←back to thread

215 points XzetaU8 | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.5s | source
Show context
ACCount37 ◴[] No.45081066[source]
Aging isn't even recognized as a disease yet, and it well should be.

Very little research currently goes into attacking aging directly - as opposed to handling things that are in no small part downstream from aging, such as heart disease. A big reason for poor "longevity gains" is lack of trying.

replies(4): >>45081119 #>>45081270 #>>45081570 #>>45081608 #
sdeframond ◴[] No.45081570[source]
I wonder if I would really like to pour billions of taxpayer money into aging when we are not even able to live a basic healthy lifestyle.

Sleeping well, eating well and exercising does work. Science about this is well-established. So why arent we?

It would not raise the life expectancy to 100 years but it would considerably reduce the health burden on the economy.

replies(3): >>45081828 #>>45081834 #>>45085258 #
1. HeadsUpHigh ◴[] No.45081828[source]
>Sleeping well, eating well and exercising does work. Science about this is well-established. So why arent we?

Those will give you at best another marginal decade. By all means worth doing but its not radical life extension. At the same time a young body can take lack of sleep and can physically perform even if not exercising much better than an old one. So there's more to it than just lifestyle.

replies(2): >>45082479 #>>45082579 #
2. sdeframond ◴[] No.45082479[source]
I would say it gives you +25 years of healthy lifespan.

Compare it to being obese, wich can happen very young and is in part determined by how you are fed when you are a baby/child.

3. carlosjobim ◴[] No.45082579[source]
> Those will give you at best another marginal decade.

Those will give you an entire life. Living while being healthy is an entirely different life than surviving while being unhealthy.