28 thoughts on “Let Me Ask You a Question – 11/23/18

  1. Maybe, but, I think it won’t be by a lot. We have a lot of potentially replaceable parts, except for one, the brain. And, the means to significantly extend an active and functioning life are likely to be expensive and benefit only the most wealthy and powerful. Aside from increasing the already glaring inequality in medical care, I’m not sure having some of those people around and in charge for decades longer is a good idea.

    1. No answering questions with a question! lol Seriously though, I’m sure someone back in 1712 asked the same thing about living to 50.

  2. Apparently not according to a guy on BBC Radio 4 (note I used BBC to give it credence 😂) He said there is a limit to how long our cells etc can survive no matter what. But as it’s goodtobecraztsometimes said ‘Why would you?’ there’s only so many times you can climb Everest 🤪

    1. Some scientists hold the opinion that in several hundred years humans will have discovered science to allow humans to live well past 200 years old. I don’t buy into the theory.

  3. If I cannot live the way I want, then why would I wan to continue on, just to live beyond my usefulness? I do not think we were meant to live that long. Your question should be …. If you could prolong your pet’s life to live as long as you, would you. Then by all means, YES!, YES! YES!

    1. But some would argue that people made the same argument 300 years ago when the expectancy was under 60. Why would anyone want to live beyond 60?

      1. Good point. It depends on the circumstances though. I had two major knee surgeries within 6 months of each other last year. One was ACL reconstruction, and the other was a total knee replacement. I am fighting hard to come back to where I was before the surgeries, and because I am an athlete, I probably fight harder than most people, and let me tell you, it has been a struggle. I know I will never be 100% again, but I’m close.

  4. I think so. People over the age of 90 were rare in the 1960’s. The age of retirement was set at 65 because people usually died by 70. In 1965, age sixty-five was more like seventy-five, mostly because of bad habits. This changed when science began to connect behaviors to health. The debate over smoking and cancer caused people to examine other bad habits. The result: Age 65 is now more like age 55 for people who’ve spent a lifetime exercising and practicing good nutritional habits. Exercise and eating well slow the aging process. According to Smithsonian Magazine, 72,197 Americans are now aged 100 or older. I’m confident medical science will continue to find new ways to slow the aging process and extend the human lifespan.

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/sep/27/rise-in-uk-life-expectancy-slows-significantly-figures-show

    1. Climate change has been an ongoing event on Earth for millions of years. Cold to hot. Hot to cold. It is inevitable regardless of what humans do as it is a natural occurrence.

      1. I am aware that is is part of the natural cycle and sometimes that cycle has moved quickly but never as fast as it is now. So human activity has sped up the natural cycle this time around.

  5. Many people already live past 100 years without the need of science, in different regions of world. Why wouldn’t you just follow their examples instead of involving a lab, if that’s truly the desired result.?

    1. Science involves so much more than lab work. Science also involves understanding the human body to a better level and discovering cures for diseases.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: