In what ways can biology create indefinite lifespans?

**brokenportal** · Mar19-09, 02:14 PM

The world has been working more and more over the years to research a way to live indefinitely with health. What ways can you think of that biology can make an indefinite life span for a human?

Of course, Im not looking for a sure fire way, Im just looking for brainstorms and ideas.

**DaveC426913** · Mar19-09, 02:40 PM

This sounds like homework. What are your ideas?

**alxm** · Mar19-09, 02:43 PM

To quote the summary from Pólya's famous book "How to Solve it"

1. UNDERSTANDING THE PROBLEM
* First. You have to understand the problem.

The mechanisms of aging are not understood well at all. There is little point in even trying to solve a problem when you don't even know what it is.

**brokenportal** · Mar19-09, 03:26 PM

Well, if thats the case then you just defined the problem. If we dont understand the mechanisms of aging, then what can we do to work toward understanding them? Who could we contact? What route might we take? What bio job might best a equip us to dig in?

**Evo** · Mar19-09, 03:42 PM

Originally Posted by brokenportal

Well, if thats the case then you just defined the problem. If we dont understand the mechanisms of aging, then what can we do to work toward understanding them? Who could we contact? What route might we take? What bio job might best a equip us to dig in?

It's already being researched. There is no one problem. There is no one area of research. I suggest you do some searching around the internet for scientific research on aging.

**brokenportal** · Mar19-09, 03:47 PM

In what ways do you know of that it is being researched? Do you think its enough and or which routes do you think are the most promising?

Ive read a lot of stuff about this but Im looking for more perspectives and discussions from people who might know of others sources and or have ideas and insights on the concept.

**Evo** · Mar19-09, 04:18 PM

Originally Posted by brokenportal

In what ways do you know of that it is being researched? Do you think its enough and or which routes do you think are the most promising?

Ive read a lot of stuff about this but Im looking for more perspectives and discussions from people who might know of others sources and or have ideas and insights on the concept.

Your post is too vague. You haven't even mentioned what it is you've been reading. You can't expect people to discuss everything under the sun. Of what you read, what did you find interesting? Pick a subject and start from there.

You started this thread, you need to be more specific, or are you doing a homework assignment?

**brokenportal** · Mar19-09, 04:44 PM

Your right, specific is good in many cases, but general can also be good. Ill respond here more when I get time. I look forward to peoples perspectives. It usually generates new avenues of thought to spin off from.

**brokenportal** · Mar20-09, 02:13 AM

Well, for starters theres the "Longevity Revolution" by something Butler that Ive been reading, and then "Ending Aging" by Aubrey deGrey and Michael Rae that I read before.

They both talk about different approaches. There are many. Does anybody have a preference, have any ideas of their own, anything like that?

**brokenportal** · Mar21-09, 12:10 AM

Im trying to keep this alive because this concept concerns me to the root of my being. What are some ways that anybody here might be able to think of that we can do to work with our biologies so that we can live on indefinitely?

For starters, we can say that we all die of aging. Alright, but what is aging? What do you know or think you know about it? Are our cells wound like clocks, waiting to snap at the end and kill us?

Some people seem to think they are mystical untouchables. Do you take that approach maybe?

**JorgeLobo** · Mar21-09, 08:09 AM

To the "root of your being"?

We all die but not of "aging". That's really more a literary term than a pathology - not unlike the root of ones being. There are specific pathologies or malfunctions that are studied and understood but I doubt many autopsy reports conclude aging.

**xxChrisxx** · Mar21-09, 11:20 AM

Originally Posted by alxm

To quote the summary from Pólya's famous book "How to Solve it"

1. UNDERSTANDING THE PROBLEM
* First. You have to understand the problem.

The mechanisms of aging are not understood well at all. There is little point in even trying to solve a problem when you don't even know what it is.

Aging is fairly well understood to be telomeres shortening during dna relication.

However there is a practical aspect to this 'live forever', the human body is a machine. Like all machines you can keep going if well maintained, but like all machines no matter how well maintained the parts always have a service life.

for example. There was some idea that the cones in your eye have the ability to absorb a certain abount of photons and then are irreversibly damaged. I cannot for the life of me remember where I read this (or even if its acutally true), i'll try to find it again though.

**granpa** · Mar22-09, 10:48 AM

you might want to look up 'stem cells'.

**JorgeLobo** · Mar22-09, 06:30 PM

More of the vague stem cell hype. Come on - be specific.

**ebon** · Apr1-09, 03:39 AM

From what I understand life can be viewed from a mechanical perspective. Organisms are simply complex machines subject to various wear and tear. Life evolved repair mechanisms to combat this such as cell division and the storage of data in DNA/RNA but the repair mechanisms and "blueprints" are subject to wear and tear themselves. So biologists simply have to come up with even better repair mechanism that can indefinitely suppress such wear and tear?

**arildno** · Apr1-09, 09:19 AM

Some people seem to think they are mystical untouchables. Do you take that approach maybe?

Nope. That is your interpretation of it.

Again:

We do not know or understand essential mechanisms involved in the aging process.

Therefore, because the phenomenon of aging is crucial to understand in even beginning to frame a sensible question about the potential for manipulating life-lendths, it follows that AS YET, it remains a pointless endeavour to inquire into the possibilities of the latter phenomenon.

Science does not progress by inquiring into each and every problem we can create, but rather by limiting us to asking thoe questions to which we reasonably can expect to find an answer.