I have to say that De Grey sounds a lot more scientific than Bortz.
5 thoughts on “Life Extension”
Yes he (Aubrey) does sound more like a scientist….the premise that repairing the damage as it occurs does not require me to have “perfect” knowledge of what caused the damage (aging) in the first place. If I could for instance, replace heart, lungs, kidneys, etc. as needed with genetically compatible organs grown from your own stem cells, I wouldn’t have to know why they wore out in the 1st place. I think however that brain and CNS aging would be tough to deal with in the long term, I mean you just can’t grow a new brain and pop in to replace your old brain.
That wasn’t much of a debate! Mostly the other guy listening open-mouthed to De Grey. Doesn’t mean De Grey is right, but one might as well stick to people who are actually studying the issue.
Tim,
but if your heart, lungs, thyroid, pituitary were ALL firing like they were when you were 25 or 35, WOULD our brains get ‘old’? Most of the people I know who have had strokes, Alzheimer’s, dementia, etc, were all sufferers of OTHER maladies that caused, or at least exacerbated, those things much more quickly than someone the same age who DIDN’T have those things.
_____________________________________________________
It seems to me that quite often, the guy pushing the envelope in the direction most people are SCREAMING is least likely to work, is actually the guy with the right idea(s). I think that the ‘scientists’ or ‘doctors’ who say we can’t live to 120, or 140 or long enough to be Lazarus Long, have forgotten that 50 or 100 years ago, much of what THEY do in the 21st Century was voodoo to their predecessors.
New organs would extend the life of the brain/CNS likely as not, but eventually brains cells lost due to the passage of time and not replaced would eventually impair cognitive function. Furthermore if one lived centuries you would have to cope with the limited storage capacity of the human brain even if it didn’t wear out. One of the perks after all of not dying would be the ability to acquire new skills/memories/experiences; one would of course need to be able to remember them to appreciate them.
1. If you were in your 80s and listening to a long-haired young punk (not even a proper MEDICAL DOCTOR, fgs) say that a few years after you die we’ll start rejuvinating people, you might dismiss the young punk too.
2. Bortz sounds a bit like that scienc-y chick who wouldn’t shake Newt G.’s hand. Well no, actually that’s an insult to Bortz.
Yes he (Aubrey) does sound more like a scientist….the premise that repairing the damage as it occurs does not require me to have “perfect” knowledge of what caused the damage (aging) in the first place. If I could for instance, replace heart, lungs, kidneys, etc. as needed with genetically compatible organs grown from your own stem cells, I wouldn’t have to know why they wore out in the 1st place. I think however that brain and CNS aging would be tough to deal with in the long term, I mean you just can’t grow a new brain and pop in to replace your old brain.
That wasn’t much of a debate! Mostly the other guy listening open-mouthed to De Grey. Doesn’t mean De Grey is right, but one might as well stick to people who are actually studying the issue.
Tim,
but if your heart, lungs, thyroid, pituitary were ALL firing like they were when you were 25 or 35, WOULD our brains get ‘old’? Most of the people I know who have had strokes, Alzheimer’s, dementia, etc, were all sufferers of OTHER maladies that caused, or at least exacerbated, those things much more quickly than someone the same age who DIDN’T have those things.
_____________________________________________________
It seems to me that quite often, the guy pushing the envelope in the direction most people are SCREAMING is least likely to work, is actually the guy with the right idea(s). I think that the ‘scientists’ or ‘doctors’ who say we can’t live to 120, or 140 or long enough to be Lazarus Long, have forgotten that 50 or 100 years ago, much of what THEY do in the 21st Century was voodoo to their predecessors.
New organs would extend the life of the brain/CNS likely as not, but eventually brains cells lost due to the passage of time and not replaced would eventually impair cognitive function. Furthermore if one lived centuries you would have to cope with the limited storage capacity of the human brain even if it didn’t wear out. One of the perks after all of not dying would be the ability to acquire new skills/memories/experiences; one would of course need to be able to remember them to appreciate them.
1. If you were in your 80s and listening to a long-haired young punk (not even a proper MEDICAL DOCTOR, fgs) say that a few years after you die we’ll start rejuvinating people, you might dismiss the young punk too.
2. Bortz sounds a bit like that scienc-y chick who wouldn’t shake Newt G.’s hand. Well no, actually that’s an insult to Bortz.