←back to thread

215 points XzetaU8 | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | 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 #
ACCount37 ◴[] No.45081834[source]
Doesn't scale. If you could put "sleeping well, eating well and exercising" into a $0.25 once a week pill and make that available to everyone, it would work. As is, it doesn't.

We want solutions that can be scaled and rolled out broadly, and "basic healthy lifestyle" ain't it.

replies(1): >>45082459 #
sdeframond ◴[] No.45082459[source]
Why not? What is not scalable about it, specifically ?

I mean, sure, it doesn't scale as well as a magic pill as a business. But is certainly is O(n) with the number of people involved.

replies(3): >>45082697 #>>45082795 #>>45083087 #
1. waldohatesyou ◴[] No.45082697[source]
The scaling challenge here comes from scaling across the various types of life situations and personality types out there. Some people work too much to be able to live a balance lifestyle. Other people just can’t summon the motivation.

Either way, a pill would scale better across all these people.