I don't know if anyone's brought this up yet, but what I don't hear being factored into the debate is the environment of new toxins, stresses, radiations, lack of physical movement etc.. that today's generation is being subjected to as a result of new advances in technology. Isn't the rule kind of that we don't know the long term side effects as they apply to health as we implement these new technologies in our daily lives? Why isn't this being considered anywhere? Am I just off the mark?
I'm shocked. "Aging is a decease".... Ladies and gentlemen, this tells me only that human race is fucked up. The next thing he'll say is that death is a bad thing.
@Hermoor You obviously didn't put much thought into your comment before you typed it. But if you did - are you suggesting the contrary - that NOT dying is good? Then, I guess, the natural phase for ALL LIVING to die is BAD? What are you smoking? :)
@drtz4890 I don't have the entire fucking world in my head guy. Death is not someone I want to meet, do I want other people to meet death? No I don't, I much rather have them stay at my side forever. Overpopulation? I don't really care if we have to reshape our failed society in order take drugs for better life quality. If you got a problem with overpopulation, do us all a favor and go kill yourself. Don't sentence people to death because you don't want to give up this society for a
@Hermoor Where did "sentence to death" come from? Did I sentenced someone? All I said was that death is a part of life and that it should not be considered abnormal, or a decease. If you can't handle the idea that all living dies, you should've said that right away, I would understand. Good luck living forever.
@drtz4890 I'm not talking about living forever, nothing lasts forever. I'm talking about extending our life span like many whales and turtles. They can live up to 200-300 years. There is no reason for us not to do this, it would benefit our species greatly. I accept that everything dies, I don't want to die but I'm not really scared to die. Since I know there will be nothing afterwards to be scared about. I repeat if you want to die while other FAMILIES live to 200 years of age. Go ahead...
@drtz4890 The only reason for you not wanting this drug is because you think that you are intellectually superior or wiser than people like me only because you have embraced death. Don't delude yourself with such nonsense, I have accepted that I will die. But I much rather die later than sooner. If you want to die earlier by all means GO AHEAD!
@Hermoor Yea, die later... by sicker. What happened to quality of life? Who's going to take care of your decomposing body for 100 more years? Is that your gift you the coming generations?
@drtz4890 You obviously don't understand, at 100 years of age our bodies would have the strength of a 35 year old man. You re good at displaying your ignorance my friend, let's see if you can accept shame and defeat. Or maybe I have to behead you online...
@drtz4890 Did you miss something? Watch it again and listen. This is about comabting the "decomposing" that occurs due to cellular metabolism, and thereof prevent deseases whom almost all are a product of cellular weakness. Still this is still just fantasy to me too, but if we feel obliged to battle cancer and heartdisease (which both have led us to live prolonged lives), we are also obliged to research the technology to prevent a great amount of deadly diseases at a whole. Longgevity or not.
@reanimated6 First, thanks for normal reply. I see aging and death as part of life. For me, there IS a difference between staying healthy to live well (some also want to die healthy, for some reason) and getting seriously involved in genetic design of the species. I AM for cancer and heart decease avoidance and treatment. BTW I'll be a doc in few years because I enjoy helping people stay well. I watched it again but still see a pretentious dude. I'm not saying it's not a complex issue.
@drtz4890 potentially better society. Imagine a society where man had all the time in the world. New generations wouldn't be taught by 30 year old bald sexually confused fuck ups. But by 200 year old wise men, ignorance would be exterminated. Religion would dissapear, wars would dissapear. My answer to overpopulation is ocean cities...moon bases...and maybe a restriction on birthrates. But it doesn't matter, just because this drug would create some problems. It doesn't mean we can solve them.
@Hermoor I do not share your sympathy for the human race, that's for sure. While I'm totally for life as long as it lasts and for healthy, productive time on earth, I hate to see humans being so self important about their own existence and take themselves so seriously. A quote by Jonas Salk: "If all the insects were to disappear from the Earth, within fifty years all life on Earth would end. If all human beings disappeared from the Earth, within fifty years all forms of life would flourish"
@drtz4890 Ahhh so you are some kind of self hating emo? You have evolved into the most pathetic organism this earth could produce, imagine a wolf giving up his life for an insect. That is the kind of idiocy you are displaying here. You think insects would be extinct if we lived another 100 years? Idiot, with longer life spans and more wisdom and knowledge, we would learn to live with nature. Old people have little power in this world today, it's the ignorant youth that rules this world.
@drtz4890 Imagine a world where we would have 90 year old parents....150 year old teachers. In a world like that there would be no alchohol, no pollution and no wars. THe benefits far overweigh the negative aspects of living longer. Overpopulation if it would happen would only mean more einsteins and ocean cities...cities under the ocean. And eventually moon bases...
@Hermoor Ha ha not self hating and not emo. Shame and defeat are completely off course because I'm not competing with you and could care less what you think. This place is anonymous in case you didn't notice. Life is exciting and I'm thankful for every day (except April 15th). Moonbases? Yuck! Moon is moon - it's perfect. But HUMANS ARE FUCKED! We are a mistake and we should leave this beautiful place to its own - the sooner the better. OK I'm off to bed. Stay healthy and behave.
@drtz4890 Humans are fucked? Hmmm the human being you are talking to now isn't. I know there at least are a decent bunch of humans like myself in this world. When you say humans are fucked, you are talking about yourself and the people you have met in your days. Yeah sure I kinda agree with you, the country you are from USA is fucked. But over here there are people you would want to live with for 200 years. Go commit suicide emo boy, if you want to die go ahead. But I want to live a long life.
Do we really need a disease free society and huge leaps on life extension? As nice as the idea sounds I cant imagine what kind of a nightmare this would have on the population and society as a whole, population is already growing at ridiculous rates. If anything you could argue towards a sweeping epidemic as a good thing and necessary; of course our own fear of death and nature to force evolution screams otherwise.
@petecabrina You may not need it; however, I should like it very much. In fact I heard a speaker at TED saying that globally birth rates are declining. Most of the world is eventually going to be filled with ageing populations. In fact, the more developed a country becomes, the more it seems the birth rate falls. In an ageing society, huge leaps in life extension are exactly what is needed. In fact, a longer age for retirement and a healthier working population is going to be beneficial to all.
I hope thats true about birth rates, I think ironically the highest birth rates in the world are in most of the worst countries in Africa. I have also read the more rights women are given in any given country, the more they are able to study, the more the birth rate declines. I guess anti ageing also goes hand in hand with disease prevention which I think is most important. The cost on the medical system simply because of long term poor nutrition is an unnecessary burden.
@petecabrina You should watch the TED talks of Hans Rosling. He shows through his statistics that education and a better standard of living discourages people from having more children. The population of the world is going to reach 9 billion by 2050. If people can preserve their youth, they probably are going to delay having children immediately. (contd...)
As to anti aging I am over Resveratrol for now. With more research on the subject all you are left with is anecdotal evidence. Sinclair also has an agenda and I dont like his comments about reducing calories as just being salads, the best thing any of us can do for ourselves is eat a lot more raw vegetables, fruits and grains. I will stick to my fish and cod liver oils, CoQ10, green tea, BC amino acids, D and multi vits for the time being.. all things I know work.
@petecabrina I read on wikipedia that some of the researchers were unable to replicate the effects of resveratrol. So whether this substance actually works is 'perhaps' unclear. The future will tell us how effective it is. I get the sense that caloric restriction seems to work.
@petecabrina Sinclair is not wrong in saying that eating a diet that involves reducing your intake by 30-40 percent is not a simple task. The object of caloric restriction is to make the body believe that a famine has taken place. It is then that the body is motivated to preserve itself, rather than to spend its vitality quickly when it thinks that plenty of food is available. So if you are doing this, you have to get used to a meagre diet.
@petecabrina In fact the better we get at keeping people young for longer, the longer it is going take people to have children, since the biological clock is no longer forcing them to take early decisions. I bet the birth rate is going to fall dramatically, the more we can preserve our youth. Already women are storing their eggs. That way they can delay marriage, and having kids.
@petecabrina Imagine if you could live to remain biologically a twenty-year-old for a hundred years. Would you decide to have kids at say 20 or twenty-four or would you delay it. Chances are that you might just decide to delay it. Now assume that by the time you are nearing ninety, they extend your youth by say another fifty years, then you might decide to delay having children for a few decades more, since raising children is a duty and a chore in addition to being a delight for parents.
@petecabrina If people who are older have fewer signs of ageing, then they can work longer. So such a strategy is also going to reduce tax burdens like Medicare and Medicaid.
Have a look into SRT1720 as well, its the drug Sinclair himself is developing, suppose to be a much more potent form of resveratrol; not thats available and even when it is I am sure it will be ridiculously expensive.
About 1% stick up their hands at 04:40. That is the conventional wisdom - and it is good. Aging is the consequence of adaptations that divert resources away from maintenance and towards reproducion. Not a "disease" - done *deliberately* by the organism as part of *normal* development. You *could* define "disease" some other way, but this is one perfectly fine definition.
Aging *isn't* a disease by many definitions - since they *define* disease is a pathological departure from ordinary development - and aging is natural and normal.
@tmtyler right - well good luck with that. We'll see when this come of age if you're ready to die on principle while everyone else continues evermore. As for me, i think it'd be nice to live a long long while...
The money spent on the Iraq war (trillions of dollars) for example, maybe could have cured cancer. What fraction of the GDP goes to biotech? what if we doubled or tripled that? More brains would come to research.
How can we lobby the politicians so that they would see that and start investing heavily?
In a nushell, we are getting sick and dying today because we want to, the money and brains are already there. Even health care expenditure would go down in the long (or medium) run.
There is on earth today enough money and brains to cure all diseases in 10 years. If Governments invested maybe 2 or 3 times as much money on biotech as is being invested today, there would be no diseases in a very short time (10? 15? years). Ofcourse you've read about Kurzweil's exponential growth of tech and science, so 10 or 15 years, with much more money and brains, would not be so far-fetched. We are living today in a potentially disease free society, and yet people are oblivious to that.
I don't know if anyone's brought this up yet, but what I don't hear being factored into the debate is the environment of new toxins, stresses, radiations, lack of physical movement etc.. that today's generation is being subjected to as a result of new advances in technology. Isn't the rule kind of that we don't know the long term side effects as they apply to health as we implement these new technologies in our daily lives? Why isn't this being considered anywhere? Am I just off the mark?
tambourinewoahman 1 month ago
How do you spell the name of the swiss scientist mentioned at 17:12?
lemonjuicer 4 months ago
@lemonjuicer If you look closely down in the corner from the black box at 17:10, it says "Johan Auwerx". :)
JestersGhost 23 hours ago
Excellent video...nice one TED
SaludesHealth 5 months ago
HAHA "paint my balls"
reanimated6 6 months ago
Took 20 minutes to say something I already knew. Can't fucking wait for this, though, in any case.
lopeztreex 6 months ago
How did all of these idiots find out about TED?
AdrianVeidt11235 9 months ago
lol Kids wanna paint my balls?
yuutokun 1 year ago
I'm shocked. "Aging is a decease".... Ladies and gentlemen, this tells me only that human race is fucked up. The next thing he'll say is that death is a bad thing.
drtz4890 1 year ago
@drtz4890 stop resveratrolling.
lalaliam 1 year ago
@drtz4890 if you think death is good...go die ;)
Hermoor 1 year ago
@Hermoor You obviously didn't put much thought into your comment before you typed it. But if you did - are you suggesting the contrary - that NOT dying is good? Then, I guess, the natural phase for ALL LIVING to die is BAD? What are you smoking? :)
drtz4890 1 year ago
@drtz4890 I don't have the entire fucking world in my head guy. Death is not someone I want to meet, do I want other people to meet death? No I don't, I much rather have them stay at my side forever. Overpopulation? I don't really care if we have to reshape our failed society in order take drugs for better life quality. If you got a problem with overpopulation, do us all a favor and go kill yourself. Don't sentence people to death because you don't want to give up this society for a
Hermoor 1 year ago
@Hermoor Where did "sentence to death" come from? Did I sentenced someone? All I said was that death is a part of life and that it should not be considered abnormal, or a decease. If you can't handle the idea that all living dies, you should've said that right away, I would understand. Good luck living forever.
drtz4890 1 year ago
@drtz4890 I'm not talking about living forever, nothing lasts forever. I'm talking about extending our life span like many whales and turtles. They can live up to 200-300 years. There is no reason for us not to do this, it would benefit our species greatly. I accept that everything dies, I don't want to die but I'm not really scared to die. Since I know there will be nothing afterwards to be scared about. I repeat if you want to die while other FAMILIES live to 200 years of age. Go ahead...
Hermoor 1 year ago
@drtz4890 The only reason for you not wanting this drug is because you think that you are intellectually superior or wiser than people like me only because you have embraced death. Don't delude yourself with such nonsense, I have accepted that I will die. But I much rather die later than sooner. If you want to die earlier by all means GO AHEAD!
Hermoor 1 year ago
@Hermoor Yea, die later... by sicker. What happened to quality of life? Who's going to take care of your decomposing body for 100 more years? Is that your gift you the coming generations?
drtz4890 1 year ago
@drtz4890 You obviously don't understand, at 100 years of age our bodies would have the strength of a 35 year old man. You re good at displaying your ignorance my friend, let's see if you can accept shame and defeat. Or maybe I have to behead you online...
Hermoor 1 year ago
@drtz4890 Did you miss something? Watch it again and listen. This is about comabting the "decomposing" that occurs due to cellular metabolism, and thereof prevent deseases whom almost all are a product of cellular weakness. Still this is still just fantasy to me too, but if we feel obliged to battle cancer and heartdisease (which both have led us to live prolonged lives), we are also obliged to research the technology to prevent a great amount of deadly diseases at a whole. Longgevity or not.
reanimated6 6 months ago 2
@reanimated6 First, thanks for normal reply. I see aging and death as part of life. For me, there IS a difference between staying healthy to live well (some also want to die healthy, for some reason) and getting seriously involved in genetic design of the species. I AM for cancer and heart decease avoidance and treatment. BTW I'll be a doc in few years because I enjoy helping people stay well. I watched it again but still see a pretentious dude. I'm not saying it's not a complex issue.
drtz4890 5 months ago
@drtz4890 potentially better society. Imagine a society where man had all the time in the world. New generations wouldn't be taught by 30 year old bald sexually confused fuck ups. But by 200 year old wise men, ignorance would be exterminated. Religion would dissapear, wars would dissapear. My answer to overpopulation is ocean cities...moon bases...and maybe a restriction on birthrates. But it doesn't matter, just because this drug would create some problems. It doesn't mean we can solve them.
Hermoor 1 year ago
@Hermoor I do not share your sympathy for the human race, that's for sure. While I'm totally for life as long as it lasts and for healthy, productive time on earth, I hate to see humans being so self important about their own existence and take themselves so seriously. A quote by Jonas Salk: "If all the insects were to disappear from the Earth, within fifty years all life on Earth would end. If all human beings disappeared from the Earth, within fifty years all forms of life would flourish"
drtz4890 1 year ago
@drtz4890 Ahhh so you are some kind of self hating emo? You have evolved into the most pathetic organism this earth could produce, imagine a wolf giving up his life for an insect. That is the kind of idiocy you are displaying here. You think insects would be extinct if we lived another 100 years? Idiot, with longer life spans and more wisdom and knowledge, we would learn to live with nature. Old people have little power in this world today, it's the ignorant youth that rules this world.
Hermoor 1 year ago
@drtz4890 Imagine a world where we would have 90 year old parents....150 year old teachers. In a world like that there would be no alchohol, no pollution and no wars. THe benefits far overweigh the negative aspects of living longer. Overpopulation if it would happen would only mean more einsteins and ocean cities...cities under the ocean. And eventually moon bases...
Hermoor 1 year ago
@Hermoor Ha ha not self hating and not emo. Shame and defeat are completely off course because I'm not competing with you and could care less what you think. This place is anonymous in case you didn't notice. Life is exciting and I'm thankful for every day (except April 15th). Moonbases? Yuck! Moon is moon - it's perfect. But HUMANS ARE FUCKED! We are a mistake and we should leave this beautiful place to its own - the sooner the better. OK I'm off to bed. Stay healthy and behave.
drtz4890 1 year ago
@drtz4890 Humans are fucked? Hmmm the human being you are talking to now isn't. I know there at least are a decent bunch of humans like myself in this world. When you say humans are fucked, you are talking about yourself and the people you have met in your days. Yeah sure I kinda agree with you, the country you are from USA is fucked. But over here there are people you would want to live with for 200 years. Go commit suicide emo boy, if you want to die go ahead. But I want to live a long life.
Hermoor 1 year ago
Quick Summary:
*Congrats to Sinclair on tenure at Harvard.
Pitch: "We are the last generation to live a normal lifespan."
Enlisting audience: "What if we can do something about aging?"
Reel: Aging and disease are synonymous.
NIH aging research: 0.06% of massive budget.
-Yeast genes may provide window into aging. "sir-too-in" sirtuins.
-Caloric restriction may lead to life extension. *good bit of humor at 9:00*
sirtuins, found in many lifeforms, may help extend life.
SanjayRaisoni 1 year ago
Do we really need a disease free society and huge leaps on life extension? As nice as the idea sounds I cant imagine what kind of a nightmare this would have on the population and society as a whole, population is already growing at ridiculous rates. If anything you could argue towards a sweeping epidemic as a good thing and necessary; of course our own fear of death and nature to force evolution screams otherwise.
petecabrina 1 year ago
@petecabrina You may not need it; however, I should like it very much. In fact I heard a speaker at TED saying that globally birth rates are declining. Most of the world is eventually going to be filled with ageing populations. In fact, the more developed a country becomes, the more it seems the birth rate falls. In an ageing society, huge leaps in life extension are exactly what is needed. In fact, a longer age for retirement and a healthier working population is going to be beneficial to all.
Jasonstarwalker 1 year ago
@Jasonstarwalker
I hope thats true about birth rates, I think ironically the highest birth rates in the world are in most of the worst countries in Africa. I have also read the more rights women are given in any given country, the more they are able to study, the more the birth rate declines. I guess anti ageing also goes hand in hand with disease prevention which I think is most important. The cost on the medical system simply because of long term poor nutrition is an unnecessary burden.
petecabrina 1 year ago
@petecabrina You should watch the TED talks of Hans Rosling. He shows through his statistics that education and a better standard of living discourages people from having more children. The population of the world is going to reach 9 billion by 2050. If people can preserve their youth, they probably are going to delay having children immediately. (contd...)
Jasonstarwalker 1 year ago
@Jasonstarwalker
As to anti aging I am over Resveratrol for now. With more research on the subject all you are left with is anecdotal evidence. Sinclair also has an agenda and I dont like his comments about reducing calories as just being salads, the best thing any of us can do for ourselves is eat a lot more raw vegetables, fruits and grains. I will stick to my fish and cod liver oils, CoQ10, green tea, BC amino acids, D and multi vits for the time being.. all things I know work.
petecabrina 1 year ago
@petecabrina I read on wikipedia that some of the researchers were unable to replicate the effects of resveratrol. So whether this substance actually works is 'perhaps' unclear. The future will tell us how effective it is. I get the sense that caloric restriction seems to work.
Jasonstarwalker 1 year ago
@petecabrina Sinclair is not wrong in saying that eating a diet that involves reducing your intake by 30-40 percent is not a simple task. The object of caloric restriction is to make the body believe that a famine has taken place. It is then that the body is motivated to preserve itself, rather than to spend its vitality quickly when it thinks that plenty of food is available. So if you are doing this, you have to get used to a meagre diet.
Jasonstarwalker 1 year ago
@petecabrina In fact the better we get at keeping people young for longer, the longer it is going take people to have children, since the biological clock is no longer forcing them to take early decisions. I bet the birth rate is going to fall dramatically, the more we can preserve our youth. Already women are storing their eggs. That way they can delay marriage, and having kids.
Jasonstarwalker 1 year ago
@petecabrina Imagine if you could live to remain biologically a twenty-year-old for a hundred years. Would you decide to have kids at say 20 or twenty-four or would you delay it. Chances are that you might just decide to delay it. Now assume that by the time you are nearing ninety, they extend your youth by say another fifty years, then you might decide to delay having children for a few decades more, since raising children is a duty and a chore in addition to being a delight for parents.
Jasonstarwalker 1 year ago
@petecabrina If people who are older have fewer signs of ageing, then they can work longer. So such a strategy is also going to reduce tax burdens like Medicare and Medicaid.
Jasonstarwalker 1 year ago
Not a very good speaker, but a great scientist.
josenros 1 year ago
I honestly don't foresee our governments allowing such things.. except for themselves of course.
ZombieX13 1 year ago
How the heck do you spell "raspberritrol"[SIC]?
ZombieX13 1 year ago
@ZombieX13
Resveratrol
petecabrina 1 year ago
@petecabrina appreciate it
ZombieX13 1 year ago
@ZombieX13
Have a look into SRT1720 as well, its the drug Sinclair himself is developing, suppose to be a much more potent form of resveratrol; not thats available and even when it is I am sure it will be ridiculously expensive.
petecabrina 1 year ago
About 1% stick up their hands at 04:40. That is the conventional wisdom - and it is good. Aging is the consequence of adaptations that divert resources away from maintenance and towards reproducion. Not a "disease" - done *deliberately* by the organism as part of *normal* development. You *could* define "disease" some other way, but this is one perfectly fine definition.
tmtyler 1 year ago
Aging *isn't* a disease by many definitions - since they *define* disease is a pathological departure from ordinary development - and aging is natural and normal.
tmtyler 1 year ago
@tmtyler right - well good luck with that. We'll see when this come of age if you're ready to die on principle while everyone else continues evermore. As for me, i think it'd be nice to live a long long while...
hmspinaforethisisspa 1 year ago
The money spent on the Iraq war (trillions of dollars) for example, maybe could have cured cancer. What fraction of the GDP goes to biotech? what if we doubled or tripled that? More brains would come to research.
How can we lobby the politicians so that they would see that and start investing heavily?
In a nushell, we are getting sick and dying today because we want to, the money and brains are already there. Even health care expenditure would go down in the long (or medium) run.
mario6k 1 year ago
There is on earth today enough money and brains to cure all diseases in 10 years. If Governments invested maybe 2 or 3 times as much money on biotech as is being invested today, there would be no diseases in a very short time (10? 15? years). Ofcourse you've read about Kurzweil's exponential growth of tech and science, so 10 or 15 years, with much more money and brains, would not be so far-fetched. We are living today in a potentially disease free society, and yet people are oblivious to that.
mario6k 1 year ago 2