Comments on: Hidden world: molecules inside cells that grab DNA like rock climbers

By: Drexler

Drexler — Wed, 31 Oct 2012 18:39:07 +0000

The troubling thing most people see with this tech is the overpopulation issue when people start routinely living past 200-300 years. This can seriously impact our environment and cause a huge food crisis. But none of these things are insurmountable as technology is keeping abreast on all this requirements. The more of us there are, the more minds at work at keeping problems resolved and addressed.

By: JC

JC — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 21:38:05 +0000

Aging to decrepitude and death are troubling too. Perhaps much more troubling?

By: Jon

Jon — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 21:34:27 +0000

It’s radical healthy life extension we’re aiming for, Ralph Dratman.

We want a 120-year-old to look and feel like they’re 35.

And if you think about it, if you want to make it to 200 or so, you’ll have to be in pretty good (young) shape for most of that time. Someone doesn’t walk around with the body of a 90-year-old for 100 years and expect everything to work out fine.

Basically we want to keep people in peak physical condition for as long as possible. Prevent and cure all the ailments we can.
The side effect would be that one would get to live for a far greater period of time.

By: Ralph Dratman

Ralph Dratman — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 21:17:20 +0000

I am not saying I’m certain it is bad, only that it makes me uneasy.

I worry that if doctors extend someone’s life beyond 110 or 120, is the person having a good quality of life? It seems that many elderly people are not happy with their quality of life. Will we have enough doctors, nurses and other helpers to take care of very old people who may not be in good health? And there may be other consequences we cannot now forsee.

Radical life extension is an experiment. It troubles me.

By: JC

JC — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 19:21:32 +0000

What are the bad ‘personal consequences’ of aiding someone to have a quality of life beyond 120 years?

By: William Jarkovsky

William Jarkovsky — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 18:49:47 +0000

…..aren’t these just centrioles and the spindle fibers?

By: Ralph Dratman

Ralph Dratman — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 18:35:56 +0000

I am uneasy about the medical agenda that makes prolongation of human life its major goal. Even if you add “quality of life” to the objective, I’m just not sure. Should we be keeping people alive without regard to the personal and social consequences?

Naturally, if I were dying of some disease that might be overcome by new science, I would jump at the chance to live longer — and that is true for almost all of us.

Nevertheless, is it really a good idea?

By: Marcos Marin

Marcos Marin — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 13:39:46 +0000

MacBETH… hahaha