@StormZephyr Was talking about an issue being turned into a "Republican VS. Democrat" type thing. I just hope it doesn't but there is a pretty good chance it will in the coming years and decades.
Sad, but all times in history - all geniuses were discriminated and was not very popular because regular people just don't understand them...
That's what the differences between genius and non - geniuses all are different from regular people, cause regular people have no abilities to be geniuses.
Scientists sometimes make the mistake of believing that because of their high capacity for reasoning, they are somehow less prone to human failings like arrogance, anger, fear, egoism, etc. when this just isn't the case. Aubrey de Grey has in this case deliberately misrepresented himself due to his obsession with his cause.
Can we get some context on this? From what I know he was an engineer at Cambridge and then worked on developing some data bases in the genetics department for their research until 2006...
Also: On the basis of the book, Trinity Hall of the University of Cambridge awarded de Grey a PhD in 2000.[8]
@Demagogue88 You're right, this video is nothing but stupidity, hence the thumbs down people have been giving it. Aubrey de Grey is a spectacular man, capable of revolutionizing the way we see life. I hope he succeeds!
We must concentrate on fighting diseases, ending extreme poverty, ending Aging,
It can be done, its a mater of how much you are willing to work for these goals that make it happen that determines how fast these discovories and breakthroughs will come.
@LuciferLBelial According to demographics of the world, the longer people live on average the lower the birth rate and the later people decide to have children.
Europe has a very high standard of living in the world. average birth rate is under 2.0
while In Zimbabwe, average life expectancy 38 years and if you were lucky to make it to age 38, you were most likely starving. they have an average birth per mother of 7+.
MOST of the population BOOM is from "super slums" not cause of longer life.
@curingaging00 think about this when south asian and african breed like fly and die like fly while european tend to live much longer and have more time to procreate.
@LuciferLBelial Well, "Lucifer", have you ever heard of the possibility that the Universe out there is imense, or rather infinite? We already went to the moon, we could go to Mars if we wanted to... Heck, if I could stop ageing, I would definetely sign up for living on the moon, even (and this is hard for me) without Internet!
250 years from now, people will read about Dr de Grey. he will be looked upon as we look upon Dr Freud- a man who had many erroneus beliefs, but whom none the less is considered a pioneer his field. Dr de Grey will be acknowlegded as a visionary, while the nay sayers will turn over in their graves.
@PhantomRaiser your logic about the body doing it twice and never again so therefore science can not do it is absolutly flawed. The body creates two sets of teeth are you saying it would be impossible science to find a way to grow a third set. If the body can do it then science can or will find a way to replicate the process. Why is this not sinking in?
People study and learn whether they are in a University doing it or doing the learning and research in their own time outside a university without any activities carried out in a university. A university is nothing more than an organized company, a business, a fraternity, a learning place, a library that contains many tools to refer to.
P.S. : If you really want to have many neurons, try and excite glial cells to reproduce to be as much as you need, the glial cells sometimes transform into some types of neuronal cells (not sure of this info myself, but as I heard and read about it, actually no one's sure :| ). Anyway, excitation of reproduction of glial cells is your homework, guys :D
@max10wonderboy You all blindly believe in this technology but you can't seem to understand that nothing and I say nothing, can replace neurons, not artificial not stem not nothing. Idealism is not a example. Stem cells cannot mimic neuronal functions, only biological functions. Neurons are something more than simple biological cells, you can't re-create electrical-biological cells.
Again I resume at my ex comment : You CAN live as much as you like, but your neurons will die, sooner or later
If you seize to percieve then you are dead regardless of your youth and health. That said we are forever dying. Our concern with dying should be not much greater than our concern on going to sleep at night.
yeah i agree..living super long isn't a bad prospect if we knew the condition of our life at that point... a 175yr old vegetable is not something we strive for.
what about that jelly fish that gets old and then something triggers it to revert back to it's baby stages, and it starts all over perpetually (sorry for my lack of proper vocab)
Ya i agree. Lets talk about science. Just because some other people have their own resources and restrict resources to people with interests to defeat aging, is no reason to not talk about science and how defeating aging is possible.
So many suffering the 'fatalism logjam' and suicidal tendancies... One might refer to these fatalists as suicidalists, or 'deathists'. Let them all die, it would certainly make our overall research in LE a lot easier and unimpeded. btw, Audrey de Grey studied at both Cambridge and Oxford, and he also attained his doctorate in more than one field, innitially in 'Science & IT' which is at the centre of all modern research in Genetics, Biomedical Gerontology and of course Nanotechnology.
@Tartersauce101 The end of the universe is such a stupendously distant future that by the time it rolls around it's entirely possible we will have figured out a way to prevent it.
All of the things you mentioned are preventable, just like death by aging may be.
Your mindset about aging is exactly the mindset that prevents people from really attempting to combat aging.
@Tartersauce101 yes I back you up on that dude, but I would say that I refuse to die of something that is indeed curable or managable. Something that is in our hands. Car accidents and that shit, enthropy...,well yeah, bad luck. But we should continue our pursuit of living longer and healthier, cus you know what? Living is fun.
Just one humble simple question. Why did Cambridge award de Grey a PhD in 2000 on the basis of his book concerning the biology of one aspect of aging, The Mitochondrial Free Radical Theory of Aging if he was a computer technician?? I smell bullshit all over this video. Someone should check their facts. HoracioLara, you are an idiot.
jealousy? or are you just misinformed? you should delete this video. Dr Aubrey de Grey was conferred a Doctorate of Philosophy from Cambridge university in 2000.
google on Congregation of the Regent House on 9 December 2000.
Totally! Bloody idiots who are trying to knock him. I heard a scientists say he has a similar intellect to Da Vinci.
Everyone should support him as much as possible. I too wish these fools would invest there energy into how they can help him further and his crusade. People in his situation need as many leg ups as possible.
@philipjterry i agree. even if this man failed for thousand years i would still support him because he is trying to grant eternity and a thousand years is nothing compared to living indefinately.
Aubrey has denied being fired from Cambridge, and says that he had express written permission to use the department's website. He left so he could work full time on his anti-aging crusade, and even gave 4 months notice.
You can find his response to this by searching on google for:
ashburner ag24 "channel 4 documentary"
(I can't post urls on here)
As of 2010 Cambridge University has released no statements claiming that De Grey was fired, or is guilty of any form of misconduct.
Lol @ you making the idiotic assumption that it'll only be available to the rich when in fact they have every reason to make it widely available to everyone.
None of that is true at all. Everything you're saying is the exact opposite of the truth. They have every incentive to give these therapies to EVERYONE because it's something that EVERYONE suffers from, and if they don't give it to everyone then they'll be spending a ridiculous amount on health care for elderly people. By 2050 Alzheimer's disease ALONE will be costing the government over $1 trillion, and that's just one example.
This are predictions, you damn idiot. They are not the fucking truth we have no fucking idea what will happen in future.
Do you fucking know how much thoes therpies will cost dumbass? No you have no fucking idea, so dont compere expensions of your retarded government, and why you amercians allways bring only your retarded country into picture, giving no shit about the rest of the world?
First of all I'm Canadian you dumb piece of shit, congratulations on presuming things about me and talking out of your ass before getting your facts straight, it makes your argument seem WAY more smart and valid. Second it doesn't matter if it's expensive because the government will recognize that NOT mandating these therapies for everyone will be even MORE expensive, they'll be spending $1 trillion on AD patients alone, a fact I wouldn't have to repeat if you'd learn how to fucking read.
So what about scenario, in which it costs fucking 10 million dollars to do this stupid therapy for one person dip shit. Just for begining, where it makes you get old, just to live like an empty shell for 50 years more.
ten fucking million, NOT fucking much,
Now multiply it by 45 millions, and add 3 times more for additional reaserch and other shit that comes with it.
LOL I seriously hope you're joking. There is no way in hell this will cost TEN MILLION DOLLARS for just one person and if you really think it will then you are fucking stupid as hell and need to go back to 2nd grade math class because even the world's most expensive therapies today only cost a few thousand dollars. I'm done arguing with you because it's clear you're just talking out of your ass about something you know NOTHING about. Ten million dollars for one person LMAO are you kidding me.
I definitely know it won't, you saying that a therapy is going to cost TEN MILLION DOLLARS is as fucking retarded as saying a Bugatti Veyron will cost $5. There are already plans for how the therapies will be distributed and it almost certainly won't be a weekly one, it'll be a one-time therapy every 20-30 years. And if you really are eager to die then you don't have to take the therapy. So please do die and take your stupidity out of the gene pool.
Furthermore, a therapy as widely-encompassing as the cure for aging can not ever be owned by a single company you fucking moron. Something as huge as this only can and will be controlled and distributed by the government, precisely because it's a treatment for a disease that absolutely everyone suffers from. Disney will not ever be the sole proprietor of the cure for cancer regardless of what tiny-brained shitheads like you think. You show such an incredibly poor understanding of the world.
Do you know what we are talking about? No you have no fucking idea.
We are talking about prediciotns you retard. You know what it means? Seems not.
And yes idiot, such therapy can be owned by a company. If say, they will pay such ppl as Aubrey, to do what he does, except on terms determined in contract.
'We pay, you work, we own.'
And again, what we were "discussing" here, were probabilities.
Yes dipshit, that's right, we are discussing predictions, specifically how utterly retarded and illogical YOUR predictions are. Here's the deal dumbass: when a cure for aging is developed, A LOT OF PEOPLE are going to want it. BADLY. More than they'd want a cure for other things. As development of a cure becomes widely known, it'll become impossible for politicians to get re-elected on a platform that DOESN'T address this issue.
So that means that anything that threatens to become a barrier to universal access of these therapies will simply become subject to compulsory purchase by the government (which could end up being pricey, but compulsory nonetheless). All the laws that impede such progress will be torn up. And it'll be in the best interests of the industrialized world to make it available to everyone at a price they can pay, because 9/11 proved that making a lot of people very mad is a bad move.
Just one humble simple question. Why did Cambridge award de Grey a PhD in 2000 on the basis of his book concerning the biology of one aspect of aging, The Mitochondrial Free Radical Theory of Aging if he was a computer technician?? I smell bullshit all over this video. Someone should check their facts.
great point harrymook! however, I was forced to refrase this question again when I read A New Kind of Science by Wolfram in his research on the revesability of the second law of thermodynamics. Can we really reverse the second law? that is the most important question in the quest for immortality. I do believe this is a physics problem rather than a biomolecular one.
Yeh, but even though they can resist that long, they won't live forever, you know. The synapsis of the neurons that makes another good part of the brain and memory, is relative to any individual, it can resist or not ... but the neurons can die, they cannot be regenerated, you don't know what nuclear and genetic information they have making the conscience and rational thinking of the individual, you can't know what neurons you should grow to forever keep the brain alive thinking.
But you don't understand, even though you can make new neurons, you must regenerate and keep alive the current neurons and that's impossible. But if you create new neurons (the absurd way) there won't have your memory you lost after your ex-neurons died... si life as this point is useless
Dude, I'm talking about our bodies, we can support long-living bodies as much as we want, but I was talking about the neurons, the cells that cannot recreate themselves because they keep our memory, you cannot add memory to a body unless you know what memory neurons you must add. But you can't decode neurons, so if you pass 150 years old with 25 years old body... you won't have a mind because all the neurons from your brain ... died :))
You cant reverse Entropy. If you want to create a body that reverses the effects of aging, you need to double the neurons, bio-cells and all of that, or quite triple them, or quadruple them.
Why ? Because you need a type of cell that re-creates (divides the other in creating a new one). You need a type of cell that keeps it alive. And you need a type of cell that protects it (not the same as keeping it alive). Or even more functions.
Merge Aubrey de Grey and nano technology and this is very much in the realm's of possible in the time frame he says. Cancer cells do not die they have no programmed cell death, steal that and were pretty tough to kill by aging. I don't really give a shit about the video not very good the rating is proof enough of that. We all know this guys on to something.
But a young person is strong, good health, good skin, healthy bones, healthy everything etc... Now can you tell me why it only last for a certain amount of time? And also, is it possible to recreate that?
The human body recreates only twice in a life-time neurons : childhood and as adult, but never again. You cannot regenerate the neurons, so even if you make the body forever young, after ~150 years you will loose all your neurons, and eventually becoming an real Undead.
(2004) Experimental Gerontology, 39 (11-12 SPEC. ISS.), pp. 1587-1593.
If you search you'll find other studies that detail centenarians with no neural degeneration. They're a small subset of the population, but apparentely it is within the mix of genes in our genome to not lose your neurons after adulthood before your "natural" death. Would we see a decline after 150 years? Don't know, we haven't been able to observe, lets get there first.
we´ll need artificial neuronal cells than wich are replaced after and after. in many steps. then in the end we´ll have a cyber brain but i dont know if thats better than Undead.
@PhantomRaiser Part of finding a cure to aging is figuring out how to keep the brain youlthful. Don't just say we "cannot" Cause we don't know that yet until we try.
@PhantomRaiser i think your story is bullshit cause the reason we only make neurons twice a life time is because of the process dr. aubrey de gray wants to stop.
So if you stop the aging process, and all of the factors around it, you will not run out of neurons either.
@PhantomRaiser You are both incorrect and correct at the same time. Granted with "immortality" or better put 'the halting and reversal of senescence and thus full cellular rejuvination' all seven causes of the "disease of aging" (dehabilitation and death) must be covered before we achieve longevity and therefore LE itself. One of those most vital steps toward LEV is via FCR the introduction in intervals of new healthy stemcells via 'Stem Cell Therapy' thus the growth of new healthy neurons.
@PhantomRaiser "you cannot regenerate the neurons..." ok "lad", then we will have, as always,to figure that shit out, no big deal... which brings us to 2 conclusions: 1. We'll be able to (cool!) 2. We wont be able to ( damn it! whatever then...we were meant to die anyways) So as you can see, it's a no-losing game bro
Once we start getting better at DNA programming and tissue engineering, we will be able to create neurons u crazy bastard. Maybe stem cells will help who knows. Also, in the future don't you think we will be able to grow extra brain matter to add onto our own?
I believe the way the body recreates these neurons, as you say, during childhood and adult, can be reproduced. Maybe a specific drug can fool the body into doing this.
@PhantomRaiser to my understanding in bruce liptons biology of belief, nearly all cells are regenerated naturally within a span of three months, others taking somewhat longer, but still being regenerated
Technology marches on fella. I have never met a 150-yr-old so you can't prove your hypothesis that we will turn to Zombies at that age.
My hope is that with Telomerase activation alone I will live to a vibrant 135 (currently 35). And by then Nanotechnology will be developed enough to repair my Neurons atom by atom, one by one. If that's not yet available then perhaps further extension of neuronal life and function will be available along the way to an even greater age.
@Achaeos6 I waste time ? What is to repair ? Neurons ? They cannot be repaired, they cannot be helped to expand nor to live forever. Our actual knowledge may lead us to think (with our logic) that neurons, like other cells, can be repaired or actually replaced. Well, it's wrong, neurons even when you touch them or use them with some part of the brain, even the most littlest cell ever to be build, they DIE. There is no hope to think of regenerating neurons, they die at a touch :|
Picture a healthy neuron. When it becomes unhealthy this only means that some atoms are not where they belong anymore. Just replace the atoms using very tiny robots. This level of technology is decades away but I have a few.
I suspect it will prove easier to stimulate the body to do the necessary repairs on its own though.
@Achaeos6 bullshit ! you cannot fucking replicate a neuron charged with past information, information that died and cannot be revived :| it's called entropy, you cannot fucking reverse entropy, nor replicate it, nor understand it, nor modify it. you cannot replicate the neuronal electrical field even with a hundred tiny nano-bots :|
And this fucking retard called Aubrey de Grey it's talking about biological cells, not neuronal cells, damn fools ! :|
@PhantomRaiser I agree with you Phatom about the neurons...
I also agree that he is talking about cells other then the neuronal. However i do believe we will find many more challenges as we attempt to halt the damage of metabolism.
Neurons are biological cells. Everything about them is determines by DNA. A few alterations to your DNA might be enough to sustain all cells forever.
i never said replicate them I said repair them. Nothing died.
Everytime an organism is formed Entropy is effective reversed and the only reason it isn't held at bay forever naturally is because that would result in an organism which does not evolve near as fast as others, putting it at a disadvantage & causing its extinction
@PhantomRaiser I do not profess to grasp shit in Biological or Neurological Medicine or Science. Although, My wife is a Alternative Nurse for people who choose to deny medicine and opt to focus on their faith in God instead. She has had a few severe cases where people people had visible tumors and Cancerous sores eating away at their flesh and internal organs. In the three cases each person died of pneumonia. Although, in each case and this is documented with Los Angeles County Coroner...
@PhantomRaiser ...Each person had been (After Death) totally restored, no visible, tumors internally or externally. One case, a Woman had her face half eaten away... And when he family came to ID the body they could not find her becasue they were expecting to find a woman missing part of her face but she had been restored and even looked almost 20 years younger... Once they found her. While they were alive they were suffering from cancer and cancer related illness and complications.
@PhantomRaiser It would seem to me there is some way to reverse entropy?? Maybe the missing ingredient is God?? ~ 'Broadview' a Christian Science care facility in LA County... wish the I get my hands on the Autopsy reports but there is no way the city or the state will allow me to do that. My wife doesn't use CPR or any other medical procedure to resuscitate the patient... She has another nurse read the Gospel of John, while she tells them "There is only God here!" And it works.
@Dositheus You know ... your comment is the one I like the most, from all others that told me from the science point of view about 'fixing neurons'. Yours is different and it is, from my point of view, the only one that it's acceptable in this case : only God can make, by little things with little atoms, miracles like that. If He really exists, then He is the only explanation.
@PhantomRaiser Only God? Are you aware that scientists are already engineering quantum computers? Life is about science, not God. God is simply a belief held by the majority.
@Prolite Agreed with the 'life is about science' but the part with 'no God', I'm not quite sure of that, if He is here somewhere, then he may well have a interference, even at a absolute minimum scale to change something, and that something is called life cell. And if you start telling me about science, then start explaining what's a "life cell", and of course, the further you go with knowledge, the further you don't understand nothing about the 'life cell', it's something real unexplainable
@PhantomRaiser When you make up your own facts in an argument, it sort of defeats the purpose of having one. Religion is not science. And science is not religion. Once science figures out how to defeat aging, the idea of "God" will be phased out over a generation and religion will have a much more Buddhist or Hindu meaning flavor to it. The only reason why religion exists is because of the fear of death and that people die.
@Prolite Dude I didn't say science didn't found out a way to stop aging, aubrey did it. He found the way to stop aging. But I'm not talking about that here, I didn't say biological cells cannot be reproduced or replaced with stem cells, and so on.
What I am saying here is that there is no possible way to re-create the synapses and the neurons. That's all, you just can't. You can't bring back to life lost information from lost neurons. In other words: 150 year old - 20 year body, no neurons
@PhantomRaiser Science some day will figure out a way. It may be impossible now, but maybe not hundreds of thousands of years into the future. But I'm not concerned about that. The only thing I am concerned with is whether science can figure out how to slow down aging before 2045, or before it's too late to have any beneficial cause to my life.
@Prolite that it's possible even now, although no one cares these days. There will be better days when all the world will be concerned on science not politics or war scandals... I hope this will happen
@PhantomRaiser See? Both of you (plus me) agree that the world should focus on science, science and more science. That's the Era when we could remove the 'im' from 'impossible'. Why bother with conflict? Wars on territory? We could end famine, disease, DEATH. That's what human beings are all about: living long, and prosper.
@squamish4244 What's wrong with you? Here I am, being all poetic and stuff (scientific, nonetheless), and you come and say that? What's that supposed to mean? Yes, I'm well aware of the theory of the Universe's heat death, that is exactly that, a theory. Even if it's true, and in the future entropy will reach it's peaking point, what about the M-theory? Multiverses? Traveling back in time? By then, I bet we'll have it all figured out. We, as a race, are still so young, and have so much to learn.
@PedroNGCProductions Well, it;s not exactly a theory..the sun WILL burn out in about 5 billion years...as you well know. But calm down man, so what if I disagree with you? You've freaked out on everyone who has in the last five hours! How happy would you be living forever with that kind of attitude?
@squamish4244 yes the sun will burn out in 5 billion years from. By then the posthuman race would be far out into space, and with that kind of future technology would problably control our sun. I know he might seem kinda harsh, but I think we both really want to live as long as possible, and we try to convince people why things like anti ageing technologies will benefit us. (and living forever is impossible, forever never, ever, ever, ever ends)
Stem cells can be differentiated into nerve cells by growing them under the proper mechanical stresses. Whether or not they can be made to replace existing or dying nerve cells is a trickier question; one that we will likely see the answer to in the next couple of centuries.
@PhantomRaiser Wow, we've got a genious in the house. He can even touch neurons. Ever heard of undifferentiated cells? Also known as stem cells? And this is just ONE of the MANY possibilities. A neural stem cell HAS BEEN PROVEN (as in, already has) to be able to develop into a functional neuron. So don't come with all that "i'm smarter than any scientist on earth" crap.
You know, even if he still only had a "computer technician" diploma, he would be, and still is more intelligent than the majority, if not all of the people attempting to call him out on things. His ideas about aging and slowing down the effects of aging are worth a look into, and ANY study into slowing the effects of aging are worthwhile.
in all fairness, you've got a point, de grey a lot of times tries to present himself as more mainstream than he actually is. That said he's got some intresting ideas, but a word to the wise never hurt anyone.
it is unfair to call him a promise maker. he is telling the science as he sees it and he makes absolutely no bones about that. where what he sees has been well studied he says that and where it is questionable he says that as well.
just for the record, de grey was awarded his phd at cambridge for his work in biology. before that he was a software engineer working on ai. to call him a "computer technician" is ridiculous, and to say that he has no biology credit from cambridge is just false. maybe he wasn't a lecturer, but having a phd from the school for your groundbreaking work in the field of biology, specifically regarding aging qualifies him for something. this attack, at least with the context given, is very unfair.
Anyone who knows anything about biology and reads his stuff knows he's a genius. Cambridge is full of stuck up british assholes... De Grey needs to come to the US where we actually pay people for good ideas instead of shit on them because of jealousy
If atheists are smarter than theists, than why do ahteists always believe that the so-called terrorist act '9/11' was carried out by outside, Islamic terrorists when there has never been relevant evidence?
To H1PBS: No, he didn't . He congratulated the people who did 9/11 because he hated America - however this does not mean he did it. It is unlikely that a person in an Afghan cave can mount a technologically advanced attack on the most powerful country in the world i.e. America. There are countless more contradictions in the official story of who the perpetrators are. Do you research. Atheists are the only ones who belief it is an outside Islamic job.
And you think that America could find people patriotic enough to be willing to give their life in a fake terrorist attack for an inside job like that? I'm not saying it wasn't what you say it was, it just doesn't seem to be very likely that they could find people willing to give their life for the sort of cause you are suggesting.
Sorry, Invesigator, but I saw the the clip of OBL bragging about how well the attack when, how he wondered beforhand if it might collapes the entire building, etc.
To stevekap8: Du måste vara en ateist, du svenska knark. Sverige är fullt av ateister, är inte det? Enligt min teori då de flesta av dem prenumerera på den officiella contradictive officiella historien att 9 / 11 var en utanför Islamiska jobb.
congrats on the troll. those things are not related. also, atheists are not smart by necessity. not believing in god for a stupid reason is fundamentally no different than believing in god for any reason. many atheists are predisposed to look at the world skeptically, often leading to reasonable answers. but that is not the same thing as being "smart".
Even if he'd be a complete fraud - he ALREADY changed a lot of peoples understanding/paradigma on aging and it's increasing every day, people starts thinking about (in)evitable. And how have you contributed to the world and society you fuckin' religious moron??
Does it matter if he has got the word professor attached to his title?
as for you "HoracioLara" i cannot believe how ignorant you are, not just because you mention god in a monotheistic way but because you contradict such a gods own values, if what you believe is true (which it's not) then you would be the one to burn in hell, not this man who is trying to pursue ever increasing novelty, technological advancement and truth.
Well, yes, it does. To the people that played by the rules, worked there way up from post doc, to assistent professor, to full professor, it matters quites a bit.
If anyone who feels like it gets to call himself, "professor at Cambridge", THEN the titled wouldn't mean anything. Thats why we call out such people.
I don't know the extent to which he's encouraged a false sense of his status at Cambridge but I do not think that the fact that he is not employed there as a biologist destroys his credibility. It seemed quite clear from the documentary that he was an outsider. He certainly does have a PhD from Cambridge and they do not give those away.
Well, there are PHD's and there are PHD's. No, they don't give them away. But you don't get a PHD in biologoy by doing the courese work in compture science.
I can for see defeating aging will be within the healthcare debates of the future. Lets just hope it stays a non-partisan topic.
curingaging00 5 months ago
@curingaging00 It will be a partisan topic. It is already a partisan topic. Some people believe it is immoral to outstrip our "natural lifespan."
StormZephyr 3 months ago
@StormZephyr Was talking about an issue being turned into a "Republican VS. Democrat" type thing. I just hope it doesn't but there is a pretty good chance it will in the coming years and decades.
curingaging00 3 months ago
Sad, but all times in history - all geniuses were discriminated and was not very popular because regular people just don't understand them...
That's what the differences between genius and non - geniuses all are different from regular people, cause regular people have no abilities to be geniuses.
tommixoft 5 months ago 2
Scientists sometimes make the mistake of believing that because of their high capacity for reasoning, they are somehow less prone to human failings like arrogance, anger, fear, egoism, etc. when this just isn't the case. Aubrey de Grey has in this case deliberately misrepresented himself due to his obsession with his cause.
squamish4244 6 months ago
lol!!!
TheNYCbarbiegirl 8 months ago
Computer techinicians tend to look to what needs to be done it's part of computal engineering.
livedandletdie 8 months ago
Death will die lol
TheDarkFenix 9 months ago
Can we get some context on this? From what I know he was an engineer at Cambridge and then worked on developing some data bases in the genetics department for their research until 2006...
Also: On the basis of the book, Trinity Hall of the University of Cambridge awarded de Grey a PhD in 2000.[8]
Demagogue88 10 months ago 2
@Demagogue88 You're right, this video is nothing but stupidity, hence the thumbs down people have been giving it. Aubrey de Grey is a spectacular man, capable of revolutionizing the way we see life. I hope he succeeds!
PedroNGCProductions 6 months ago 2
HAHAHAH WTF???
saltfan2 10 months ago
Instead of these religious cancer comments I'd like to see an explanation on what is going on in this video
MrAmritasya 1 year ago
We must concentrate on fighting diseases, ending extreme poverty, ending Aging,
It can be done, its a mater of how much you are willing to work for these goals that make it happen that determines how fast these discovories and breakthroughs will come.
curingaging00 1 year ago
@curingaging00 we are already overpopulated, what do you think would happen if people lived 10 times as long?
LuciferLBelial 9 months ago
@LuciferLBelial According to demographics of the world, the longer people live on average the lower the birth rate and the later people decide to have children.
Europe has a very high standard of living in the world. average birth rate is under 2.0
while In Zimbabwe, average life expectancy 38 years and if you were lucky to make it to age 38, you were most likely starving. they have an average birth per mother of 7+.
MOST of the population BOOM is from "super slums" not cause of longer life.
curingaging00 9 months ago
@curingaging00 think about this when south asian and african breed like fly and die like fly while european tend to live much longer and have more time to procreate.
siewmj1 6 months ago
@LuciferLBelial Well, "Lucifer", have you ever heard of the possibility that the Universe out there is imense, or rather infinite? We already went to the moon, we could go to Mars if we wanted to... Heck, if I could stop ageing, I would definetely sign up for living on the moon, even (and this is hard for me) without Internet!
PedroNGCProductions 6 months ago
wtf
barbaracolley 1 year ago 2
250 years from now, people will read about Dr de Grey. he will be looked upon as we look upon Dr Freud- a man who had many erroneus beliefs, but whom none the less is considered a pioneer his field. Dr de Grey will be acknowlegded as a visionary, while the nay sayers will turn over in their graves.
Kafka1479 1 year ago
@PhantomRaiser your logic about the body doing it twice and never again so therefore science can not do it is absolutly flawed. The body creates two sets of teeth are you saying it would be impossible science to find a way to grow a third set. If the body can do it then science can or will find a way to replicate the process. Why is this not sinking in?
MrIgat 1 year ago
People study and learn whether they are in a University doing it or doing the learning and research in their own time outside a university without any activities carried out in a university. A university is nothing more than an organized company, a business, a fraternity, a learning place, a library that contains many tools to refer to.
dotnetsparx 1 year ago
P.S. : If you really want to have many neurons, try and excite glial cells to reproduce to be as much as you need, the glial cells sometimes transform into some types of neuronal cells (not sure of this info myself, but as I heard and read about it, actually no one's sure :| ). Anyway, excitation of reproduction of glial cells is your homework, guys :D
PhantomRaiser 1 year ago
@max10wonderboy You all blindly believe in this technology but you can't seem to understand that nothing and I say nothing, can replace neurons, not artificial not stem not nothing. Idealism is not a example. Stem cells cannot mimic neuronal functions, only biological functions. Neurons are something more than simple biological cells, you can't re-create electrical-biological cells.
Again I resume at my ex comment : You CAN live as much as you like, but your neurons will die, sooner or later
PhantomRaiser 1 year ago
He didnt lie about anything. Watch the programme.
ramadroid 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If you seize to percieve then you are dead regardless of your youth and health. That said we are forever dying. Our concern with dying should be not much greater than our concern on going to sleep at night.
nobodydobon18 1 year ago
Comment removed
nobodydobon18 1 year ago
yeah i agree..living super long isn't a bad prospect if we knew the condition of our life at that point... a 175yr old vegetable is not something we strive for.
what about that jelly fish that gets old and then something triggers it to revert back to it's baby stages, and it starts all over perpetually (sorry for my lack of proper vocab)
FLPman 1 year ago
May i remind you that mr Darwin was a fricking priest?
Biology was his hobby.
diekerze 1 year ago
Comment removed
jmpeer 1 year ago
Ya i agree. Lets talk about science. Just because some other people have their own resources and restrict resources to people with interests to defeat aging, is no reason to not talk about science and how defeating aging is possible.
IcarusFlying 1 year ago
...so?
DarkMessiah6 1 year ago
So many suffering the 'fatalism logjam' and suicidal tendancies... One might refer to these fatalists as suicidalists, or 'deathists'. Let them all die, it would certainly make our overall research in LE a lot easier and unimpeded. btw, Audrey de Grey studied at both Cambridge and Oxford, and he also attained his doctorate in more than one field, innitially in 'Science & IT' which is at the centre of all modern research in Genetics, Biomedical Gerontology and of course Nanotechnology.
AryanCrusaderXII 1 year ago
I like the man, but he is incorrect in his ideas. no one will ever "live forever"
(at least not on this side of the grave)
Tartersauce101 1 year ago
@Tartersauce101 How the hell do you know that?
dannyboyfour 1 year ago
@dannyboyfour
lol.
how the hell do you not?
the universe won't even live forever...and trust me, know one will live even close to what could be called "immortal"
even if we "stop" the aging process you will die, and soon.
car accidents, strokes, plane crashes, food poisoning, falling and hitting your head, war, drowning etc etc etc.
death is inevitable, i suggest everyone learn to accept it.
Tartersauce101 1 year ago
@Tartersauce101 The end of the universe is such a stupendously distant future that by the time it rolls around it's entirely possible we will have figured out a way to prevent it.
All of the things you mentioned are preventable, just like death by aging may be.
Your mindset about aging is exactly the mindset that prevents people from really attempting to combat aging.
dannyboyfour 1 year ago
@Tartersauce101 yes I back you up on that dude, but I would say that I refuse to die of something that is indeed curable or managable. Something that is in our hands. Car accidents and that shit, enthropy...,well yeah, bad luck. But we should continue our pursuit of living longer and healthier, cus you know what? Living is fun.
nestorlovesguitar 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Just one humble simple question. Why did Cambridge award de Grey a PhD in 2000 on the basis of his book concerning the biology of one aspect of aging, The Mitochondrial Free Radical Theory of Aging if he was a computer technician?? I smell bullshit all over this video. Someone should check their facts. HoracioLara, you are an idiot.
Shadowstar204 1 year ago
Please just remove this video if it isn't a joke, you are kinda making yourself look bad.
curingaging00 1 year ago
I hope this videos a joke.
curingaging00 1 year ago
jealousy? or are you just misinformed? you should delete this video. Dr Aubrey de Grey was conferred a Doctorate of Philosophy from Cambridge university in 2000.
google on Congregation of the Regent House on 9 December 2000.
chillshack 1 year ago
bloody idiots who try and get in his way... he needs as many leg ups as possible. Fools.
philipjterry 2 years ago
what is this from? Was it on the BBC?
1qewretry 2 years ago
where is it from? i want to see whole thing
its definitely BBC
soth3d 2 years ago
It was on channel 4 a few years back.
This small clip isn't an accurate description of the whole program..
INGRAM0009 2 years ago
a computer technician who was given a PHD for his biological research by cambridge.
I wish these negative twits would get the hell out of the way of research and those pushing the boundaries. Beige people are the same the world over.
I wish I could give this zero stars!!
SidandCoke 2 years ago
Totally! Bloody idiots who are trying to knock him. I heard a scientists say he has a similar intellect to Da Vinci.
Everyone should support him as much as possible. I too wish these fools would invest there energy into how they can help him further and his crusade. People in his situation need as many leg ups as possible.
philipjterry 2 years ago
@philipjterry i agree. even if this man failed for thousand years i would still support him because he is trying to grant eternity and a thousand years is nothing compared to living indefinately.
maxgunn555 1 year ago
Totally! Bloody idiots who are trying to get in his way. I scientist compared his intellect to Da Vinci. We need to support him.
philipjterry 2 years ago
life extension therapies will be affordable in the foreseeable future. i can see it.
DraeneiGirlsHotMuch 2 years ago
Comment removed
DraeneiGirlsHotMuch 2 years ago
Albert Einstein - patent clerk (assistant).
Kitsua 2 years ago
Aubrey has denied being fired from Cambridge, and says that he had express written permission to use the department's website. He left so he could work full time on his anti-aging crusade, and even gave 4 months notice.
You can find his response to this by searching on google for:
ashburner ag24 "channel 4 documentary"
(I can't post urls on here)
As of 2010 Cambridge University has released no statements claiming that De Grey was fired, or is guilty of any form of misconduct.
marainein 2 years ago
That lying SOB!!
CleverDjembe 2 years ago
Lol @ you making the idiotic assumption that it'll only be available to the rich when in fact they have every reason to make it widely available to everyone.
PsychoJosh 2 years ago
You mean anti-aging treatment?
Believe me, VERY few will be given it.
At least not all. They simply have no reason to give it to unproductiv retards. That's what i say.
But i think, if we reach this point, it will be given first to thoes most usefull, scientists etc. I'am sure many politicians would 'volounter'.
Who knows? Immortal emperor of humanity will arrive?
Ilamarea 2 years ago
None of that is true at all. Everything you're saying is the exact opposite of the truth. They have every incentive to give these therapies to EVERYONE because it's something that EVERYONE suffers from, and if they don't give it to everyone then they'll be spending a ridiculous amount on health care for elderly people. By 2050 Alzheimer's disease ALONE will be costing the government over $1 trillion, and that's just one example.
PsychoJosh 2 years ago
Oh yeah, and here we go with the fucking thruth,
This are predictions, you damn idiot. They are not the fucking truth we have no fucking idea what will happen in future.
Do you fucking know how much thoes therpies will cost dumbass? No you have no fucking idea, so dont compere expensions of your retarded government, and why you amercians allways bring only your retarded country into picture, giving no shit about the rest of the world?
Fuck you fat retard.
Ilamarea 2 years ago
First of all I'm Canadian you dumb piece of shit, congratulations on presuming things about me and talking out of your ass before getting your facts straight, it makes your argument seem WAY more smart and valid. Second it doesn't matter if it's expensive because the government will recognize that NOT mandating these therapies for everyone will be even MORE expensive, they'll be spending $1 trillion on AD patients alone, a fact I wouldn't have to repeat if you'd learn how to fucking read.
PsychoJosh 2 years ago
So what about scenario, in which it costs fucking 10 million dollars to do this stupid therapy for one person dip shit. Just for begining, where it makes you get old, just to live like an empty shell for 50 years more.
ten fucking million, NOT fucking much,
Now multiply it by 45 millions, and add 3 times more for additional reaserch and other shit that comes with it.
How much it gets? Quite fucking much.
It gives you 450 trillion dollars.
Budget of USA is around 3 trillions.
Retard.
Ilamarea 2 years ago
LOL I seriously hope you're joking. There is no way in hell this will cost TEN MILLION DOLLARS for just one person and if you really think it will then you are fucking stupid as hell and need to go back to 2nd grade math class because even the world's most expensive therapies today only cost a few thousand dollars. I'm done arguing with you because it's clear you're just talking out of your ass about something you know NOTHING about. Ten million dollars for one person LMAO are you kidding me.
PsychoJosh 2 years ago
And how the fuck do you know It won't? It has not yet been invented idiot. What if it will cost say 10 thousnds a week, and go on for few years?
And what if some fucktarded company will take over this and sell it for profit?
You noticed words such us "if" in my responses?
Again, this are just predictions, and you talk even worse shit out of your ass... whats been for diner? o.0
Ilamarea 2 years ago
I definitely know it won't, you saying that a therapy is going to cost TEN MILLION DOLLARS is as fucking retarded as saying a Bugatti Veyron will cost $5. There are already plans for how the therapies will be distributed and it almost certainly won't be a weekly one, it'll be a one-time therapy every 20-30 years. And if you really are eager to die then you don't have to take the therapy. So please do die and take your stupidity out of the gene pool.
PsychoJosh 2 years ago
Furthermore, a therapy as widely-encompassing as the cure for aging can not ever be owned by a single company you fucking moron. Something as huge as this only can and will be controlled and distributed by the government, precisely because it's a treatment for a disease that absolutely everyone suffers from. Disney will not ever be the sole proprietor of the cure for cancer regardless of what tiny-brained shitheads like you think. You show such an incredibly poor understanding of the world.
PsychoJosh 2 years ago
"Cannot ever be owned" blah blah blah.
You, are, just, retarded.
Do you know what we are talking about? No you have no fucking idea.
We are talking about prediciotns you retard. You know what it means? Seems not.
And yes idiot, such therapy can be owned by a company. If say, they will pay such ppl as Aubrey, to do what he does, except on terms determined in contract.
'We pay, you work, we own.'
And again, what we were "discussing" here, were probabilities.
Good one with dieying and gene pool.
Ilamarea 2 years ago
Yes dipshit, that's right, we are discussing predictions, specifically how utterly retarded and illogical YOUR predictions are. Here's the deal dumbass: when a cure for aging is developed, A LOT OF PEOPLE are going to want it. BADLY. More than they'd want a cure for other things. As development of a cure becomes widely known, it'll become impossible for politicians to get re-elected on a platform that DOESN'T address this issue.
PsychoJosh 2 years ago
So that means that anything that threatens to become a barrier to universal access of these therapies will simply become subject to compulsory purchase by the government (which could end up being pricey, but compulsory nonetheless). All the laws that impede such progress will be torn up. And it'll be in the best interests of the industrialized world to make it available to everyone at a price they can pay, because 9/11 proved that making a lot of people very mad is a bad move.
PsychoJosh 2 years ago
at the end of this documentary, the reporter said, he likes Aubrey de Grey.
meowthyy 2 years ago
Just one humble simple question. Why did Cambridge award de Grey a PhD in 2000 on the basis of his book concerning the biology of one aspect of aging, The Mitochondrial Free Radical Theory of Aging if he was a computer technician?? I smell bullshit all over this video. Someone should check their facts.
Shadowstar204 2 years ago
Nah no worries, you should really check out this full documentary where this clip came from to get the full context. It's excellent.
ubersteigen 2 years ago
Do canadians really seriously call people fags?
Transfectingood 2 years ago 2
you are right, then, how much energy do we need to regenerate our dying cells? I guess that is a better question.
edgaritoaqui 2 years ago
great point harrymook! however, I was forced to refrase this question again when I read A New Kind of Science by Wolfram in his research on the revesability of the second law of thermodynamics. Can we really reverse the second law? that is the most important question in the quest for immortality. I do believe this is a physics problem rather than a biomolecular one.
edgaritoaqui 2 years ago
thats because you dont have a background in biology..
Transfectingood 2 years ago
Impossible, if they can really take the function of the old neurons ... there's no telling how many things you can use this, but I doubt it ...
PhantomRaiser 2 years ago
Yeh, but even though they can resist that long, they won't live forever, you know. The synapsis of the neurons that makes another good part of the brain and memory, is relative to any individual, it can resist or not ... but the neurons can die, they cannot be regenerated, you don't know what nuclear and genetic information they have making the conscience and rational thinking of the individual, you can't know what neurons you should grow to forever keep the brain alive thinking.
PhantomRaiser 2 years ago
But you don't understand, even though you can make new neurons, you must regenerate and keep alive the current neurons and that's impossible. But if you create new neurons (the absurd way) there won't have your memory you lost after your ex-neurons died... si life as this point is useless
PhantomRaiser 2 years ago
Dude, I'm talking about our bodies, we can support long-living bodies as much as we want, but I was talking about the neurons, the cells that cannot recreate themselves because they keep our memory, you cannot add memory to a body unless you know what memory neurons you must add. But you can't decode neurons, so if you pass 150 years old with 25 years old body... you won't have a mind because all the neurons from your brain ... died :))
PhantomRaiser 2 years ago
I see quote mining here. There's a lot more that got cut out here.
hellomate639 2 years ago
what a dumb vid 1/5
cpisretartedmuch 2 years ago 2
You cant reverse Entropy. If you want to create a body that reverses the effects of aging, you need to double the neurons, bio-cells and all of that, or quite triple them, or quadruple them.
Why ? Because you need a type of cell that re-creates (divides the other in creating a new one). You need a type of cell that keeps it alive. And you need a type of cell that protects it (not the same as keeping it alive). Or even more functions.
So ... be careful what you want guys
PhantomRaiser 2 years ago
Merge Aubrey de Grey and nano technology and this is very much in the realm's of possible in the time frame he says. Cancer cells do not die they have no programmed cell death, steal that and were pretty tough to kill by aging. I don't really give a shit about the video not very good the rating is proof enough of that. We all know this guys on to something.
AdamBoozer 2 years ago
But a young person is strong, good health, good skin, healthy bones, healthy everything etc... Now can you tell me why it only last for a certain amount of time? And also, is it possible to recreate that?
yourealiti 2 years ago
The human body recreates only twice in a life-time neurons : childhood and as adult, but never again. You cannot regenerate the neurons, so even if you make the body forever young, after ~150 years you will loose all your neurons, and eventually becoming an real Undead.
So again I say... careful what you want, lads.
PhantomRaiser 2 years ago
We'll end up as mind-dead zombies in young and healthy bodies :)
HoracioLara 2 years ago
Exactly :))
PhantomRaiser 2 years ago
Perls T.
Dementia-free centenarians
(2004) Experimental Gerontology, 39 (11-12 SPEC. ISS.), pp. 1587-1593.
If you search you'll find other studies that detail centenarians with no neural degeneration. They're a small subset of the population, but apparentely it is within the mix of genes in our genome to not lose your neurons after adulthood before your "natural" death. Would we see a decline after 150 years? Don't know, we haven't been able to observe, lets get there first.
Waywardpaladin 1 year ago
@HoracioLara Have you heard about SVZ and SGZ?!?!? Google it...
SethleyNovais 1 year ago
@HoracioLara don't see why science just couldn't figure out how the body does it, and recreate it...we could all be geniuses.
ChinoMasFino 1 year ago
@HoracioLara Sounds like what modern media has done to the youth allready.
sacredgeometry 1 year ago
yeah so no different than now?
BananaSandwich1 1 year ago
we´ll need artificial neuronal cells than wich are replaced after and after. in many steps. then in the end we´ll have a cyber brain but i dont know if thats better than Undead.
kingmaxim187 2 years ago
:)))) Good point
PhantomRaiser 2 years ago
uhm no
its called stop aging
not rebuild your body
de grey tries to find a way that our cells dont become older
cryssiss 2 years ago
No, it's also possible to repair the damage done by aging.
PsychoJosh 2 years ago
@PhantomRaiser
This is why stemcells are important. They can be used to re-populate those areas of the brain. So this is also a managable issue.
deram 1 year ago
@PhantomRaiser Part of finding a cure to aging is figuring out how to keep the brain youlthful. Don't just say we "cannot" Cause we don't know that yet until we try.
dont give up.
curingaging00 1 year ago
@PhantomRaiser i think your story is bullshit cause the reason we only make neurons twice a life time is because of the process dr. aubrey de gray wants to stop.
So if you stop the aging process, and all of the factors around it, you will not run out of neurons either.
djDarkDemon 1 year ago
@PhantomRaiser Why do you think it's impossible to regenerate neurons?
DeceiverReborn 1 year ago
@PhantomRaiser You are both incorrect and correct at the same time. Granted with "immortality" or better put 'the halting and reversal of senescence and thus full cellular rejuvination' all seven causes of the "disease of aging" (dehabilitation and death) must be covered before we achieve longevity and therefore LE itself. One of those most vital steps toward LEV is via FCR the introduction in intervals of new healthy stemcells via 'Stem Cell Therapy' thus the growth of new healthy neurons.
AryanCrusaderXII 1 year ago
@PhantomRaiser "you cannot regenerate the neurons..." ok "lad", then we will have, as always,to figure that shit out, no big deal... which brings us to 2 conclusions: 1. We'll be able to (cool!) 2. We wont be able to ( damn it! whatever then...we were meant to die anyways) So as you can see, it's a no-losing game bro
nestorlovesguitar 1 year ago
@PhantomRaiser
Once we start getting better at DNA programming and tissue engineering, we will be able to create neurons u crazy bastard. Maybe stem cells will help who knows. Also, in the future don't you think we will be able to grow extra brain matter to add onto our own?
I believe the way the body recreates these neurons, as you say, during childhood and adult, can be reproduced. Maybe a specific drug can fool the body into doing this.
ChimeraProd 1 year ago
@PhantomRaiser to my understanding in bruce liptons biology of belief, nearly all cells are regenerated naturally within a span of three months, others taking somewhat longer, but still being regenerated
fatwadmcskylar 1 year ago
@PhantomRaiser A moot point considering that in 100 years we will definitely have artificial neurons replacing our current ones.
PsychoJosh 1 year ago
@PhantomRaiser
who told that you cant regenerate neurons! with stem cells that would be possible!
max10wonderboy 1 year ago
@PhantomRaiser
Technology marches on fella. I have never met a 150-yr-old so you can't prove your hypothesis that we will turn to Zombies at that age.
My hope is that with Telomerase activation alone I will live to a vibrant 135 (currently 35). And by then Nanotechnology will be developed enough to repair my Neurons atom by atom, one by one. If that's not yet available then perhaps further extension of neuronal life and function will be available along the way to an even greater age.
Achaeos6 1 year ago
@Achaeos6 Nanotechnology = metal, neurons = biological, don't make mistakes, lad. You can't repair bio-cells with metal-cells, doh. :|
PhantomRaiser 1 year ago
@PhantomRaiser
How do you know that future technology will not be able to repair and rejuvenate neurons?
The answer: you don't.
So many people have made the mistake of aying that something was impossible only to be proven wrong when science achieved it.
Nanotechtech is not exclusively metal. We may even build the DNA code for an organism which would go into our brains and repair everything.
Broaden your mind a bit. You are locked in a feedback loop or something. Stop wastig time.
Achaeos6 1 year ago
@Achaeos6 I waste time ? What is to repair ? Neurons ? They cannot be repaired, they cannot be helped to expand nor to live forever. Our actual knowledge may lead us to think (with our logic) that neurons, like other cells, can be repaired or actually replaced. Well, it's wrong, neurons even when you touch them or use them with some part of the brain, even the most littlest cell ever to be build, they DIE. There is no hope to think of regenerating neurons, they die at a touch :|
PhantomRaiser 1 year ago
@PhantomRaiser
You just dont understand.
Picture a healthy neuron. When it becomes unhealthy this only means that some atoms are not where they belong anymore. Just replace the atoms using very tiny robots. This level of technology is decades away but I have a few.
I suspect it will prove easier to stimulate the body to do the necessary repairs on its own though.
Achaeos6 1 year ago
@Achaeos6 bullshit ! you cannot fucking replicate a neuron charged with past information, information that died and cannot be revived :| it's called entropy, you cannot fucking reverse entropy, nor replicate it, nor understand it, nor modify it. you cannot replicate the neuronal electrical field even with a hundred tiny nano-bots :|
And this fucking retard called Aubrey de Grey it's talking about biological cells, not neuronal cells, damn fools ! :|
PhantomRaiser 1 year ago
@PhantomRaiser I agree with you Phatom about the neurons...
I also agree that he is talking about cells other then the neuronal. However i do believe we will find many more challenges as we attempt to halt the damage of metabolism.
Nxcng 1 year ago
@PhantomRaiser
Neurons are biological cells. Everything about them is determines by DNA. A few alterations to your DNA might be enough to sustain all cells forever.
i never said replicate them I said repair them. Nothing died.
Everytime an organism is formed Entropy is effective reversed and the only reason it isn't held at bay forever naturally is because that would result in an organism which does not evolve near as fast as others, putting it at a disadvantage & causing its extinction
Achaeos6 1 year ago
@PhantomRaiser I do not profess to grasp shit in Biological or Neurological Medicine or Science. Although, My wife is a Alternative Nurse for people who choose to deny medicine and opt to focus on their faith in God instead. She has had a few severe cases where people people had visible tumors and Cancerous sores eating away at their flesh and internal organs. In the three cases each person died of pneumonia. Although, in each case and this is documented with Los Angeles County Coroner...
Dositheus 1 year ago
@PhantomRaiser ...Each person had been (After Death) totally restored, no visible, tumors internally or externally. One case, a Woman had her face half eaten away... And when he family came to ID the body they could not find her becasue they were expecting to find a woman missing part of her face but she had been restored and even looked almost 20 years younger... Once they found her. While they were alive they were suffering from cancer and cancer related illness and complications.
Dositheus 1 year ago
@PhantomRaiser It would seem to me there is some way to reverse entropy?? Maybe the missing ingredient is God?? ~ 'Broadview' a Christian Science care facility in LA County... wish the I get my hands on the Autopsy reports but there is no way the city or the state will allow me to do that. My wife doesn't use CPR or any other medical procedure to resuscitate the patient... She has another nurse read the Gospel of John, while she tells them "There is only God here!" And it works.
Dositheus 1 year ago
@Dositheus You know ... your comment is the one I like the most, from all others that told me from the science point of view about 'fixing neurons'. Yours is different and it is, from my point of view, the only one that it's acceptable in this case : only God can make, by little things with little atoms, miracles like that. If He really exists, then He is the only explanation.
The rest ... die in flames >:)
PhantomRaiser 1 year ago
@PhantomRaiser Only God? Are you aware that scientists are already engineering quantum computers? Life is about science, not God. God is simply a belief held by the majority.
Prolite 1 year ago
@Prolite Agreed with the 'life is about science' but the part with 'no God', I'm not quite sure of that, if He is here somewhere, then he may well have a interference, even at a absolute minimum scale to change something, and that something is called life cell. And if you start telling me about science, then start explaining what's a "life cell", and of course, the further you go with knowledge, the further you don't understand nothing about the 'life cell', it's something real unexplainable
PhantomRaiser 1 year ago
@PhantomRaiser When you make up your own facts in an argument, it sort of defeats the purpose of having one. Religion is not science. And science is not religion. Once science figures out how to defeat aging, the idea of "God" will be phased out over a generation and religion will have a much more Buddhist or Hindu meaning flavor to it. The only reason why religion exists is because of the fear of death and that people die.
Prolite 1 year ago
@Prolite Dude I didn't say science didn't found out a way to stop aging, aubrey did it. He found the way to stop aging. But I'm not talking about that here, I didn't say biological cells cannot be reproduced or replaced with stem cells, and so on.
What I am saying here is that there is no possible way to re-create the synapses and the neurons. That's all, you just can't. You can't bring back to life lost information from lost neurons. In other words: 150 year old - 20 year body, no neurons
PhantomRaiser 1 year ago
@PhantomRaiser Science some day will figure out a way. It may be impossible now, but maybe not hundreds of thousands of years into the future. But I'm not concerned about that. The only thing I am concerned with is whether science can figure out how to slow down aging before 2045, or before it's too late to have any beneficial cause to my life.
Prolite 1 year ago 3
@Prolite that it's possible even now, although no one cares these days. There will be better days when all the world will be concerned on science not politics or war scandals... I hope this will happen
PhantomRaiser 1 year ago 15
@PhantomRaiser See? Both of you (plus me) agree that the world should focus on science, science and more science. That's the Era when we could remove the 'im' from 'impossible'. Why bother with conflict? Wars on territory? We could end famine, disease, DEATH. That's what human beings are all about: living long, and prosper.
PedroNGCProductions 1 year ago 33
@PedroNGCProductions Even the sun will die.
squamish4244 6 months ago
@squamish4244 What's wrong with you? Here I am, being all poetic and stuff (scientific, nonetheless), and you come and say that? What's that supposed to mean? Yes, I'm well aware of the theory of the Universe's heat death, that is exactly that, a theory. Even if it's true, and in the future entropy will reach it's peaking point, what about the M-theory? Multiverses? Traveling back in time? By then, I bet we'll have it all figured out. We, as a race, are still so young, and have so much to learn.
PedroNGCProductions 6 months ago
@PedroNGCProductions Well, it;s not exactly a theory..the sun WILL burn out in about 5 billion years...as you well know. But calm down man, so what if I disagree with you? You've freaked out on everyone who has in the last five hours! How happy would you be living forever with that kind of attitude?
squamish4244 6 months ago
@squamish4244 yes the sun will burn out in 5 billion years from. By then the posthuman race would be far out into space, and with that kind of future technology would problably control our sun. I know he might seem kinda harsh, but I think we both really want to live as long as possible, and we try to convince people why things like anti ageing technologies will benefit us. (and living forever is impossible, forever never, ever, ever, ever ends)
Keim4ever 2 months ago
@PhantomRaiser Not so long as Kantianism continues to dominate the world.
510shredder 1 year ago
@PhantomRaiser
Stem cells can be differentiated into nerve cells by growing them under the proper mechanical stresses. Whether or not they can be made to replace existing or dying nerve cells is a trickier question; one that we will likely see the answer to in the next couple of centuries.
StormZephyr 1 year ago
@PhantomRaiser
haha. oh i get your reasoning now. because it's not possible today....it's not possible in the future. you're grasp of science is amazing.
Kafka1479 1 year ago
@Kafka1479 dude, you're close-minded. please shut up and think and then comment. cheers
PhantomRaiser 1 year ago
@PhantomRaiser
owned
Kafka1479 1 year ago
@PhantomRaiser Wow, we've got a genious in the house. He can even touch neurons. Ever heard of undifferentiated cells? Also known as stem cells? And this is just ONE of the MANY possibilities. A neural stem cell HAS BEEN PROVEN (as in, already has) to be able to develop into a functional neuron. So don't come with all that "i'm smarter than any scientist on earth" crap.
PedroNGCProductions 6 months ago
@PhantomRaiser LOL, do you even know what you're talking about? "Metal-cells"? What the hell are you on?
PedroNGCProductions 6 months ago
@PhantomRaiser this is dead wrong. its proven YEARS AGO that brain cells aka neurons are able to regenerate themselves
garbinoda 1 year ago
@garbinoda yeah, twice in a life-time and after that, nevermore.
PhantomRaiser 1 year ago
Oh this is bullshit subtractive ad hominem. How about you fight like a man and discuss the SCIENCE as opposed to making a big fuss over the POLITICS.
You swine.
w0r1dpeace 2 years ago 23
You know, even if he still only had a "computer technician" diploma, he would be, and still is more intelligent than the majority, if not all of the people attempting to call him out on things. His ideas about aging and slowing down the effects of aging are worth a look into, and ANY study into slowing the effects of aging are worthwhile.
1rishShaman 2 years ago 22
in all fairness, you've got a point, de grey a lot of times tries to present himself as more mainstream than he actually is. That said he's got some intresting ideas, but a word to the wise never hurt anyone.
VentrueAccolyte 2 years ago
it is unfair to call him a promise maker. he is telling the science as he sees it and he makes absolutely no bones about that. where what he sees has been well studied he says that and where it is questionable he says that as well.
read the book. you will be impressed.
whtevn 2 years ago
just for the record, de grey was awarded his phd at cambridge for his work in biology. before that he was a software engineer working on ai. to call him a "computer technician" is ridiculous, and to say that he has no biology credit from cambridge is just false. maybe he wasn't a lecturer, but having a phd from the school for your groundbreaking work in the field of biology, specifically regarding aging qualifies him for something. this attack, at least with the context given, is very unfair.
whtevn 2 years ago 3
Anyone who knows anything about biology and reads his stuff knows he's a genius. Cambridge is full of stuck up british assholes... De Grey needs to come to the US where we actually pay people for good ideas instead of shit on them because of jealousy
ezra2662 3 years ago 2
This is so sad. We have the opportunity to achieve immortality in our lifetimes, and it's spoiled by this fraud.
implicaverse 3 years ago
If atheists are smarter than theists, than why do ahteists always believe that the so-called terrorist act '9/11' was carried out by outside, Islamic terrorists when there has never been relevant evidence?
Invesigator 3 years ago
"Never been any relevant evidence"? Didn't Osama bin Laden claim responsibility?
H1PBS 3 years ago
To H1PBS: No, he didn't . He congratulated the people who did 9/11 because he hated America - however this does not mean he did it. It is unlikely that a person in an Afghan cave can mount a technologically advanced attack on the most powerful country in the world i.e. America. There are countless more contradictions in the official story of who the perpetrators are. Do you research. Atheists are the only ones who belief it is an outside Islamic job.
Invesigator 3 years ago
And you think that America could find people patriotic enough to be willing to give their life in a fake terrorist attack for an inside job like that? I'm not saying it wasn't what you say it was, it just doesn't seem to be very likely that they could find people willing to give their life for the sort of cause you are suggesting.
H1PBS 3 years ago
Sorry, Invesigator, but I saw the the clip of OBL bragging about how well the attack when, how he wondered beforhand if it might collapes the entire building, etc.
You seem to be a bit of a nutter.
stevekap8 3 years ago
To stevekap8: Du måste vara en ateist, du svenska knark. Sverige är fullt av ateister, är inte det? Enligt min teori då de flesta av dem prenumerera på den officiella contradictive officiella historien att 9 / 11 var en utanför Islamiska jobb.
Invesigator 3 years ago
Way too much svenska for me, I lived in Sweden for a while, but don't speak it.
stevekap8 3 years ago
congrats on the troll. those things are not related. also, atheists are not smart by necessity. not believing in god for a stupid reason is fundamentally no different than believing in god for any reason. many atheists are predisposed to look at the world skeptically, often leading to reasonable answers. but that is not the same thing as being "smart".
again. congrats on the troll.
whtevn 2 years ago 4
Does anyone know what this programme was called? And Is the rest of it on youtube?
Tadgh78 3 years ago
"Do you want to live forever?"
It's in related videous currently.
evgeniy13 3 years ago
I love that video, who doesn't?
tyciol 3 years ago
Even if he'd be a complete fraud - he ALREADY changed a lot of peoples understanding/paradigma on aging and it's increasing every day, people starts thinking about (in)evitable. And how have you contributed to the world and society you fuckin' religious moron??
dajukas 3 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
this man is a kook!!!
mamanora03 3 years ago
you're a kook for having such low standards for inspiration. american idol is on.
ohnickoli 3 years ago 2
lol @ Simon Cowell
tyciol 3 years ago
Does it matter if he has got the word professor attached to his title?
as for you "HoracioLara" i cannot believe how ignorant you are, not just because you mention god in a monotheistic way but because you contradict such a gods own values, if what you believe is true (which it's not) then you would be the one to burn in hell, not this man who is trying to pursue ever increasing novelty, technological advancement and truth.
science fuels logical morals and progression.
religion fuels ignorance.
johnyprestige 3 years ago
Well, yes, it does. To the people that played by the rules, worked there way up from post doc, to assistent professor, to full professor, it matters quites a bit.
If anyone who feels like it gets to call himself, "professor at Cambridge", THEN the titled wouldn't mean anything. Thats why we call out such people.
stevekap8 3 years ago
I don't know the extent to which he's encouraged a false sense of his status at Cambridge but I do not think that the fact that he is not employed there as a biologist destroys his credibility. It seemed quite clear from the documentary that he was an outsider. He certainly does have a PhD from Cambridge and they do not give those away.
starrynightuk 3 years ago
Well, there are PHD's and there are PHD's. No, they don't give them away. But you don't get a PHD in biologoy by doing the courese work in compture science.
stevekap8 3 years ago
I gather it's a PhD in biology!
starrynightuk 3 years ago
Nope, He doesn't have a Phd in biology, thats the point.
stevekap8 3 years ago