Utopia Talk / Politics / Time for clinical immortality?

jergul large member	Tue Nov 13 00:50:07 The Lancet just published a study that suggests peak human will be around the 10 billion mark, so I am starting to think death should be optional. Premise Women will give birth to less than one girl each no matter their lifespan. Clinical immortality simply exstends lifespans as accidents and the 2nd amendment will still kill people (so clinical immortality may give a life expectancy of say 300-600 years). Contries with birthrates above replacement rates will not adapt clinical immortality before their birthrates fall (so a big FU to Africa). The science will mature before we have a viable colony on Mars. Discuss?
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Nov 13 07:06:21 Didn't China try population control? How did that work out?
jergul large member	Tue Nov 13 07:59:20 For China? Great. Its the main reason its better off than India. But I was actually speaking of the reverse. No control. Birth rates are the sum of individual choices and are below replacement rates in much of the world. So why die?
Hrothgar Member	Tue Nov 13 08:36:35 It could be argued death is the natural way to renew the species spirit for survival. Toward the middle aged years and beyond the thrill of living fades for most. The mundane tasks required for day to day self sufficiency become mundane, no matter the field of expertise. Overall the feeling of new and fun and exciting becomes more and more rare. A human world full of healthy body, old mind 300 year old humans could very well feel like a planet sized old folks home with a few young whipper snappers running around being noisy pissing everyone else off who can barely face day 102200 on the job. Most would eventually be facing hundreds of years of life beyond the few most precious loved ones who died at 75 in some unfortunate way. As much as we fear death, I think the alternative really may be more of a curse than we realize at first glance.
patom Member	Tue Nov 13 09:22:34 I don't mind getting older but there are things I just don't have the stamina that I used to have. Pisses me off. But there ain't anything I can do about it. My knee just starts aching after I'm on my feet for an hour or two. I'm still able to work, just driving though. This year I spent most of the summer driving an escort for road side mowing and now I have a plow truck in the driveway waiting for snow. It could be worse. There are a few that I know of that I grew up with that didn't make it this far. I'll be 75 in less than a month.
Forwyn Member	Tue Nov 13 09:32:53 We're decades away from genome mastery.
Pillz Member	Tue Nov 13 09:36:18 Much further than decades. But jergul, for once, is almost on to something
TJ Member	Tue Nov 13 12:05:28 jergul: I had to chuckle with a few of your chosen words. Mostly the 2nd and Africa. Intelligence has a dark side too. Humanity against humanity. At what point do you believe that humanity will become something else?
jergul large member	Tue Nov 13 14:32:04 Hrothgar It could certainly be so argued. I think it the premise for "Logan's Run" (though with a slight variation on the definition of "old"). I should have indicated I though cerebra- rejuvination part and parcel. Mental and physical aging stopping at say 45-55? But I do believe I may have overestimated the life expectancy clinical mortality might give as people will still sub optimize. 250-300 average life expectancy? Forwyn Decades? What is decades? :-). Reviewing data by age bracket for Norway. Mortality for 80-84 has plummeted by 45% between 2000 and 2016 (the chance per year of someone reaching that age bracket dying in that age bracket).
jergul large member	Tue Nov 13 15:05:04 TJ I have my moments :). The past will become something else. I think we might redefine Homo Sapiens Sapiens to Homo Sapiens Anthropocenes when 3 things happen: 1. The mass extinction event ends 2. Clinical mortality is within reach 3. Some sort of new genetic tracer is discovered 2 and 3 probably overlap as snippets of new genetics probably play a part in 2 while justifying a shift to new terminology (we are no longer genetically the same as what killed off whatever large % of the species on earth).
jergul large member	Tue Nov 13 17:10:55 I do see a generational issue: Your parent's die, you get their *stuff* You don't dies, your kid gets *zilch* Balance somewhat by the singular *kid* as opposed to *kids*. You might help a bit.
jergul large member	Tue Nov 13 17:11:08 die*
Pillz Member	Tue Nov 13 17:23:01 Back to full retard. The sun will set and rise again after all.
jergul large member	Tue Nov 13 17:45:05 Pillz Of course it is a transitional issue, but for most Americans, inheritance is the pathway into the middle class.
TJ Member	Tue Nov 13 19:51:33 "Of course it is a transitional issue, but for most Americans, inheritance is the pathway into the middle class." That depends on what you consider inheritance. Money inheritance isn't the pathway. You might want to consider genetics and mentoring. The greatest majority of kids from middle class families are middle class earners long before they receive any inheritance at their parents death. I think you'll find that to be generational. According to one study I read: Those in the middling wealth ranges—$25k-$50k, $50k-$100k, and $100k-$250k—have received inheritances of $14.8k, $22.5k, and $51.4k respectively.” So, the wealthiest in the United States are able to leave behind very large inheritances and this skews the average numbers to be nowhere near average for the majority of retirees. Of course there is always a chance I could be wrong.
Hot Rod Revved Up	Tue Nov 13 20:09:29 Never.
jergul large member	Wed Nov 14 01:15:01 TJ People are pretty marginal middle-class in the first place. But more correctly, the term would be wealth transfers (it does not matter if the transfer takes place before or after death). 50% need help from their parents to enter the real estate market. Home ownership being one of the characteristics of the middle class. I am also suggesting college fund priorities might change if you are looking to fund not years, but scores of decades in retirement. With post secondary education being another characteristic of the middle-class. Inter-generational wealth transfers will of course be impacted by lifespans stretching into the centuries. At the very least for the first generation. Hopefully that will be the millennials. Why not accumulate all suffering in one place?
TJ Member	Wed Nov 14 11:25:58 jergul: I agree that middle class is pretty marginal. !) I suppose you realize what living beyond your means-means . 2) College debt 1 and a half T in the States. 3) Most middle class kids rent 2-6 years before saving enough to purchase a home. 4) Pew Research: The category of middle-income is made up of people making somewhere between $40,500 and $122,000. The upper middle class stretches well beyond the $122,000 income level. 5) Pew Research: In percentage terms, 52% of adults lived in middle-income households, 29% in lower-income households and 19% in upper-income ... 4 and 5 are a nice way to make things appear on the up and up, eh? 6) Americans are horrible with saving and most have lived in the present with little attention to retirement. Most of what they did manage to save will be depleted in retirement-many before they pass on. The above is relative close with other financial data available. There is a small wealth transfer to children and what has been is spent within the first five years of receiving. Even in the upper most middle class as far as I can tell Millennial's appear to be paying attention. The wife and I have been exceptions to the patterns and reaped huge benefits the past 18 years. Our children don't need our money, but they have benefited considerably from our talents. The middle class has been making their own bed they find themselves sleeping in and a great deal of them(most of them)are duel income families. I'm done as this thread has lost its path. Possibly it will find its way back to the topic if I stop responding.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Wed Nov 14 13:37:41 That isn't how UP thread work TJ, you follow the path that emerges.
TJ Member	Wed Nov 14 13:53:54 Nim: I have never been much on following the lead of others, and I admit at times to my disadvantage, but it hasn't been a frequent occurrence in a good number of years, therefore, I'm satisfied.
jergul large member	Wed Nov 14 22:23:02 I find it striking how huge decreases in age specific mortality is not making headlines. A 40% reduction in the 80-84 over 16 years is stunning. Remarkably, the brain seems relatively immune to current hardwired failure points (homeostasis no longer possible). Which simplifies anti aging stem cell treatment dramatically (not a silver bullet, but a likely arrow in the quiver of clinical immortality).
TJ Member	Thu Nov 15 11:33:33 My opinion on topic. Clinical immortality is a twisted take on religion with a scientific approach. At some point we'll cease to be what we call human. Can we assign the idea to selection purge? I find it mind boggling that immortality is applied in a discussion on prolonging mortality 3-6 hundred years, but not surprised that multi-cellular aging is an inevitability. If some cataclysmic event doesn't destroy humankind-humankind will take its place in the accomplishment. The tower will crumble one way or another. I'm pessimistically optimistic to say the least.
jergul large member	Thu Nov 15 11:46:42 TJ We will cease to be what the future considers human. Homo Sapiens Halocenes compared to the new Homo Sapiens Sapiens. Humans will always consider themselves to be humans in other words :). Clinical immortality was supposed to mean that it becomes medically feasible to extend lifespans indefinitely and would play out as a practical lifespan in the 200+ average age. I suppose I would have used the term infinite if I thought we had a shot at living for billions+ years. In fact I am just dabbling in timelines considerably shorter than that attributed bibical figures (Adam broke 900 years according to that particular mythology). Yah, assuming the Halocene or other mass extinction events don't finish us of course. I hope that clarifies what I meant.
TJ Member	Thu Nov 15 12:18:12 "Humans will always consider themselves to be humans in other words :)." Sure-it doesn't make it so though in an evolutionary sense. Digital is human discovery-not human. Just as language is a human construct. I knew your intent, and just providing a perception. opposing fantasy, and attempting to stoke a fire of controversy. Lifespans have no fixed end, but can be averaged. Lifespans can also devolve in an attempt to prolong the drift.
jergul large member	Thu Nov 15 14:14:00 TJ Its just a classification system and is quite malleable. In evolutionary terms we would measure such things in 10s of thousands generations. So maybe, must maybe, in 200 000 years we will be genetically distinct from humans that lived 100 000 years ago. I rather think we will define current man as Human Sapiens Holocens within a few 100d years or so. But that is just my opinion. I have no idea when we will stop killing off stuff. Not killing off stuff would certainly be a change worth noting. The premise is that currently, lifespans do have a fixed end (something happens between 100 and the 115 year mark). I am merely questioning how much longer that will remain true.
TJ Member	Thu Nov 15 16:51:04 jergul: "Its just a classification system and is quite malleable." True: humans are easily persuaded and influenced. DNA has an intrinsic value, which seems to coincide with your hardwired implication. A singular nature with similarities. Cell cheaters prevent longevity and could easily be the something that happens between 100 and 115 years or so it seems. The intrinsic value continuously mutates from innumerable subjection's and appears to be the illusive factor that prevents human defeat or perfection. But..., what the hell, the discussion is way out of my league and demands extensive research on my part. I am uninspired at this stage. Imaginations are the keys to creativity that can be good or bad. In my imagination of a 100-200 year future, humans could be a historical blip in a cosmic library where no one exists to read. :) Its been fun.
murder Member	Thu Nov 15 21:12:07 "I'll be 75 in less than a month." patom: Damn, I can't even imagine getting that far. Even 60 seems like I might be praying for death. Happy birthmonth! :o)
murder Member	Thu Nov 15 21:16:13 "Discuss?" Who the hell is going to support the 200 year olds? Are we talking death being optional or aging being optional?
jergul large member	Thu Nov 15 23:01:03 TJ The holocene will more likely than not play out that way. Its one of the things that makes clinical immortality tempting. It may change perspectives in ways that end the mass extinction events. Murder Aging beyond a certain point becoming optional would need to be the premise.
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: