Is there any reasonable prospect that during the next half-century,

>>8324318
>during the next half-century
2016-2066? any reasonable prospect? sure

and by the way as far as i know
>the damage the body accumulates over time during the ageing process
is just a dominating mindset right now - there's still a possibility that ageing is genetically programmed

>>8324318
No. This will literally never become possible.
Ok, maybe not "never", but definitely not in the next half-century and it will never be the practical solution.
How are you planning to "reverse" damage done on hundreds of billions of unique cells? How are you going to retain the macroscopic morphology?
These kind of shit aren't really doable.
We will all die. There's no way around it.

Maybe you can prolong your death or improve the quality of life until death, but death is a given.

>>8324336
>there's still a possibility that ageing is genetically programmed

That'd be even better since you could fiddle with that more easily to turn it off. It is easier to fix 1 thing than it is to fix 100.

File: n+47.jpg (10KB, 259x400px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 259x400px

>>8324340
yeah, i know

you might find this book useful

>>8324338

The cells are dying and being replaced all the time; but after a long enough time they are not replaced with high-quality, well-functioning cells.

We need to ensure they're regularly replenished with youthful cells; not try to keep existing cells alive forever.

>is it possible

Yes.

>will we

Depends on too many variables for me to calculate.

>>8324336
Some of it is genetic. Some of it, such as amyloid plaque formation or deposition of fatty plaques on the insides of arteries, most cancers, are very much environmental damage due to wear and tear.

>>8324340
>It is easier to fix 1 thing than it is to fix 100.

No, it still wouldn't be just one thing.
>inb4 telomerase
Telomeres are just one part of the puzzle. You still need to deal with cancer.


So my assessment is that it's a pipe dream, at least for people who are reading this thread right now.

>>8324386

Cancer is caused by degeneration of the immune system.

>>8324390
Cancer is caused by like, a billion things. Failure of cytotoxic T cells to recognize cancerous cells is just one etiology.

>>8324390

Aren't there also cancers caused by overexpression of telomerase, preventing healthy apoptosis?

>>8324415
Yeah, so you have a dilemma. Either you extend telomeres to delay sensence, and then you get cancer, or you let cells die and get old. There's no feasible way to repair all that accumulated damage because the cell doesn't retain 'memory' of what the genome looked like before all that damage happened like 12 cell divisions ago (it might remember how to repair damage like 1 or 2 generations ago due to methylation markers). Sure you can attempt to repair damaged DNA using homology-directed double-stranded tempate repair, but that has its risks as well, so you might end up causing cancer while trying to repair damage.

>b-but muh stem cells!

Good luck injecting stem cells into your brain.

>>8324318
They reversed the aging on mice 3 years ago by messing with telomerase if I remember correctly, but the mice developed cancer/tumors.

Good Point: Mice age got reversed.
Bad Point: They developed cancer.

So that's some kind of progress.

I got an important question. What are the pros and cons of humanity being able to undo ageing done to the body?

>>8324318
Start working on it faggot. Go into anti-aging science and make a killing selling the drugs to rich people

File: 1396734346691.gif (827KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

827KB, 320x240px

>>8324680
>killing selling the drugs to rich people
you make a killing by selling cheap, easily accessible meds to a huge amount of people, by making a mass product, not a golden pill

>>8324698
>giving immortality to the plebs
a fatal mistake

>>8324680
See: >>8324698

He would become immensely richer selling it to all and hold a monopoly like no other, and rich fucks wouldn't be able to touch him or the masses would rape them into next week.

I wish anti-ageing was real, be cool to live to see the year 3000.

extropism ftw

>>8324318
Its possible. Depends on a lot of things, not least whether or not accumulated damage actually is responsible for the aging process