It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Live Up to 1000 years+!

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 31 2005 @ 04:15 PM
link   
www.mindpowernews.com...

This will be a huge step for humanity, well the only thing we might have to outlast is a nuke attack, bio terror, muggings, andfatal accidents. if this happens, how will it revolutionise the medical world?




posted on Oct, 31 2005 @ 04:38 PM
link   



Born London, England, 1963

B.A., M.A. and Ph.D., University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Employment 1992-present: Department of Genetics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 3EH, UK

Journal editorial board memberships:
Rejuvenation Research (editor-in-chief)
Mitochondrion (associate editor)
AGE (Journal of the American Aging Association)
Current Stem Cell Research & Therapy

Society memberships:
International Association of Biomedical Gerontology (Board of Directors)
British Society for Research on Ageing
American Aging Association (Board of Directors)
Gerontological Society of America (Fellow)
International Coenzyme Q10 Association
Mitochondrion Research Society


FROM HIS WEBSITE: www.gen.cam.ac.uk...


How you can help - www.gen.cam.ac.uk...



IF YOU HAVE SOME SPARE AIR MILES: please consider donating them to the Methuselah Foundation to support my travel expenses, which constitute a large proportion of my biogerontology-related outgoings. I get quite a few expenses-paid invitations to conferences, but I also attend a lot of conferences where I pay my own way, and the Methuselah Foundation subsidises that. See here for more information on my financial support.

IF YOU'RE WEALTHY: contribute to the Methuselah Mouse Prize fund, and ask me what research you could productively fund.

IF YOU'RE EXTREMELY WEALTHY: ask me more about the proposed Institute of Biomedical Gerontology.

IF YOU KNOW SOMEONE FITTING ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIPTIONS: why are you still reading? Go and tell them what they can do to help, and make sure they do it!


Ummm...yeah! I am not sure what to make of this man.
Seems a little too eager to get me help him.



posted on Nov, 1 2005 @ 08:10 AM
link   
Is it his credentials that bother you? or is it his Facial apperance of that unshaven beard?



posted on Nov, 1 2005 @ 08:24 AM
link   
Neither on this end, merely his 7 steps. Most of the steps are going to take a while, I mean look at

2. The problem: Cancer
Mr. de Grey's solution: Aggressive gene therapy will make it impossible for cancer cells to reproduce. Stem-cell therapy will prevent side effects.


First we need to get rolling on stem cell research, not including the gene therapy.


4. The problem: Unwanted cells (such as fat cells)
Mr. de Grey's solution: Possibly stimulate the immune system to kill unwanted cells.


Fat cells are GOOD, the problems caused by fat cells is usually a matter of too many. That and, stimulating the immune system to target particular cells but not kill off all, that's a lot of work too.

I guess I'm saying I don't understand the conspiracy part of this, nor how this would make you live so much longer. In theory death is caused by a natural stopping of cell division, and stem cell research may be able to revive the division; least that's how I've always looked at it. But these 7 steps just seem to be kind of like, "duh" if we had the technology to achieve all that, we probably would be living a lot longer.



posted on Nov, 1 2005 @ 08:29 AM
link   
Who's stopping stem cell research? the Christian right wing, but why? are there any biblical reasons for it? not that I can see as yet.. I am a christian an I see nothing wrong with stem cell research.. Another thing, why didn't they protest with the bloodshed of many thousands of lives in Iraq? they are too double standards on these issues. i think it will be great if we can live to 1,000 years don't you all think? Imagine what you could within that millenium?

If we can live forever as god intended it to be? will it be marvellous?



posted on Nov, 1 2005 @ 08:36 AM
link   
With the christian thing going, thats a whole 'nother ball game.

(If you put it that way, no, God didn't intend for us to live forever after the fall of man. So by living forever you could be going against God)

Yes it might be nice, I just don't think de Gray will be the one directly helping us achieve it.



posted on Nov, 1 2005 @ 08:58 AM
link   
Yea, that's where religion and science become muddle and confused.. what did God actually instructed Us to do? What are our purpose here on earth? did God instructed us to be fruitful and multiply? Did God give us Dominion over the Earth, but yet still we take that too lightly and destroy the Earth. Did God instructed us to love our neigbour as thyself? Did he also tell us to be as wise as serpents but to be harmful as doves?

And lastly di he tell us to ``Occupy till he comes?``



posted on Nov, 1 2005 @ 09:17 AM
link   
Exactly, I think those discussions are in a different board


More on this guy, I'm curious to know what "Junk" he's talking about in his 6th and 7th steps. The same with the mitochondria dna. Interesting stuff for sure, but it still seems too much like common sense to me. I definitely think the potential is there, we just have yet to grasp it.

Edit: Spelling

[edit on 11/1/2005 by Kalapadea]



posted on Nov, 1 2005 @ 09:35 AM
link   
www.wired.com...




Mice discovered accidentally at the Wistar Institute in Pennsylvania have the seemingly miraculous ability to regenerate like a salamander, and even regrow vital organs.

Researchers systematically amputated digits and damaged various organs of the mice, including the heart, liver and brain, most of which grew back.


We are allot closer to extreme longevity then most people realize.



posted on Nov, 1 2005 @ 09:52 AM
link   
lol, I saw that article just the other day too. But does that regeneration go on forever? Like, do those mice live longer than normal?



posted on Nov, 1 2005 @ 10:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kalapadea
lol, I saw that article just the other day too. But does that regeneration go on forever? Like, do those mice live longer than normal?


Unknown as of this date(one article said it lasted 6 months and another said it was hereditary to an extent). It is hereditary but it unfortunately doesn't regenerate the brain as of yet. I'm not exactly sure how this works as the paper hasn't been published yet. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if these mice lived longer until their brains give out that is. So if we can somehow find ways to stem various brain conditions... who knows how long we will be able to live with this technology combined with some other technology(s)

[edit on 1-11-2005 by sardion2000]



posted on Nov, 1 2005 @ 10:08 AM
link   
who would want to live 1000 years anyway?
I'm only 22 and i'm about ready to check out with all thats going on in this crazy world. I would like to live till about 70, after that it's all down hill. You can't feed yourself, go to the bathroom on your own, you wet your bed, your family abandons you because you get to be too much maitenance and stink up their house. It's horrible. I've worked with the elderly, and their families don't visit them as much because it's too hard on them, the old people forget easily, they get put on one too many meds that make them 'high', confused, and depressed, all to keep them in 'low maitenance mode'..

even if they had a way to stop the aging process, i wouldn't take it. we're meant to go through stages in life, young adult years, adult, mid life, and old.
It's called lifespan development, you experience things and then your ready to move on. living 1000 years is absurd. i'd rather see history in the making from the heavens, not to mention history is usally clouded w/ war stories, murders,and events gone wrong, there's more bad then there is good, not worth it in my books.



posted on Nov, 1 2005 @ 10:15 AM
link   
Good point, I thought of mentioning how I think it would get exceedingly boring in the day to day, and boredom leads to more ah extreme activities for people. Like say murder, or attempting something crazy just to feel alive. But heck, I might be wrong, So, bring it on.



posted on Nov, 1 2005 @ 10:24 AM
link   
100 years ago the median life expectancy was around 40 years. It's doubled so our definition of old has already changed. Frankely I think an 80 year lifespam is really short especially when you consider that many more life forms on this planet can live far longer, Trees and certain Turtles live for hundreds of years so extreme longevity is not unknown in nauture.




I would like to live till about 70, after that it's all down hill.


Living 1000 years doesn't mean you continue to age continuosly.
You check out that link I posted?



we're meant to go through stages in life, young adult years, adult, mid life, and old.


According to whom exactly? As I've pointed out before we are already living longer due to modern technology. 100 years ago you would be considered extremely lucky to live to age 60 let alone 70.



posted on Nov, 1 2005 @ 12:19 PM
link   



Not trying to imply anything, but doesn't he look sorta like Jesus?



posted on Nov, 1 2005 @ 12:34 PM
link   
Just a reminder to stay on the thread topic.

Thanks.



posted on Nov, 1 2005 @ 12:51 PM
link   
On the surface, this might appear to be a wonderful idea. But after a moment, I begin to think of all the complications that could arise.....

It sounds like this longevity will require a lot of medical manipulations, a lot of regular visits to specialist for upkeep, so to speak. That would probably be rather expensive, and so would be restricted to the wealthy or heavily insured ( i.e. wealthy). If not just for the wealthy, how and who would choose those to 'live forever' and those not??

How long before those living so long would have more and more offspring, creating a overpopulation problem, leading to a crush on the environment and resources needed for survival? How great would it be to starve to death, and be in perfect health otherwise?

I think it would be a better use of medical research to make life better for more people within the time we have now......and, perhaps that will be the true outcome of this line of thinking.



posted on Nov, 1 2005 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by frayed1
It sounds like this longevity will require a lot of medical manipulations, a lot of regular visits to specialist for upkeep, so to speak.


Regenerative technology is close, see the link I posted above. And it will get commoditized eventually especially if an Open Source solution gets created.

Here is a link on that subject.

rsss.anu.edu.au...



That would probably be rather expensive, and so would be restricted to the wealthy or heavily insured ( i.e. wealthy).


At first it will, but it will flood down the economic chain eventually. See above link.



If not just for the wealthy, how and who would choose those to 'live forever' and those not??


Economics. Pure simple economics and personal choice.



How long before those living so long would have more and more offspring, creating a overpopulation problem,


The poor contribute to overpopulation way more then the middle-class or rich.



leading to a crush on the environment and resources needed for survival? How great would it be to starve to death, and be in perfect health otherwise?


You realize we are undergoing a technological revolution? Resource depletion and overpopulation will not be an issue, infact if current trends continue if we do not make this technology available we will be in a fully fledged Fertility crises. It's hitting Europe already and is starting to creep its way over here. Blame the Baby Boomers(or their parents) also there is ALLOT of resources in our Solar System which can support our Civilization for thousands years. All we need is a little time to learn how to efficiently exploit it. Also there is no shortage of food we just lack efficient distrubution and incentives to distribute it to those who need it the most.



posted on Nov, 1 2005 @ 01:08 PM
link   
On the other hand, what better reason to secure a sustainable future than the thought that you'd have to live through it?



posted on Nov, 1 2005 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cilandak
On the other hand, what better reason to secure a sustainable future than the thought that you'd have to live through it?


My thoughts exactly. What better incentive to really sit down and solve some of the more basic problems plaguing our world.




top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join