Scientists can reverse aging in mice.

[martin-w 3,235]

1 hour ago, OzWhitey said:

I wasn't aware we were having a debate

 

🙄 Debate, discussion, friendly chat... whatever you want to call it.

 

1 hour ago, OzWhitey said:

nd pointing out that it failed to support the overblown claims of both CNN, Dr Sinclair and the OP of this thread.

 

Which overblown claim of Sinclair? Its not "both" by the way, you mentioned three. 

 

Quote

You perhaps failed to notice that I actually understood the Nature article, whilst also alluding to the fact that I've done research in the past using animal models? 

 

Lovely, clever boy... but strange you didn't know who Sinclair was then. 

Edited June 7, 2022 by martin-w

[OzWhitey 3,353]

1 hour ago, martin-w said:

Lovely, clever boy... but strange you didn't know who Sinclair was then. 

Perhaps a tad condescending, sir.

By the way, you need to work on your reading comprehension. I never said that I didn't know who Sinclair was.

Are you actually an academic, or just some guy who likes to go around trying to sound smug, smart and superior on the internet? 

[dmwalker 603]

In the video, Sinclair says about heart disease, cancer and Alzheimer's:

“If we reverse ageing, these diseases should not happen and we have evidence now, in my lab at least, that those diseases go away because the body is young again and can get rid of them, in animals at least.”

Is this borne out by his December 2020 article or is there another study? I can imagine reverse ageing avoiding cancer but not eliminating it once it is established.

[GaryK 201]

So if possible in humans,

What happens to evolution? .......the ability to change to better suit our environment, our environment is changing all the time?

Stagnation?

[martin-w 3,235]

14 hours ago, OzWhitey said:

Perhaps a tad condescending, sir.

By the way, you need to work on your reading comprehension. I never said that I didn't know who Sinclair was.

 

 

Not condescending... strange... strange that you didn't know who he was.

You didn't specifically say you didn't know who he was but when you referred to him as, and I quote, "this Sinclair guy" and "sounds like he's good at marketing" It implies you don't know anything about him

 

Quote

The more important point is that they didn’t make mice immortal or anything like that, despite what you might read on Avsim.

 

Huh... nobody on Avsim claimed such a thing. The topic just drifted into a discussion about immortality. It wasn't claimed in the CNN article either. Sinclair hasn't claimed it either. 🙄

 

Quote

Are you actually an academic, or just some guy who likes to go around trying to sound smug, smart and superior on the internet? 

 

Psychologists call that projection I believe. Think it was you that claimed you "probably" knew as much about longevity as Sinclair. I find that smug, smart and superior. 

The above, is why I'm going refrain from  debating discussing this with you. That, and your decision to be rude, which will get this topic locked. 

Edited June 8, 2022 by martin-w

[OzWhitey 3,353]

14 hours ago, dmwalker said:

In the video, Sinclair says about heart disease, cancer and Alzheimer's:

“If we reverse ageing, these diseases should not happen and we have evidence now, in my lab at least, that those diseases go away because the body is young again and can get rid of them, in animals at least.”

Is this borne out by his December 2020 article or is there another study? I can imagine reverse ageing avoiding cancer but not eliminating it once it is established.

Sinclair’s approach is more likely to cause cancer than cure it.

This is one of my issues with the way the information has been presented, both by CNN and in this thread. 

The 2020 article is about improving tissue regeneration, a useful outcome but not the same as reversing aging or achieving immortality. The obvious question would be “how much longer did the mice in question live?”. The answer? This wasn’t studied. There’s no evidence that this approach improves longevity. For example, you might improve optic nerve regeneration (as per the 2020 Nature study), but die more quickly due to increased cancer incidence. This in fact did happen to the mice some of the similar experiments. 

The idea that Alzheimer’s would go away because the epigenome is reprogrammed to mimic its younger self is also highly speculative. My best guess is that the existing neurofibrillary tangles would persist, but the rate of new amyloid deposition and neuronal damage might be slowed down.

At the end of the day, the research is conceptually fascinating but the clinical endpoints for mice are modest, and the clinical utility for humans is unknown.

[birdguy 3,943]

I can think of the many advantages of being turned back to 17 years old knowing everything I know now.  Like already knowing trig and algebra and having read several of the classics including Shakespear's plays.

I'd have no problem getting a scholarship to MIT. 

Noel 

[dmwalker 603]

2 hours ago, birdguy said:

I can think of the many advantages of being turned back to 17 years old knowing everything I know now.

I wonder what would happen to pensions.

[Matthew Kane 1,343]

Even if the brain can be made young again and reduce or eliminate things like Alzheimer's, I would think Mental Health would still be a major problem due to that fact the brain was never meant to function for so long, I don't think you can take your current knowledge and go back to 17 again, I think like a hard drive it just gets full and won't function as well with prolonged unnatural life. 

This could be a major problem for people in power who go about these sort of treatments to prolong lives and hold onto power, only to enter an unknown when it comes to Mental Health, imagine a Dictator living to 200 years old and have a majorly compromised brain functionality due to the brain being forced to live for too long, and making questionable decisions. This opens a major can of worms. CEO's, World Leaders, the Wealthy, or people of power would be the first to go through these sort of treatments and what happens to those brains in my view could be dangerous to humans

[HiFlyer 9,358]

Just now, Matthew Kane said:

Even if the brain can be made young again and reduce or eliminate things like Alzheimer's, I would think Mental Health would still be a major problem due to that fact the brain was never meant to function for so long, I don't think you can take your current knowledge and go back to 17 again, I think like a hard drive it just gets full and won't function as well with prolonged unnatural life. 

This could be a major problem for people in power who go about these sort of treatments to prolong lives and hold onto power, only to enter an unknown when it comes to Mental Health, imagine a Dictator living to 200 years old and have a majorly compromised brain functionality due to the brain being forced to live for too long, and making questionable decisions. This opens a major can of worms. CEO's, World Leaders, the Wealthy, or people of power would be the first to go through these sort of treatments and what happens to those brains in my view could be dangerous to humans

I think it more likely that as your brain gets "full" you will just begin overwriting and or essentially "deleting" unused/weak data over time, eventually losing your younger self except for important memories useful in your current life.

People will probably start making extensive records of their lives.

And..... I already suspect that a lot of our memories, even with our current lifespans, are suspect, and at least partially fictional.....

[Matthew Kane 1,343]

10 minutes ago, HiFlyer said:

I think it more likely that as your brain gets "full" you will just begin overwriting and or essentially "deleting" unused/weak data over time, eventually losing your younger self except for important memories useful in your current life.

But like I said this is unchartered territory pushing a human brain beyond its limit when it comes to Mental Health, especially when it come to a person that has power over others, the damage could be catastrophic 

[HiFlyer 9,358]

6 minutes ago, Matthew Kane said:

But like I said this is unchartered territory pushing a human brain beyond its limit when it comes to Mental Health, especially when it come to a person that has power over others, the damage could be catastrophic 

I wonder how much of your feeling comes from our current cultures struggles with Alzheimer's, dementia and etc. Which might be nightmares of the distant past for our descendants.

As you said, its uncharted territory, and for me, the results are just as likely to be neutral or nonexistent, as they are to be negative.

[Matthew Kane 1,343]

35 minutes ago, HiFlyer said:

I wonder how much of your feeling comes from our current cultures struggles with Alzheimer's, dementia and etc. Which might be nightmares of the distant past for our descendants.

As you said, its uncharted territory, and for me, the results are just as likely to be neutral or nonexistent, as they are to be negative.

I am quite content with the concept of mortality, for me this is not based on feelings just me being realistic, of course this treatment will not be readily available for all to begin with, maybe over time, but it does raise a lot of questions and all I did was raise one of them I feel valid.

When this is priced out of the market for most and available to the privileged few, and the unknown with mental health around doing this for people that have influence over others, I feel I do raise a valid point and this is not based on feelings. I can recognize how this could be exploited

[dmwalker 603]

3 hours ago, HiFlyer said:

And..... I already suspect that a lot of our memories, even with our current lifespans, are suspect, and at least partially fictional.....

"Memories are not stored as exact replicas of reality; rather, they are modified and reconstructed during recall.

Because memories are reconstructed, they are susceptible to being manipulated with false information.

Much research has shown that the phrasing of questions can alter memories. Children are particularly suggestible to such leading questions.

People tend to place past events into existing representations of the world ( schemas ) to make memories more coherent.

Intrusion errors occur when information that is related to the theme of a certain memory, but was not actually a part of the original episode, become associated with the event.

There are many types of bias that influence recall, including fading- affect bias, hindsight bias, illusory correlation, self-serving bias, self- reference effect, source amnesia, source confusion, mood-dependent memory retrieval, and the mood congruence effect."

[birdguy 3,943]

Gee Whiz!  After reading some of the replies, especially Dugald's just now, maybe my life was completely different from what I remember.

Did I really have a brother?

Was I really a Marine who went to Korea?

Are all those stories I wrote about my boyhood just fiction?

Did my father and I really go on a backpacking trip in the High Sierras?

Did I really learn how to fly an airplane?

Am I really as old as I think I am?

Noel