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.
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."
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.
I'd certainly hope so. You know how easy it is to score LSD and heroin.
If you're reading this you likely are in the top 1% globally. Yes, you could redefine it as the top 0.1%, or 0.01%, or 0.001%, or 0.0001%, but in my experience wherever you go on the curve people have similar vices, virtues, motivations and goals. Richer people get more help and own better toys—that's about it.
How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
And then everyone dies after someone contracts a disease from a dirty telephone.
I am 43 and starting to feel the effects of aging. I need this stuff pronto!
If the 1% in America would quit shitting all over everyone, the global 99% would have a chance to catch up.
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?
Aging is widely accepted to be multifaceted. telomeres, dna damage, epigenetics, build up of plagues and shit. there is considered to be about 7 major things, and its not really considered an exhaustive list.
If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
Top 10% probably. Take a look at a global rich list calculator. You can live very comfortably in a western country with 9% of the world's population being richer than you. If you're in some parts of central or eastern Europe, or a few parts of south-east Asia then you may be near the bottom of the top 20% and still living very comfortably. The '1%' that people talk about in the USA are well in the top 0.1% globally, but 'the 1%' makes a better soundbite than 'the 0.1%'.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
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.
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 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
Oh boy! A chance to work 100 years instead on "only" 70, and watch the Earth drown in human flesh!!! Fuck that shit...
What good is all their money and power when there are no proles to do their dirty work? It would mean they'd have to do it.
Hence the large investments in robotics and AI research.
It also neglects to consider the difference between net and gross. Almost every other country provides healthcare and education while the US has the highest costs for comparable care and generally inferior education. If you subtract healthcare and education costs from what we have left after taxes in the US most Europeans are probably ahead.