Scientist discover it is possible to live to 5000 years old.

I think I'd likely terminate myself after about 500 years or so..... Seeing man make the same mistakes over and over again.....

Oh man, sign me up! 5,000 years would be a mere drop in the bucket! Think of all the neat things you could do and the great research you'd have time for!

Yeah!

On the flip side, Michael Fossel is kind of interesting.

I looked him up on scirus (the science search engine: www.scirus.com) and I'd tend to think he's correct. He's one of the big debunkers of fake and hype "antiaging" medicine. Annoyingly, he's journal published and all the citations are on "MedLine" which is a big medical paper database... and costs like the dickens to have online access.

So I don't have direct access.

He's dealing with telomerase inhibitors, from what I can figure out.

Here's a brief summary (in English. Readable English) of his theories: www.keithlynch.net...

Well this is a step in the right direction a prominent researcher claims humans can live to be 150 years old.



news.bbc.co.uk...

doing this would slow down the evolution process by maybe 5000 times?

Well we can find out in 5,000 years...

Oh sorry, not "we." I meant our great-great-great-great-great-great-(add 500 greats here)-grandchildren.

No you wouldn't...if everyone lives to that age, they would still be with you

bleugh, unless this process also slows deterioration of brain cells count me out....look at the amount of people that become senile, suffer from alchziemers etc. Think I will stick to my original plan. Get married, have kids. Soon as the kids are old enough to fend for themselves...nude skydiving, bungee jumping, riding a dirtbike over parked busses, bring it on baby! If I'm going out, I'm going out with style!

im 6241... you can't start to fathom what i have seen... and yet i have not seen everything, although the normal stuff got boring after the first couple of thousand

time is passing slow until it ends

[edit on 26-10-2004 by beyondSciFi]

Could you yourself? I mean I'm 18 now and I'm already starting to mix things up. What good would 5000 years do if you can't remember 4900 of them?

Here's the solution, if the sciences conquer the 7 deadly things, we live forever, if not then 'no way'.
www.gen.cam.ac.uk...

Now what are the chances the list of things wrong in the human can be corrected in our lifetimes.

For those that desire death, sorry but the chances are looking very good for those that desire everlasting health.

The reasoning has to do w/ this chart. Sometime in the year 2010 the amount of useful knowledge in the world will be doubling every hour.

Another boost to everlasting life might be felt if Artificial Intelligence ever comes into being. The rate at which signals travel in a human brain is 100ft/sec, but in an electronic brain with a human cognitive level those same signals would travel at the speed of light. This would mean that when they turn on the first A.I. it would do 9,000,000 years worth of thinking and discovery in the 1st year of operation. The human race would jump that far ahead for every year an A.I. is working.

The possibilities are everlasting health would be easy then.

[edit on 10/27/2004 by bodebliss]

It would be good for deep space exploration.

It might be good for space exploration. The reality might be to send an A.I instead. Can you imagine being in close quarters with a group of people for the 2 million years it might take to do extensive exploration. The society that developes everlasting health and youth would be very risk aversed, not willing to take a chance on mishappenstance, they might even give up on driving and flying.

just another thought. With longer life spans (talking about extending them into the 1000's of years here), would not our life "stages" also be drawn out? We would still go through adolescence, middle age etc etc, but instead of adolescence being 12-21years of age, it might be 120-210years. Also wouldn't that possibly mean we would stay in education longer? Maybe 3yr uni courses now would become say, 10yr courses if the average life expectancy grew to 2000. Meaning percentage wise, our lives would not change, we'd still spend 30% of our life studying & "growing up", say, 60% working, and the last 10% in retirement. Imagine the insane amount of knowledge you could accumulate over such a long time period assuming your brain retained its abilities for a longer time period instead of starting to deteriorate dramatically when you hit around the 60-70yr mark. The amount of wisdom, the leaps and bounds in scientific study that would occur due to increased time periods with which an individual can learn.

This idea of living to 5000 is rediculous. Even if your cells reproduced perfectly, you would be killed by disease or an accident before you reached 200. NOBODY would live to be 5000. Nobody

When they conquer aging by beating the 7 deadly things. I remember reading that the optimal physiological age( the age when the human body has the most potential ) for humans is 11 years old. I think the older humans would gravitate backwards and the younger ones would hold at 11 years old.

When they conquer aging, they conquer aging that's all there is to it. You'd have to go for regular treatments like you go to a docter's office once a year. They'd have to resize equipment so smaller humans can use it.

They'll do it about 50 years after everyone stops laughing, but w/ a speeded up timeframe due to a sudden vast accumulation of relevant knowledge, it might take place 15 years after everyone stops laughing.

[edit on 10/29/2004 by bodebliss]

5000 years? Just a blink upon the eternity

Well, there is more to "ageing" than cell reproduction. Horomones, stress and physical exertion play a key role in our development, so we wouldnt look like we were 11 forever.

count me in, the thought of dying horrifies me anyway since i reached my 30th birthday. life is great.

It's cells going out of kilter that causes physiological stress. This also causes the loss of fat under the skin that causes wrinkles. I would say cell problems are 99.9% of what is wrong with humans. From the way the mRNA mutates to the mitochondria to cellular pollution, it makes up most of the damage and displays it in heart disease, lung disease, liver disease, etc.

We with the new knowledge given us by science can no longer look at the human condition as the 19th century doctors did. We can't put a bandage on cancer and say it's fixed.

We should bite the bullet and go to the source. We should fix the cells and cure the human. Would it be wrong, immoral to be living and working for our own goals and enjoying life 700, 7,000, or 70,000 years from now.

The fact that some think everlasting health is immoral or wrong might also be a curable disease.

[edit on 10/29/2004 by bodebliss]

We need to put our science dollars to more useful research. This is absurd, with world population, starving millions, we dont know where we are going to get our next 10 barrels of oil, global warming, crop shortages, this is a crime of research! The people involved should be jailed or put in an asylum. Does anybody read the Bible anymore, has everyone lost faith? We have the promise of a wonderful eternity! I mean everyone complains everyday about how horrible the world is! I think there should be moral limits to research. Does anyone believe in reincarnation? If so you would find that it is true, THE GOOD DIE YOUNG! Living 500 years or more would be admission to you just cant get it right, in God's eyes. This world is a test ground, a school, a realm of learning, you stay a while then it is time to "go home". You need to get to the day of judgement to determine what your next life lessons should be! Instead of advancing further we need to stop, look and think. The earth will be "cleansed" and then we will start over, right where we should be, without all of this technology and without playing God with our bodies!