1000 years?
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
"This" civilization would be responsible for maintaining immortality tech. If it falls away, then we're left with a collapse for no good reason.
This is one of the many reasons SS is a stupid concept. There shouldn't "age of retirement" that's set in stone. If we were a rational society we would have raised the "age of retirement" to 68 in the 1970s and 70 in the 1990s and we would now be talking about when to bring it to 72.
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
It must be difficult to remain such a shallow individual, only seeing gain from the demise of others.
Oh boy! A chance to work 100 years instead on "only" 70, and watch the Earth drown in human flesh!!! Fuck that shit...
Why does this shit get spewed forth every fucking time.
Because the left hate humans, because most humans won't do what they're told just because the left are convinced they know what's best for them. Also, humans typically move further to the right politically as they grow older, so a population whose average age is measured in centuries won't have much time for SJWs.
Unless you're the richest man on earth, what's the point?
Given an infinite lifespan, everyone would get to be the richest man on Earth for a while. And the poorest.
5. Ha ha ha Ha ha!
I only look human.
My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
Cavemen were modern They were fully wireless, and I hear they liked to go clubbing.
I only look human.
My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
Instead of permenating existing tissue to reset all the epigenetic switches.. just extract a few cells and throw out the rest.. reset at conception and 'clone' the individual.. differentiate by mixing genes extracted from successful individuals that survived to adulthood. Filter meta-genetic information from one generation to the other through tutalage and temporary 'parenthood'.. throw away the rest.
How to mess this up? Initiate random epigenetic repairs and partial repairs, reduce atoposis, induce mutagenic cancers. Keep impaired individuals around to reproduce in a partially successful manner. Repair damage insitu to individuals which normally would not survive in their environment. Interrupt transfer of meta-genetic information transfer through 'estimated' representations of ideological cultural 'norms'.
Worse. All the bigoted assholes won't die as quickly so we'll have to deal with their bullshit longer. Why do you think we tend to progress toward less bigotry and oppression as a society? It's because the assholes eventually die and only the most brainwashed bigots continue to carry the torch. Of course the worst of those sometimes realize how shitty they were in their youth and will take it down a notch from being a supreme douchebag to just being a typical douchebag that uses terms like SJW.
First article I read about the so called "on off" aging switch the guy said you wouldn't live forever. He backed this up with statistics and the certainty that something would get you after about 300-400 years: illness, plane crash, murder, etc. it is the aging switch, not the immortality switch in the general sense.
Chewbacon
The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
I think this may actually be a boon for the species. Think about it, everyone is granted an immortal lifespan. You still have the same percentage of the population that are little more than -I'm looking for a better phrase than "idiot brutes" but lets go with that. They will have a longer lifespan sure but not by much as lifestyle will become the deciding factor in how long you live. You will have those unfortunate souls continuing to die off at alarming rates and the more mature individuals gaining more and more a significant percentage of the voting population. Utopia? Maybe not. Better? Perhaps.
Gizmag's paper reports the research is about a Glycine regulating gene, then suggest Glycine supplement may sometime thrive as anti-age treatment.
Is it just me, or did the person that wrote the second part failed to understand what is gene regulation?
There's a difference between extending life and living forever.
Only the passion of the young push society to dream and explore.