A pill that makes you live 30% longer? More likely than you think!
- Thread starter Zoombie
- Start date
I fight for every ounce I can get. Think I will stay away from this.
(Wish they made a pill that made you get fatter.)
(Wish they made a pill that made you get fatter.)
I was originally going to make a separate thread, but since mine deals with this same drug: 5 sci-fi medical procedures/devices we'll have in our lifetime (which I'm presuming is somewhat soon). Some of which have already been reported on.
#5 Memory repression/enhancement.
#4 Skin gun is already here, now they're working on a gun that fixes everything else.
#3 Anti-depression procedure via "transcranial magnetic stimulation."
#2 Nano-ink tattoos to monitor glucose levels.
#1 And yes, SRT-1720.
#5 Memory repression/enhancement.
#4 Skin gun is already here, now they're working on a gun that fixes everything else.
#3 Anti-depression procedure via "transcranial magnetic stimulation."
#2 Nano-ink tattoos to monitor glucose levels.
#1 And yes, SRT-1720.
Does anybody know which politician will be taking sizable donations to secure one's position on the list of participants for the clinical trials?
Just curious. I probably couldn't afford it anyway.
Just curious. I probably couldn't afford it anyway.
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2005
- Messages
- 16,339
- Reaction score
- 4,110
- Location
- East O' The Sun & West O' The Moon
- Website
- www.jlevitt.com
In a related story, scientists have found that a new therapy that involves eating only as many calories as one burns, leads to a similar longer, healthier life.
And that list is open to all. (Except Don)
And that list is open to all. (Except Don)
I'm already on that list, rc, but thanks.
When I first saw this thread in the list, my eyes skipped over "live" and I thought Zoombie needed to check his spam filter.
When I first saw this thread in the list, my eyes skipped over "live" and I thought Zoombie needed to check his spam filter.
living longer?
not if it's in an 80+ year old body
in a thirty year old body - now there's the pill
not if it's in an 80+ year old body
in a thirty year old body - now there's the pill
It seems to me like the less there is to support and maintain, the easier it would be on your whole system. It makes sense that being thin would prolong your life. But then, what happens if you get sick? I wonder if they can give you enough nutrients in the hospital that that wouldn't matter. Or, if you would be at risk of wasting away, with low excess fat stores of your own. Anybody know? I might have answered my own question. Maybe the best chance would be "thinnish," a bit extra, but not too much.
Last edited:
Yes, because it's just as easy as saying it!
Also, to be fair, the pill test being run on obese mice is due to the fact that, well, it's easier to see improvements in life expectancy in obese mice rather than healthy mice. It's fully possible this pill will be just as useful for skinny people too.
"They" also found out saliva causes stomach cancer
But only when swallowed in small dowses over a long period of time
But only when swallowed in small dowses over a long period of time
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2005
- Messages
- 16,339
- Reaction score
- 4,110
- Location
- East O' The Sun & West O' The Moon
- Website
- www.jlevitt.com
Interestingly, they've already done studies on underfeeding healthy rats. It seems if they drastically restrict the rats' calorie intake the rats live significantly longer.
Of course, they're still rats.
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2005
- Messages
- 28,750
- Reaction score
- 2,933
- Location
- right here
- Website
- www.veinglory.com
By the way . . . it was pointed out that I should give mad props to george Carlin for this bit of wisdom
I've already lived twenty years longer than I should have, so I'm cool.
Plus I'm not nearly as afraid of death as most Westerners. It's a simple fact of life, and the last truly democratic institution left.
Plus I'm not nearly as afraid of death as most Westerners. It's a simple fact of life, and the last truly democratic institution left.
Before my thyroid packed in, I was a stone underweight - no fault of my own, I ate like a horse - and I had the bad luck to get salmonella (dodgy saveloy. I can't even look at them now) It was three days before I finally went to the doctor and in that time I had lost another stone, and was dangerously dehydrated and suffering from electrolyte imbalance. I would not have been nearly as sick if I had had fat stores to fall back on.
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2005
- Messages
- 28,750
- Reaction score
- 2,933
- Location
- right here
- Website
- www.veinglory.com
It is, animal studies are the first step.
But there is ongoing debate as to whether the animal studies on caloric restriction are due to keeping rodents skinny, or the fact that we normally over feed them. A "normal" adult lab rat or mouse on ad libertum diet is obese. Being stuck in a box with nothing to do but eat has that effect. Data on calorie reduction from normal wild-type or equivilent to healthy human weight is not available.
But there is ongoing debate as to whether the animal studies on caloric restriction are due to keeping rodents skinny, or the fact that we normally over feed them. A "normal" adult lab rat or mouse on ad libertum diet is obese. Being stuck in a box with nothing to do but eat has that effect. Data on calorie reduction from normal wild-type or equivilent to healthy human weight is not available.
Yes and no
Animal toxicology studies are part of the clinical development process.
Animal models of activity are not, they are part of the pre-clinical package.
Plus I'm not nearly as afraid of death as most Westerners. It's a simple fact of life, and the last truly democratic institution left.
I find this to be...not an...offensive sentiment, but an odd one. Why is it terrible to kill someone, and yet not terrible to let people die. I can understand allowing someone to die when there is nothing to be done, and no one should be blamed for their lack of technology...but if we HAD a way to keep people, then not using it as much as possible would be - in effect - murder.
But I'm one of those weird people who see nothing good in death.
No, not even in a "oh, it'll get rid of the bad people", if only because I doubt most "bad people" could remain bad for a decade, let alone a century. I mean, I'm not the same person I was two years ago, let alone ten.
I could be wrong, but I think Romantic Heretic was commenting on the belief that death is always tragic/horrible/should be avoided at all costs, which I think is more common in the states than elsewhere. That's why, if you wander into an ER or an ICU on any given day, you're likely to see a medical team doing chest compressions on some poor 92 y.o. grandma and crushing every bone in her torso in the process.
It's cool that we are living in an age when life can be improved by pharmaceuticals, but not everyone wants to live forever.
*runs off to watch Highlander*
It's cool that we are living in an age when life can be improved by pharmaceuticals, but not everyone wants to live forever.
*runs off to watch Highlander*
Last edited:
The inherent problem of Highlander style immortality is that only a few people live forever. It gets less lonely if you can share it.
Immortality - like love, sex and freedom - is a joy that only gets better as it's shared.
Immortality - like love, sex and freedom - is a joy that only gets better as it's shared.
My reaction to this is similar to Zoombie's.I've already lived twenty years longer than I should have, so I'm cool.
Plus I'm not nearly as afraid of death as most Westerners. It's a simple fact of life, and the last truly democratic institution left.
People have always used knowledge and technology to lengthen their lives. How long you "should have lived" is determined mostly by what era and location you live in, which largely determines your diet, level of hygiene, etc. If you're 105 now and have lived in the USA all your life, I'd agree you've lived about 20 years longer than you "should have."
You remind me of the naysayers in this story:
http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/2181
The big problem with death is that it really interferes with other activities - in fact it completely stops one from doing anything else. It severely limits the possibilities of what one can do, and (surprise!) I don't like that.
That's true, we sure don't want those "Death Panels" in the USA!
Perhaps it's true that not everyone wants to live forever, but I certainly want to volunteer to live forever. And if I can't do that, I'll settle for a three-digit-age life of healthy, active, alert living.