So it’s not a “brain disease”, it’s a disease of the immune system… In the brain. And it’s not that the beta amyloid plaques are bad! They are good actually, except that in this case they are attacking brain cells and that is bad. So the prevailing wisdom that we should focus on the plaques is actually correct, right? The theory is interesting, but this article is very badly written.
I think he’s just trying to have the conversation. Every time you talk rejuvenation with normies someone brings up death worship, might as well learn how to respond
Our generation miiiight still get by without humans being able to dramatically extend their lifespan, but looking at how fast this field is developing, I think it is reasonably likely that our children’s or grand children’s generation will have to face the social and ethical dilemma of having the ability to cure aging. It’s super interesting. Thanks for sharing!
That’s a no brainer. Nothing in history have made people suffer as much as aging.
If you’re agains prolonging healthy lifespan (or outright rejuvenation) then I guess you’re against our treatments we already have that extends healthy lifespan like cancer treatments, or any kind of medication?
It is not something that I frame as something to be “in favor of” or “against”. I think it adds complexity.
I do not think it is a “no brainer” at all!! Will it be so expensive that only the rich can live forever? Does society agree to only let specific people, like nobel prize winners, drink the elixir? Or do we just let everyone live forever? Or… how long? Do we end people’s lives at some age? Do we force people to have less children? If so, who enforces this, and how?..
then I guess you’re against our treatments we already have that extends healthy lifespan like cancer treatments, or any kind of medication?
Our current generation is dealing with what happens when you have for-profit pharmaceutical industries in a capitalist world. Not everyone who has cancer gets to receive an equal level of treatment. The whole system is plagued with social and ethical dilemmas!
Okay, thanks for the answer but I think it’s only moot points ;
Yes, not everyone gets a cancer treatment when they need it, but that doesn’t mean we should not pursue better cancer treatments. Maybe share wealth better?
All, or at least the large majority of technological advancements are for the rich for starters when it doesn’t work that well, then it becomes available to the middle class and it works better and are cheaper and then it becomes super cheap and ubiquitous, basically everyone has accass to it.
I don’t know your age but mobile phones was like that crazy expensive and only worked in some cities. Smartphones were similar and many medical treatments are the same, cardio vascular treatments like stents and bypass are done on the regular today for example.
They kept a decapitated pig head alive for hours. It means we are closer to keeping people alive when major things fail without the ability to self heal. Basically Nixon in Futurama.
longevity
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.