I think preventing/managing ageing is both desirable and practical for man kind.. The human lifespan is the most unfair system on earth, our society simply doesn't allow for 95% of people to enjoy their lives with the current lifespan. If you are able to provide people with a longer healthier lifespan then people will be able to achieve more, societies and economies will boom as more of the population are capable of being able to work and contribute to the economy. We currently accept death and growing old as something that is inevitable but when you actually think about it it is in fact the most obsolete fact of life.. Whom actually wants to die, simple fact is nobody even people whom commit suicide I'd argue that if those people where in a world where their time wasn't finite and there was always a chance to turn life around then alot more people would be alot more optimistic in life.. People give up on life when they feel they don't have enough time to turn things around but if time wasn't a factor then there wouldn't be a reason to give up.. Postponing ageing for a substantial period of time is the only way we will ever be able to create true equality in this world, cause right now unless you win the birth lottery and are born into money, then you've only got 40-60 years of working life to be able to come close to enjoy luxuries and pleasures of life but for most people currently that simply isn't possible..
While yes it is hard to say when ageing will be under comprehensive control as that could take centuries, but I do honestly believe that within the next decade or so initial treatments will start to come about that will begin to slow the ageing process and as those treatments improve then so will lifespan so I do hope and believe that most people under the age of 70 today could potentially survive to the point of potentially never dieing.. People hope to go to heaven yet those people will call me nuts for hoping to cure ageing yet we are both just essentially hoping to never die.. Cause what is heaven other than an immortal world where you can't die, it makes more sense to try cure ageing.
I am a researcher on anti-aging, nanotechnology and biotechnology and whilst people think aging is natural - it isn't. There is species on Earth such as the hydra and jellyfish who are biologically immortal and show no signs of aging which proves that aging is not natural - it is neither natural or innatural.
Aging is the accumulation of damage in the cells and thus results to death. There has been proof that aging is reversible (in mice) and has been conducted by Harvard Medical School where sciencists managed to reverse signs of aging in mice which included their muscle tissue and appearance. Harvard's Scientific Officer, George Church has said that age reversible is plausible.
Aging has also been reversed by sciencists in Japan in the human cell line.
Although there is not an exact year where age reversal will become possible, there is a good chance that it is likely possible within the 21st century. But it will become possible eventually. Aubrey de Grey suggests somewhere in the next 20-25 years at a 50% chance.
For people who think aging is natural and that we all have to die - these are people who are very likely to believe in God and that we all go to heaven - but seriously, I can not see a man with a white beard sitting on a cloud in the sky. So people who think that aging is invetiable - your argument is indeed invalid and idiotic.
If technology continues to progress (absent catastophic war, economic collapse or environmental calamity) then we will inevitably discover the physical causes of ageing and then how to control them. The only question for me is when that is. It could be 20 years or 100 years but I don't doubt it will happen,
"Cure" isn't the right word. I don't think we would need a cure for aging as we could just simply reverse it and have an indefinite lifespan. Aging, in the words of Aubrey de Grey is the accumolation of damage in the cells of the human body. Aging can be reversed as it has been proven already in mice and in lab worms.
Now reading the arguments that people say that age is not curable or reversed and that ageing is a fact of life or that there would be an overpopulation - your wrong!
1. Ageing is not a fact of life, it is a disease - Many believe that ageing is part of life but it actually causes damage within your body. It causes diseases such as Alzeihmers and cancer to be much more common as you grow older. Ageing is reversable and could be eliminated which would make indefinite lifespans come into effect (and it's not immortality - you will just not die of old age but you could still die if you were hut by a car or facing physical trauma)
2. Birth rates are actually decreasing - Another controversal argument of near-immortality (indefinite lifespans) is that the world's population will keep rising - but even though birth rates are falling at a decreasing rate and if we have indefinite lifespans, more woman would have children later in life.
3. It will only be available for the rich - A lot of nonsense - remember there is only a handfull of rich people in the world - and yes I think it will be expensive at first but the companies or organisations which would give rejuvenative threapies would make no profit if every rich person had them! Simply my opinion!
People normally say that if aging was to be under desisive medical control, we would be immortal - not as this moment in time although it could pave the way to biological immortality (which in the means to not simply die of old age - similar to indefinite lifespans)
Other sciencists and futurists believe that emerging technologies such as nanotechnology could increase the human lifespan indefiently. There is also research into telomere lengething (as telomeres is what causes aging) which could rejuvenate the human body as well.
When will it happen? My guess it could be within our reach that aging could be under medical control within 20-30 years from now. Aubrey de Grey believes we could have desisive medical control of aging by 20-25 years at a 50% chance. Ray Kurzweil, futurist and the Director of Enginerring at Google believes that humans could be immortal by 2040 by the use of nanotechnology which would constantly keep repairing our cells and fight against diseases within the human body and defeat aging.
So in conclusion - yes, aging will be reversable, yes, indefinite lifespans are possible. I think the prospect of immortality would have to wait for now!
With the DIY bio movement this research is accelerating fast. Just like we hack computer code, with its binary code, so shall we hack DNA "quadratic code". When the Wright Brothers were taking the historic test flight, the pessimists were saying that it would be 100-300 years before we flew, it was already happening. The Wright Brothers did not have the luxury of data crunching computers or simulators. This technology could be 4-5 years out.
No because there should be no argument about curing aging because
its a good thing that aging will be cured. Because I will never age
I would never get old and I would stay young forever. And because
I would live forever and I would never die. Never get diseases.
I have been a friend of Dr. De Grey for years. The evidence is accumulating that we have the causes already figured out. It does seem like biology can be treated as an engineering problem. The more we know the closer we get and the more reasonable it seems. Hurray!
Well, let's see: Tissue engineering, Adult Pluripotent Stem (APS) Cells, TA-65 (Maybe)--Available now at a price, 3-D Bio-printing of Replacement Organs, etc... Are very intriguing, and potentially revolutionary possibilities! With the right funding, we can do this--possibly--in say---eight (8) years, or even less! We can use a phenomenon called "Crowd-funding," and other fundraising methods!
Scientists have already reversed the aging process in mice, identified genes that directly influence aging and discovered compounds that directly affect the rate at which people age. At this point, ending aging is inevitable.
Others have written that aging is a natural part of life and is basically something that should not be tampered or interfered with. However, people have been interfering with such things for thousands of years. Things like vaccinations and antibiotics are good examples of this, as are hospitals, surgical procedures, medications etc. Unlike other species people have developed things like agriculture, digital technology, art/music/movies, the use of electricity and medical science (among a long-long list of other things). People have a sense of morality. These things from the view of another species could be seen as unnatural, while they are in fact part of human nature.
I believe if people do not at least try to cure aging that that would be more unnatural than actually curing it. It is the pursuit of advancement...Something unique to our species.
Science is simply growing at a terrific rate. The interest in slowing aging is incredible and the inertia or disbelief is dissipating. There is no reason to think we will stop learning about the aging process tomorrow. In five years time how do you think we'll feel?
The circumstantial evidence already suggests that aging is curable.
First of all we should know that aging is not a disease so we can not recover ıt since whıch current diseases are related to aging the answer is noillness. Hypertension and diabete can appear even ın teenagers.Have you ever heard of any immortal cretaure ? Dont take as an example jellyfish .They are proven not to be ımmortal.The sun dıes ,the universe die and you wıll die .
The work these scientist will help people live longer healthier lives and their research should be funded more. Treatments for duchesses will improve causing people to live longer.
Curing aging is a completely different story. Doing research on mice is completely different than on humans and were not even slightly close to curing aging in humans. Even after a few hundred more years we won't even put a dent into curing aging.
On a long enough timeline, who knows, anything is possible. But within our lifetimes? Highly unlikely. This is just another example of misplaced optimism in technology. It's no different from 1950s Americans thinking that we'd all be driving flying cars and living on the moon in the year 2000. To say that aging will be cured is a wild claim, and the burden of proof lies with the claimants. Science still hasn't even cured cancer! President Nixon declared war on cancer in 1971! Ever since, people have been saying "a cure is right around the corner!" It's not going to happen any time soon. Instead of hoping for a cure for cancer, people should be focusing on prevention. People should be asking, why did only 1 in 20 people get cancer in 1900, and 1 in 10 people got it in the 1940s, and today 1 in 3 get it? Why? And why isn't anybody asking why? And now we're talking about curing aging. It's as ridiculous as curing cancer. Yes, SOMEday it might happen, but that day is a long long way off. Instead of wishful thinking, we should all live in the moment. Enjoy what little time we have on this earth. Live and let live. Love one another.
The aging process is a natural process of cellular deterioration and death. Cells grow, change and die. This is the natural order of life. Scientists cannot prevent cells from undergoing their natural cycle. If they try to alter this natural cycle, cell mutation and cancer is far more likely than the cessation of the aging process.
I do not think science can or will cure aging. Aging is a natural part of life that every living being needs to take part of. Just because science comes up with new and more interesting ways to make a person look younger, or to seem younger, does not mean they are not aging.
The concept of debate here could very well be centered on one letter. Rewrite the primary word of topic listed here, “cure”, and change the “e” to a “b”, and we will have ourselves an entirely different premise for discussion. Cure? There is simply just not presently a medical cure for the process of aging, even though our modern scientific and medical advances are helping to prolong life, to cure it completely is presently just not a realistic topic for debate. Curb on the other hand is a phenomenon of aging that is going on each and everyday. Someday we may live to be a century and half old or even more, but in the final analysis, we’re biologically going to end up as dust. There’s just no cure for what ages me!
There is no "cure" for a fact of life. We are born, we age, we die. Simple as that. If there was a cure for aging, the world would rapidly become over populated. I am sure there is a way to slow down the aging process, but who would really want to? The brain ages and if you have a young body and an old brain, the two don't match.