Comment by dyauspitr

in my futile searches for meaning I’ve wondered whether cancers in humans are a failsafe to something else or preventing something worse

more specifically the lack of more failsafes seen in some other mammals are a reaction to something besides happenstance

> We really do need AI for this if any of it is going to be remotely feasible.

Would you give your life into the hands of AI skynet slop?

I understand your rationale, of course, but I for one don't want big fat mega-corporations dictate over our life here. Naturally, all of this hinges whether AI can even solve this problem. I assume it can, but I doubt it can do so initially - and the legal implications are still enormous. I really am not ready to turn my hands to claude's gene therapy slop.

Sadly, AI just made many of us lose all hope.

Sometimes I like to close my eyes and dream of electric sheep.

Thanks, Obama

What about Xanax or medication. Hypothetically ignoring the ill effects of the drugs themselves will chemical stress relief have the same anti-aging benefits?

I suppose the stress was running away from a lion, not having the all-eating thought of meeting deadlines, a bad boss, backstabbing coworkers and so on, i.e. intense, but short, not persistent and chronic.

I'm no biologist, but it's pretty easy to imagine a plausible mechanism.

Stress doesn't cause your body to "immediately grenade itself", it causes gradual problems over an extended period. But you can imagine that evolutionarily speaking, a stressful situation would frequently be a situation involving imminent danger. A response that prioritizes short-term survival (e.g. releasing adrenaline and cortisol) regardless of the long-term consequences could easily improve evolutionary fitness.

The idea that pre-agricultural societies are subjected to constant stress reflects modern biases somewhat. I remember years ago I saw a talk from Spencer Wells where he described how pre-agricultural life might have been like in Anatolia. Fields and fields of wild wheat stretching across the horizon. Long periods of seasonal abundance. Occasional periods of hunger and privation where families would often have to rely on the help of friends and acquantainces, with the understanding that one day the debt would be repaid if similar ill circumstances befell your neighbors.

You can see some of how life might have been like in modern Papua New Guinea. War is nothing like modern warfare with artillery and guns. Its two groups of people firing arrows at each other from stand off distances while shouting at each other with minimal casualties. If you look at casualty rates from some of the early Greek warfare during the hoplite era, it's also surprisingly low.

Also note that in this post, and from research, caloric restriction counteracts some of these inflammatory effects. In many ways modern life can be stressful in its own ways, especially as we remove ourselves more and more from the active lifestyles that necessitated survival in previous eras.

There always has been a lot of stress, but there used to be relaxed moments as well. The issue is that we don't calm down anymore.

Relevant video by Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mo1A45ShcMo

Considering that aging only happens later in life, it wouldn't have much of an effect on how efficient humans produce offspring, so it wouldn't be selected against. It is the same explanation for why Huntington's and Alzheimer's are still around.

> Wouldn't we have evolved in an environment with constant stress?

Well, humans did not reach an old age if you look back to history. Only in recent times, say, 2000 years or so, or, if you want to be strict, the last 100 years, did humans reach very old ages. Back in older days, 30 years was considered old. Then 40 or so.