The hair one is a fascinating one to me... We have some many examples of people like Bezos, Jobs, Ballmer, Brin, Slim... I mean, if the ultra rich have not figured it out, I don't think there much hope for anyone else really... haha of they can pull a Musk, but that's not the point, the point is to reverse balding...
It's not what you meant but toupees have gotten really good, the only problem is you can't be a public figure and have pattern baldness one day and a full head of hair the next. There's actually something called "the toupee fallacy" which means assuming an entire category of something is bad based on only noticing bad examples.
It's both, though. Yes, the Earth can support more humans with a lifestyle closer to that of the West in the 19th century than with a lifestyle closer to the the West in the 21st, but even in the 19th (and earlier) deforestation and the like were happening. And it's just reality that as societies prosper they use more resources per person. 50 years ago the vast majority of Chinese didn't use cars but walked and and bicycled. Now they are quite car dependent.
I'm not sure that's an easy argument to hold up. Where would you draw the line on lifestyle that can and should reasonably change?
We've populated large portions of the planet that we really have no business living in without climate controlled indoor environments. HVAC is also a huge energy suck with all the externalities that come along with it. If we were to really want to cut energy use, for example, and climate control had to go we almost certainly couldn't continue to sustain as many people as we have today.
This will happen no earlier than the 2080s. The world population is expected to increase every year until then. We will add nearly 2 billion people in that time. Consider that the entire world population was less than 1 billion for all but the last 221 years.
Just imagine how many more grandpas and great grandpas will be around for you to shout this at.
The problem with the population isn't (yet? only?) the absolute number of individuals but the age distribution. Most societies rely on young people to support themselves and the old, and this only works if there's a good balance between the numbers of each. Living longer isn't guaranteed to offer a longer productive period. We might just end up with more old people in need of support and not necessarily more children. This is already a major problem today in most developed countries.
There are probably so many more factors to consider. Like the psychological impact of living substantially longer. Even things like that crappy boss who won't retire from another 60 years, the dictator who won't die for another hundred years, or any number of the many society destroying tech CEOs getting to entrench themselves for decades more.
> The results revealed that Jonathan has “unique gene variants in most aging pathways” including DNA repair, insulin regulation, mitochondrial function, and “low entropy” methylation, reports the study.
No point staying alive if you're not healthy. This is a great podcast about the difference between lifespan and healthspan: "To start our new series about what it means to live in a world of ageing populations, David talks to geneticist Adam Rutherford about the benefits and pitfalls of increasing longevity. Are GLP-1s – drugs like Ozempic, Wegovy and Mounjaro – miracle cures that will extend human lifespans? What happens if longer lives do not coincide with better health? How far can life extension be pushed? And who wants to live forever anyway?" https://www.ppfideas.com/episodes/an-ageing-world-lifespan-v...
Maybe not for you, but others would beg to differ?
Darwin apparently had debilitating illnesses at 72 (one year before his death) when he published a book on earthworms and their role in forming soil. And Pasteur was apparently paralyzed at 63 when he developed the rabies vaccine. Etc.
Should they have just kicked the bucket when they lost their health, because of the pointlessness of living past that?
That's an uncharitable reading of what I mean, but I suppose I could have been clearer. Perhaps "no point staying alive if you're so unhealthy that you're perpetually miserable" would be closer to what I meant, particularly having seen a number of elderly relatives living through their last years in unrelenting misery, impatient for death. One in particular sticks with me, an uncle who had been a doctor and knew exactly what was coming because he'd seen plenty of it in his career, but without the means to end it in a dignified way. These people absolutely didn't want to be kept alive longer - which is the point of the distinction between lifespan and healthspan in the podcast.
A bit more charitable read on the GP is that people should focus on having as many healthy days as possible rather than as many total days as possible.
That doesn't mean those already I'll should just give up, it means those looking to their future should consider whether living 20 more healthy years is better than living 40 more years if 30 of those are increasingly focused on just treating symptoms to wake up tomorrow.
Chopin had tuberculosis most of his life and died at 39 weighing only 45kg. Euler became almost blind before 60. Give a chance to sick and feeble, folks.
This is the oldest land animal currently living and whose age is known with certainty.
It is believed that other tortoises may have lived close to 300 years.
The greater age reached by animals living in an environment that is cold and with a constant temperature and which need a much lower average power for living (i.e. a lower energy consumption and a slower metabolism) is very much expected.
English isn't my native language, but to my eyes it looks like writing "'Jonathan' is the oldest land animal" lacks context/completeness for an article title. Perhaps "'Jonathan' is the oldest known land animal" could add some mystery, but "'Jonathan' is the oldest land animal on Earth" sounds more attention-grabbing.
He still has quite a ways to go to 1485715964481761497309522733620825737885569961284688766942216863704985393094065876545992131370884059645617234469978112000000000000000000000. :-)
The struggles for limited resources among humans marooned in a finite ecosystem will not allow us to defy death. When natural causes no longer reduce our numbers sufficiently, we will be winnowed through an unceasing epidemic of violence. So long as there are births, there will be deaths.
If you thought the carnival of dementia brought about by modern medicine's gradual reduction of quick death was grim, just wait until medicine solves natural death entirely.
Tortoises who give up their secrets to humans won't survive the cataclysm.
They did opt to swab his mouth rather than draw blood to minimize his discomfort. That seems like a pretty reasonable compromise for the value of learning and science
We don’t need to cure death. Just hair loss and old skin, it will create $50T market cap in new companies.
I’m actually more interested in hair removal. There should be better methods than what we have now.
If I’m going bald, then I’d love to shortcut the process.
Shaving is awful no matter where it is on your body. It takes time, it’s irritating and you never look fresh for more than a day.
Isn't this solved with laser hair removal?
3 replies →
Just grow a scraggly and comb it down. Venture capitalists wear t-shirts that show their nipples on stage, so what’s the shame in a long scraggly.
The hair one is a fascinating one to me... We have some many examples of people like Bezos, Jobs, Ballmer, Brin, Slim... I mean, if the ultra rich have not figured it out, I don't think there much hope for anyone else really... haha of they can pull a Musk, but that's not the point, the point is to reverse balding...
It's not what you meant but toupees have gotten really good, the only problem is you can't be a public figure and have pattern baldness one day and a full head of hair the next. There's actually something called "the toupee fallacy" which means assuming an entire category of something is bad based on only noticing bad examples.
1 reply →
Trump, the most vain of them all, has tried pretty much every way for the last 40 years. It's likely mostly glue at this point.
> can pull a Musk, but that's not the point, the point is to reverse balding
How much such hairline can cost, $10?
1 reply →
Reminds me of one of my favourite SNL sketches: https://youtu.be/kq8Xlbb3bOw?is=ymUnd9aG6B1kE_NJ
heartrate of 10bpm is cra-cra
but explains a lot
The goal is to lengthen human lifespan? Like the planet doesn't have enough humans already.
The problem is not with the number of human but with our lifestyle...
It's both, though. Yes, the Earth can support more humans with a lifestyle closer to that of the West in the 19th century than with a lifestyle closer to the the West in the 21st, but even in the 19th (and earlier) deforestation and the like were happening. And it's just reality that as societies prosper they use more resources per person. 50 years ago the vast majority of Chinese didn't use cars but walked and and bicycled. Now they are quite car dependent.
I'm not sure that's an easy argument to hold up. Where would you draw the line on lifestyle that can and should reasonably change?
We've populated large portions of the planet that we really have no business living in without climate controlled indoor environments. HVAC is also a huge energy suck with all the externalities that come along with it. If we were to really want to cut energy use, for example, and climate control had to go we almost certainly couldn't continue to sustain as many people as we have today.
Wake up grandpa, human population is on the cusp of beginning to decline.
"on the cusp of beginning to"
This will happen no earlier than the 2080s. The world population is expected to increase every year until then. We will add nearly 2 billion people in that time. Consider that the entire world population was less than 1 billion for all but the last 221 years.
I continue to not worry.
Wouldn't a decline be good? Or is the theory that we can only do collapse, not decline?
1 reply →
> Wake up grandpa
Just imagine how many more grandpas and great grandpas will be around for you to shout this at.
The problem with the population isn't (yet? only?) the absolute number of individuals but the age distribution. Most societies rely on young people to support themselves and the old, and this only works if there's a good balance between the numbers of each. Living longer isn't guaranteed to offer a longer productive period. We might just end up with more old people in need of support and not necessarily more children. This is already a major problem today in most developed countries.
There are probably so many more factors to consider. Like the psychological impact of living substantially longer. Even things like that crappy boss who won't retire from another 60 years, the dictator who won't die for another hundred years, or any number of the many society destroying tech CEOs getting to entrench themselves for decades more.
Well, they dont want more for you, but more for “them”.
https://archive.ph/jHHYp
> The results revealed that Jonathan has “unique gene variants in most aging pathways” including DNA repair, insulin regulation, mitochondrial function, and “low entropy” methylation, reports the study.
min-maxing longevity vs speed and charisma
I dunno, I think he's pretty charismatic. He has all these researchers wanting to spend time with him.
Sure but biologists will talk to anything. You know what happened to the other tortoises? Bored to death.
He's basically been networking for 194 years without ever leaving the garden
Yeah, but is he more charismatic than Bryan Johnson?
Wait till he gets his hands on turtle semen and peptides
1 reply →
The oldest gay tortoise there is. You can hear the grunts when he and Frederick are fucking from the other side of the valley.
To be fair, he's had 194 years to work on his charisma. At this point it's a choice
The hare really ought to take notes
Hell yeah I’m down to become a turtle. Lay by the beach. Eat kelp. Awesome
You can already do that in Bali without tortoise conversion therapy.
https://xkcd.com/889/
it kinda looks like he was taken from his home as a toddler and put in jail for like... 180 years or so?. very romantic indeed.
No point staying alive if you're not healthy. This is a great podcast about the difference between lifespan and healthspan: "To start our new series about what it means to live in a world of ageing populations, David talks to geneticist Adam Rutherford about the benefits and pitfalls of increasing longevity. Are GLP-1s – drugs like Ozempic, Wegovy and Mounjaro – miracle cures that will extend human lifespans? What happens if longer lives do not coincide with better health? How far can life extension be pushed? And who wants to live forever anyway?" https://www.ppfideas.com/episodes/an-ageing-world-lifespan-v...
> No point staying alive if you're not healthy.
Maybe not for you, but others would beg to differ?
Darwin apparently had debilitating illnesses at 72 (one year before his death) when he published a book on earthworms and their role in forming soil. And Pasteur was apparently paralyzed at 63 when he developed the rabies vaccine. Etc.
Should they have just kicked the bucket when they lost their health, because of the pointlessness of living past that?
That's an uncharitable reading of what I mean, but I suppose I could have been clearer. Perhaps "no point staying alive if you're so unhealthy that you're perpetually miserable" would be closer to what I meant, particularly having seen a number of elderly relatives living through their last years in unrelenting misery, impatient for death. One in particular sticks with me, an uncle who had been a doctor and knew exactly what was coming because he'd seen plenty of it in his career, but without the means to end it in a dignified way. These people absolutely didn't want to be kept alive longer - which is the point of the distinction between lifespan and healthspan in the podcast.
A bit more charitable read on the GP is that people should focus on having as many healthy days as possible rather than as many total days as possible.
That doesn't mean those already I'll should just give up, it means those looking to their future should consider whether living 20 more healthy years is better than living 40 more years if 30 of those are increasingly focused on just treating symptoms to wake up tomorrow.
Chopin had tuberculosis most of his life and died at 39 weighing only 45kg. Euler became almost blind before 60. Give a chance to sick and feeble, folks.
Luxury problems.
And?
No one wants to live forever. Except maybe Trump, Musk and co
Why was the us space force involved?
He has a pm unusually large volume and has been around an unusually long time and they are the group responsible for anomalies in space-time.
I'd guess that the samples got flown through RAF Ascension Island which the Space Force operate at.
Interesting so the oldest land animal hasn’t cracked 200 but stuff that lives in the sea can go for five or 600 years or more.
Apparently the secret to living 500 years is to move somewhere cold, avoid sunlight, and never be in a hurry
I do IT, poorly, in a basement in Canada. I will live to 500.
But what if I already live somewhere cold, avoid sunlight and am never in a hurry?
3 replies →
This is the oldest land animal currently living and whose age is known with certainty.
It is believed that other tortoises may have lived close to 300 years.
The greater age reached by animals living in an environment that is cold and with a constant temperature and which need a much lower average power for living (i.e. a lower energy consumption and a slower metabolism) is very much expected.
Maybe leaving the water is a mistake...
Whales seemed to have figured that out.
2 replies →
There's sharks out there that are much older than the United States.
And sponges older than pyramids.
Older than the United States hahaha.
Remember the saying : in the US, 100 years is a long time; in Europe, 100km is a long distance.
21 replies →
And Orange Roughy, available in Australian fish and chip shops, spawned around the same time as the first British colony there.
Proof that rucking is good for your health
only if you go very slowly
> Stephen Clark, an aging researcher
Shouldn’t they find a younger researcher?
Ideally one called Jonathan?
To be fair, all researchers are aging.
Then why they are they picking on Stephen?
oldest known animal
I wonder where else the oldest land animal could be, if not on Earth?
English isn't my native language, but to my eyes it looks like writing "'Jonathan' is the oldest land animal" lacks context/completeness for an article title. Perhaps "'Jonathan' is the oldest known land animal" could add some mystery, but "'Jonathan' is the oldest land animal on Earth" sounds more attention-grabbing.
A greenland shark, just with lots of water on top of the land too.
There might be older land animals on other planets…
(writing that just gave me mini goosebumps)
He doesn't look a day over 90!
> He doesn't look a day over 90!
He still has quite a ways to go to 1485715964481761497309522733620825737885569961284688766942216863704985393094065876545992131370884059645617234469978112000000000000000000000. :-)
194 is the new 90 apparently
Every couple Summers
Me and a couple hunters
Like to row in from the Isle of
Astonishing M*erf*ers
he's so old, he's completely lost the hare /j
Hare dropped out ages ago. He won the long game.
> He Could Hold the Secrets to Defying Death
The struggles for limited resources among humans marooned in a finite ecosystem will not allow us to defy death. When natural causes no longer reduce our numbers sufficiently, we will be winnowed through an unceasing epidemic of violence. So long as there are births, there will be deaths.
If you thought the carnival of dementia brought about by modern medicine's gradual reduction of quick death was grim, just wait until medicine solves natural death entirely.
Tortoises who give up their secrets to humans won't survive the cataclysm.
> the samples were delivered from Saint Helena to Florida by the U.S. Space Force.
...why space force?
It's a remote area and USSF has operations in nearby Ascension Island.
St Helena is where the minimum wage workers on Ascension come from. It only exists to provide cheap labour to Britain's Atlantic territories.
Because Trump, Musk, et al are hoping to live forever but their lifestyle is not very forgiving - hence all haste.
Y'all see Trump and Elon in everything.
3 replies →
[dead]
ok
In the Leftovers people think living in Jarden is why they were left. Maybe St Helena is the new Jarden.
Can't we just appreciate that exceptionality as it is?
Somehow, I wish we would leave that creature alone. For once.
They did opt to swab his mouth rather than draw blood to minimize his discomfort. That seems like a pretty reasonable compromise for the value of learning and science
Because a spit swab is so invasive?
What's the use of living longer, all we do is leech, kill. I am glad and sad at the same time that humans are mortals.
[I am being sarcastic here, XD]