Immortality is within our grasps.(Or at least massively slow down aging)

[Prozac]

I remember hearing about removing the limit of cell division some time ago, they have increased the life span of fruit flies by seven or eight times.
We all have a limit on how many times a cell can divide, which will be our eventual downfall.

But when we remove the limit, in combination with keeping your cells in shape, immortality really is really getting closer.

 

[Synth]

I remember hearing about removing the limit of cell division some time ago, they have increased the life span of fruit flies by seven or eight times.
We all have a limit on how many times a cell can divide, which will be our eventual downfall.

But when we remove the limit, in combination with keeping your cells in shape, immortality really is really getting closer.

 

[Eacos]

I think a longer life span would make the general population a lot lazier.
If I knew I was going to die around 160 years of age, hell, I'd still be slacking my ass off. Although it would be incredible to think of how strong and experienced one can become with such a resistant body.

 

[Sicron]

So much would change if we were able to become 200 years old. Imagine, you won't work 'till your 60th-ish. You'd be working until you are like 160 years old. Would anyone want to work for a ******* 160 years? We complain that life is too short, but actually, I think 80-100 is absolutely fine.

 

[Prozac]

So much would change if we were able to become 200 years old. Imagine, you won't work 'till your 60th-ish. You'd be working until you are like 160 years old. Would anyone want to work for a ******* 160 years? We complain that life is too short, but actually, I think 80-100 is absolutely fine.

Not everyone has made the wrong choice in life, some of us enjoy what we do for a living. You don't life to work, but work to life. Becoming 200 will have it's "downsides"

 

[Sicron]

I still can't imagine it'd be fun working for 160 years. Even if you have a dream job, after 60-ish years, you'd just want to do something else. Which would probably require you to go to school again when you are 80.

 

[Prozac]

I still can't imagine it'd be fun working for 160 years. Even if you have a dream job, after 60-ish years, you'd just want to do something else. Which would probably require you to go to school again when you are 80.

So, you take five years of to goto school and do another job? If your life span is doubled, your time to study should be doubled too. No reason to stick with one job.

 

[Sicron]

It will still make it hard for a lot of people. Just see what the French did a couple of weeks ago. When the government raised the work time by 2 years from 60 to 62, they started massive amounts of riots. People do not want to work longer, it's quite possibly the most boring, static and grey part of our lives.

 

[Prozac]

It will still make it hard for a lot of people. Just see what the French did a couple of weeks ago. When the government raised the work time by 2 years from 60 to 62, they started massive amounts of riots. People do not want to work longer, it's quite possibly the most boring, static and grey part of our lives.

So, give people the choice between living longer and working longer, or living shorter and working shorter. It's in no way fair, or POSSIBLE to let people reach 200 years and have them stop working at 65.

 

[Tenzo]

I, personally, think it would be cool to live longer. That way you'll have time to do more things.

 

[Sicron]

Giving people the choice wouldn't work either. You'd get fragmentation between friends and family's. Mother and father would live to become 200, while their son dies at 75. It's also not fair to only give people medicine to grow older, if they also work longer.

 

[Prozac]

Giving people the choice wouldn't work either. You'd get fragmentation between friends and family's. Mother and father would live to become 200, while their son dies at 75. It's also not fair to only give people medicine to grow older, if they also work longer.

That would be their choice. Choices have consequences. Also, I honestly don't get how you can't see the difference between raising the retirement age in todays society as compared to this hypothetical situation. It's not the same thing.
Simply put, people need money to survive. Money needs to be earned.
When you look at greece, people retired at what? in some case the age of 58? That means on average they have worked nearly 40 years. In a life span that's just above 80 years long. Who do you think pays for their retirement? Once you figure that out, you also realize why the country is in so much ****. The burden of that alone on a system is insane. So simply put. it is impossible to increase lifespan without increasing work time. There is no choice in the matter. You can't expect people to just not work for 150 years because they did a little work a century ago.

 

[Sicron]

Obviously I know that. But there is a difference between being forced to work for 160 years, and actually wanting to work for 160 years. You are talking about a massively long time here. When people get annoyed by the fact that they have to work for 2 more years when they are 60. Imagine how much ruckus you'd get if they would have to work for an additional 100 years. Nobody will want to live for 200 years if they know they'll have to work until their 160th. You'd have to wait for 160 ******* years before retirement. You'd actually get world-weary then. And no, I personally don't believe that even re-eduction at your 100th birthday is going to help with that.

On the other hand, people DO want to be able to live longer, since life is too short right now. Partly it's too short because we have to work for 75% of our live (school included). Doubling our life expectancy isn't going to change that.

 

[Prozac]

You really seem to have a bleak outlook on life. There is more to life then work. From the moment you're born, to your current retirement age of 65 you have more then 400.000 hours of free time to yourself. You're making it sound like all we do is work these days. Yet compared to our ancestors.. we have it pretty ******* easy. Again, the current riots that are caused by the increased retirement age does -not- compare to this situation.

 

[Dokutayuu]

I'm under the impression that it's something that's too infeasible to market even if science gets around to it; humans are pretty complicated organisms.

Living a few hundred years would be a strange concept, I'm not sure I'd know what to do with myself for that long. The changes in society would probably be interesting, would being on a pension for 200 years really be fun?

 

[Deathshot]

If I am correct, I remember that HIV and Cancer are listed under Population Control in some places. That and sicknesses.


But the expansion of people's lives should be chosen wisely. Mainly for people who are going to pass on information for generations.

 

[Avenger]

I guess some people would waste their lives. I would learn and experience as much as I could. Personally I have no problem with the concept of living a few hundred years, as long as I remain healthy. An interesting film on the subject of longevity is The Man from Earth. Probably my favourite film of all time.

 

[Rocky]

Over-population is already an issue, if people are living twice as long, and procreating twice as much (assuming the range of fertility stretches as well) then the world is gonna go to **** faster.

 

[Prozac]

Over-population is already an issue, if people are living twice as long, and procreating twice as much (assuming the range of fertility stretches as well) then the world is gonna go to **** faster.

No, women won't magically grow new eggs
On that note, women shouldn't be allowed to age beyond their fertile age.. NO USE!

 

[-Origin]

Even if they're not fertile, they can still make sandwiches.