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.

 

Doctors Baffled, Intrigued by Girl Who Doesn't Age

page: 4
51
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 24 2009 @ 08:12 PM
link   
This story is very interesting, Ive been looking around but there seems to be a ridiculously small amount of info available on this girl.

The bit about her becoming ill very quickly and then recovering of her own accord sounds pretty amazing, but Id like to know whether they had actually diagnosed a brain tumour, or it was just a suspected one. And the stroke she had, was it inevitable that she would have suffered brain damage? And how would they really know if she was brain damaged when she only has the mental capabilities of a 6 month old?

Im also really interested what she is actually capable of mentally. And why her mental development stopped at 6 months, or even how long it took her to reach that level?
It would be interesting to see how all her organs are developing as well. She still has her baby teeth and her bones are similar to a 10 year olds, but what about the rest of her?

So many questions!

Also, the pictures on the abc article - in the 9th picture where she's 16, she looks a lot older in her face... and I dont know why Im getting this impression, but she looks more aware than you'd expect a toddler to look. Hmm.




posted on Jun, 24 2009 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69We don't know that....

She could be aging something 1 year to our 20 or whatever that math works out to be. I could only imagine at that growth rate one day. She being an old lady sitting by the fireside with a grandchild on her knee talking about the olden days.

Really Grandma? They still drove gasoline powered cars way back in 2109?

No Darling I mean 2009!



We both know that will not be the case, in cases of growth or aging diseases the person usually dies an early death...and even if she did live that long (which she won't) I still feel sorry for her. She would out live her kids, out live her entire family. The fact the she develops slow may keep her from reproducing. It's a sad case, and again, she is not a lab rat, so let's not treat her like one.



posted on Jun, 24 2009 @ 08:34 PM
link   
I wonder if she was born without any growth hormones or if she has them then they don't work. It will be interesting to see what they find out. Also on the bit about her ultra strong immune system, maybe she has ultra stem cells?

Wait! I bet it was a genetic experiment gone right! O.o

Here comes the world of GATTACA (movie)


[edit on 6/24/09 by MoothyKnight]



posted on Jun, 24 2009 @ 08:48 PM
link   
already posted here

abovetopsecret.com



posted on Jun, 24 2009 @ 09:00 PM
link   
reply to post by truthtothemasses
 


I think there are much more problems than the health. For one, if you read the article, a doctor from Tampa said that her body is growing in independent parts instead of growing out of sync and that's why she looks so young. If this is the case, this is a big negative by my part. Only certain limbs or organs growing or NOT growing until later (brain or heart for example). I'm sure this is the reason why she's had the health issues in the first place. Certain organs/muscles etc. are not growing at the rate/maturity that are needed.



posted on Jun, 24 2009 @ 09:04 PM
link   
Let's remember how Stalin wanted to mix ape (I think) with human DNA to create Super Soldiers. Looking at the math, since Nati was born in 1981 & WWII ended in 1945 .... then fast forward to Project Paperclip. Here's my theory: That's a good few years to be experimenting with Stalin's ideas. I think that Nati & Brooke were simply mutations that weren't essential to serving their main agenda, but let's look a bit deeper & consider programming & mind control upon the parents.

1. According to records, Stalin received a letter from a woman who wanted to volunteer for his super soldier experiment. Alas, as the war was ending, the gorilla he had chosen as the sperm donor died & the experiment never happened ... or so it has been reported.
2. Look at their names.
In the article about Brooke (meaning a brook or stream), the journalist even refers to her as the 'Fountain of Youth'. Did her mother know that she was going to be born with this condition? Maybe it's just an eerie coincidence. Then, (& this may be a really big stretch), say the name Nati. It can certainly be pronounced 'naughty', but you'll see where I'm going with this....
3. They are both females. I haven't seen any references to any males with this condition, but feel free to correct me & please post findings. There is much sexual programming in our societies, so what would one do with a Super Soldier mistake? As I was reading the posts, I knew my thoughts were correct. They've created a pedophile's dream. What's better than a Super Soldier for our sick elite? A perpetual child. Not only good for child predators, but also blood sacrifices.

Maybe I'm going out on a limb with this theory, but then again, money talks & has the ability to participate in wierd medical experiments. Plus, you never can be sure what our wonderful government scientists may be busily concocting as we speak.



posted on Jun, 24 2009 @ 09:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by scubagravy
already posted here

abovetopsecret.com


Your title wasn't good at all. I think I recall seeing it yesterday and past over it.

This has nothing to do with the "fountain of youth". This a simply a child born into this reality the way she is. Your title should have focused on the facts, like this current titled thread did.



posted on Jun, 24 2009 @ 09:35 PM
link   
i agree my title wasnt as good as this one. I believe scientists will find answers to the fountain of youth scanning this childs genome.



posted on Jun, 24 2009 @ 10:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Question
 


True.
I noticed the way she was "crawling". She had her legs out in front ,indian style, and used her arms to move, not the way normal tods crawl, which is on hands and knees.

One poster previously said she's going to be on 20/20 this Friday. I've already tivo'd it.

I'm surprised no has mentioned the other toddler that a poster linked here that's 28 years old. Don't know if it's legit and it's in another language but you have to see this video.




posted on Jun, 24 2009 @ 10:48 PM
link   
reply to post by truthtothemasses
 


Well they show this person's birth certificate, so I imagine that it is legit.

There are a couple of cases I've heard of of this condition. It is the opposite of progeria. Like progeria, I doubt this is a new condition.

If you look at old stories about changelings - fairies stealing babies and putting in their place babies that age too fast, or never age at all - well these are stories trying to explain these children. This isn't a "new" condition.



posted on Jun, 24 2009 @ 11:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by danishD
reply to post by Djdoubt03
 


no im serious, could some 60 year old dude getting away with having sex with her? and just getting called in for rape?


Firstly, she would not be able to give consent. So it would not be consensual and therefore legally rape.

Secondly, the rolling eyes emoticon says it all...



posted on Jun, 24 2009 @ 11:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by MoothyKnight
I wonder if she was born without any growth hormones or if she has them then they don't work.
[edit on 6/24/09 by MoothyKnight]


They said in the article that she was given growth hormones for over a year and when they returned to the doctor, he queried them as to why they had not given her them... to which they replied We DID!



posted on Jun, 25 2009 @ 12:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kaytagg
I think she will die -- probably sooner than any of us, sadly. The body still goes through wear and tear, and since the article mentions nothing about the ability to regenerate itself, this is just another case of evolution at work.

Looks like a new, but unadvantageous, mutation that will soon be weeded out of the gene pool. Mother Nature is merciless, isn't she?


I think you are right.

But just think of how we would look at aging if we could simply turn it on and off like a reading lamp. It's pretty bizarre when you think about it, but it could work.

First of all,
A 30 year old man is going to hold up much better than such a small body with non-regenerative properties.

Second,
If you did ever become injured, you could simply flip the switch (so to speak) and let your body physically heal itself if you have any broken bones or anything like that.

Third,
If we could map the genome of the girl and figure out what triggers this condition (or, otherwise, prevents normal development and aging) we might be able to figure out how to manipulate a treatment that could prevent the aging process all-the-while allowing the body to heal itself if ever injured. In other words the gene(s) responsible for preventing the aging process in this girl might be re-engineered as a form of gene therapy that could prevent aging while allowing people to live ordinary lives.

-ChriS



posted on Jun, 25 2009 @ 02:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kaytagg
Looks like a new, but unadvantageous, mutation that will soon be weeded out of the gene pool. Mother Nature is merciless, isn't she?


And what if its the other way around? The human brain has an estimated lifespan of 500 years (will have to find that data again) The Bible patriarchs lived over 600 years How old was Noah when he got on that boat?

We have long sought the off switch for the aging gene. Maybe hers never got turned on and will live a lot longer than us...



posted on Jun, 25 2009 @ 03:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
And what if its the other way around? The human brain has an estimated lifespan of 500 years (will have to find that data again) The Bible patriarchs lived over 600 years How old was Noah when he got on that boat?


Can you post a few links regarding this 'estimated brain age' and the whole 'ancient patriarchs' thing? Thanks.



posted on Jun, 25 2009 @ 03:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by thebox

Originally posted by zorgon
And what if its the other way around? The human brain has an estimated lifespan of 500 years (will have to find that data again) The Bible patriarchs lived over 600 years How old was Noah when he got on that boat?


Can you post a few links regarding this 'estimated brain age' and the whole 'ancient patriarchs' thing? Thanks.
Genesis 5:27

And all the days of Methuselah were nine hundred sixty and nine years: and he died



posted on Jun, 25 2009 @ 03:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by Kaytagg
Looks like a new, but unadvantageous, mutation that will soon be weeded out of the gene pool. Mother Nature is merciless, isn't she?


And what if its the other way around? The human brain has an estimated lifespan of 500 years (will have to find that data again) The Bible patriarchs lived over 600 years How old was Noah when he got on that boat?

We have long sought the off switch for the aging gene. Maybe hers never got turned on and will live a lot longer than us...


The one problem I have with the reference to biblical people is that I'm fairly sure they didn't spend 20-30 years as a baby.

I was of the impression that they grew as normal, but then aged slower - if the ages are to be believed.

One fact being overlooked, is that if this is some genetic regression, it was eliminated for a very good reason. A child that remains a child this long, had a very low chance of survival, in terms of survival of the fittest.

Thousands of years ago, they would have certainly not survived and it is only with today's medical and lifestyle luxuries that she has, I would think.

She must suffer some sort of inactivity of the brain, simply because 16 years of life crammed in there and she cannot speak a word, that is a sign of something not functioning, not of an infant. We can only hope that she is only aware of life as an infant, and not as being trapped in body incapable of what a 16 year old brain would wish.

Still, a miracle for the parents I suppose, as they are all too happy with her, and that's all that matters as long as she is not suffering.




posted on Jun, 25 2009 @ 06:17 AM
link   
I wish it was me
I'd still be able to play with lego and have no worries.. aahhh well back to waiting for N.Korea to blow us up



posted on Jun, 25 2009 @ 08:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kaytagg
She 'ages' in the sense that she's 16 years old, she just hasn't developed past what you would see in a toddler.

I think she will die -- probably sooner than any of us, sadly. The body still goes through wear and tear, and since the article mentions nothing about the ability to regenerate itself, this is just another case of evolution at work.

Not necessarily. The body generates new growth more than damage up to age 24 then after that age more damage occurs than repair so you basically start to die....slowly!

If that girls body is in equilibrium (which it seems to be) then she could potentially live forever.



posted on Jun, 25 2009 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Picollo30
Did Methuselah really live to be 969 years old? I believe he did. If so, what happened that changed how long we live?

Can this little girl be the answer? Is it possble that we are getting back to the times when our genes didnt age?


I doubt that. Apart from thinking a human can live nearly 1,000 years, one would think they would mature normally, rather than be a baby for the first 100 years of their life.




top topics



 
51
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join