Talk-Polywell.org

I don't know about the drugs, but I do know calorie restriction is a proven method for lifespan extension in mice. I also recall reading a study that mentioned it not working nearly as well in higher order primates. (It was still somewhat effective) I don't recall where that study was, though.

You're correct, Mirari. It's replication that could build up errors, rather than transcription.

I read something interesting on the origin of aging. It proposed that evolution may have selected for genes that cause more harm over the long term, if they provided a substantial advantage to the young.
After all, the old are irrelevant.

And to round off this rambling post, bactoblood

And another recent study has suggested that the absence of old men in the reproductive pool was reducing genetic mutations, which significantly reduced the rate of evolution.

Now that's a study I'd like to read. Do you recall where you saw it?

I used to work at a pharmaceutical manufacturing company. I asked a related question of one of the Dr. of genetics or whatever his degree was (He made recombinant DNA in the lab, among other things.) I was dating a younger woman at the time. In the course of conversation, I asked the Dr., "If older men, much older than fathers normally are, married younger women and they had children, as for evolution, would that select for longer life in the offspring?"
The Dr. thought about it for several seconds, then answered, "Yes, it probably would."
That is not a clinical study, but it is one expert's educated opinion.

I’d had a related thought some time ago (college) – critters and plants evolving without an ageing mechanism might not be so good. At least for the development of more complicated or specialized plants and animals. That would mean the young would have to compete with their parents for resources. If the situation became too crowded, one would expect equal numbers of old and young to survive, barring the ability of the older to learn (I’m assuming very early in evolution and very simple critters and plants). But one might expect more mutations (bad and good) to occur in the newbies (right??). I wonder if there are species out there that don’t age, but as a result are still microscopic bacterium.

Or maybe fighting off time is just too hard. Notice how we hear about children with that ageing disease (Progeria), but you never hear about adults that have something of equal severity on the flip-side: “She’s 110 years old today, but physically she is about 52.” You never hear that except in science fiction.

On a related but really unrelated note, you rarely hear about people suffering from hallucinations and voices telling them to do good things. Why is that? You never hear stories like: “These voices Doc, they have been telling me to avoid drugs, stay in school, and invest for long-term growth for years now. I exercise regularly, but not to excess because of them. I work hard, but not too hard, because of them. I eat right, but occasionally indulge myself because of them. If it wasn’t for the voices I’d be a drug addict living in a wet cardboard box on south main. And yet hear I am. A multi-billionaire, retired at 32 and helping poor inner-city yutes stay out of trouble. What gives?”

It wasn't a study, but a lecture entitled "Human evolution is over" by a Pf. Steve Jones at University College London.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/u ... 894696.ece

The less you eat, the slower you age. Maybe.

Malnutrition and starvation the keys to long life?

On a related but really unrelated note, you rarely hear about people suffering from hallucinations and voices telling them to do good things. Why is that? You never hear stories like: “These voices Doc, they have been telling me to avoid drugs, stay in school, and invest for long-term growth for years now. I exercise regularly, but not to excess because of them. I work hard, but not too hard, because of them. I eat right, but occasionally indulge myself because of them. If it wasn’t for the voices I’d be a drug addict living in a wet cardboard box on south main. And yet hear I am. A multi-billionaire, retired at 32 and helping poor inner-city yutes stay out of trouble. What gives?”

Because hearing voices is inherently suspect. So the only time you hear about it is when it goes bad.

When it goes good it gets another name: inspiration.

And another recent study has suggested that the absence of old men in the reproductive pool was reducing genetic mutations, which significantly reduced the rate of evolution.

Time to trade in my 60 for two 30s?

Smoke em if you got em

MSimon wrote:

And another recent study has suggested that the absence of old men in the reproductive pool was reducing genetic mutations, which significantly reduced the rate of evolution.

Time to trade in my 60 for two 30s?

Maybe that is too conservative. Three 20s?

Betruger wrote:Smoke em if you got em

Actually, they should be smoking you.

MSimon wrote: Malnutrition and starvation the keys to long life?

Starvation without malnutrition. Which is only possible in the first world.
Not chowing down on hamburgers probably helps.

As for 'slowing down the rate of evolution,' that's just bunk. Actually, there's a comment on it after the article. Historically, there just weren't very many old people to be fathering children anyway. At least, not old by our standards.

And I'm sure we're more than making up for it with our strange pollutants in the water supply.

Hey Simon, what's the 60's opinion on this plan?

rj,

I doubt there's any evolutionary downside to functional immortality in complex life. More likely, it just didn't offer any particular benefit (since most everything gets killed sooner or later anyway), so Nature never put much effort into figuring it out.

Hey Simon, what's the 60's opinion on this plan?

Which plan? There are so many around here. Which is why I love it so.