How feasible are rejuvenation therapies (AKA reversing aging)

File: 1473847594280.jpg (613KB, 1746x2048px) Image search: [Google]

613KB, 1746x2048px

should probably focus on anti-aging before reversing aging

>>8988393
The real answer is nobody knows. To date there isn't really any real evidence to suggest any ongoing research will achieve anything close to anti aging or reverse aging so all predictions are based on future discoveries and assessment on how fast and how effective they can be.
Which means it's all bullshit.

>>8988406
That doesn't make any sense.

File: are you serious.jpg (851KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

851KB, 1920x1200px

>>8988411
what do you mean?

>>8988420
Depending on how you define "anti-aging", they are basically the same thing.

But if you mean that we should first focus on stopping aging before trying to reverse it, that doesn't make any sense at all. You basically can't stop aging, just like you can't stop a car or some other machine from accumulating damage when used. What you can do is repair the damage and return the machine (e.g human body) back to the best possible condition - that's what reversing aging does. And that treatment has to be repeated every now and then because the body continues to age (read: get more and more damaged) as time goes on.

At least that's how I understand it.

File: double double.png (160KB, 606x504px) Image search: [Google]

160KB, 606x504px

>>8988435
>Depending on how you define "anti-aging", they are basically the same thing.
think of it like

young person = skinny person
old person = fat person
reverse aging = losing weight
anti aging = staying skinny

so while treatment to return a body back to best possible condition would be reverse aging, anti-aging would be preventing the damage to begin with

>>8988439
>so while treatment to return a body back to best possible condition would be reverse aging, anti-aging would be preventing the damage to begin with

As I already said, it's basically impossible to prevent the damage, at least for the next 100-200 years, probably more. We would have to understand our metabolism completely before trying to fuck with it and at the moment we know about 0,000000000001%

Which is easier: making a car that doesn't accumulate any kind of damage no matter how it's used OR repairing a normal car periodically so it stays in good condition?

Depends which aspect of aging you're talking about. Cell loss therapies via stem cells and senescent cell clearance have received a lot of funding in the past 2 years, so will probably be the first to appear on the market.

File: Capture.png (411KB, 589x369px) Image search: [Google]

411KB, 589x369px

>>8988456
I don't mean permanently preventing damage, but even dietary choices can drastically slow down certain aging aspects, see the monkeys in pic related

We already have modern medicine that can keep you in good condition to some extent, but the words 'rejuvenation therapies' and the pic you posted seem to imply going much further

>>8988472
>Depends which aspect of aging you're talking about

Looks, mostly...

>>8988476
>the words 'rejuvenation therapies' and the pic you posted seem to imply going much further

Is that a bad thing?

It would be like being a vampire but without the drawbacks. OK, fedoras would still hate Christianity, but you get my point.

>>8988406
This.

Fires don't burn backward, and it's hard to stuff the explosion back into the bomb case.

>>8988435
>Depending on how you define "anti-aging", they are basically the same thing.

Anti aging is akin to doing maintenance on your house so it doesn't fall down. Reverse aging is akin to trying to put it back together after it falls down.

They both have the same end result -- you have a house that is standing.

But the one is easier than the other. Keeping the termites from eating your wood is easier than figuring out how to turn termite poo back into a floor joist.

>>8988567
>>8988577
So wrong it hurts my brain.

>>8988745
>not an argument: the post

if you can't reverse bone, connective tissue, and teeth loss. then it isn't worth it. unless you want to look 20, with the skeleton and teeth of a grandma.

>>8988393
From what I'm told by an incredibly-smart person who suffers from Lupus:

"If you want to stop aging, you'll have to change how our immunity system affects our body. Aging is the result of our autoimmune system attacking our own body, and we won't suffer the consequences of this (known by all intensive purposes as aging) if we can prevent internal infection, yet control our immune system."

I have no idea what this means, but I trust her because she's way smarter than I am.

>>8988752
It would. Idk about teeth though.
>>8988435
This is the correct explanation

>>8988746
I've already explained why stopping aging is not fucking possible.

>>8988752
You can. Next.

>>8988785
Teeth would be possible, but probably be a little more complicated because you have to stimulate the development of new teeth.

>>8988798
>I've already explained why stopping aging is not fucking possible.
where?

>>8988806
>>8988456

>>8988823
i mean that's just your opinion, science doesn't run on opinions

where's the proofs?

File: Mads.gif (1004KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

1004KB, 500x281px

>>8988409
>To date there isn't really any real evidence to suggest any ongoing research will achieve anything close to anti aging or reverse aging

>Lifespan of mice extended by as much as 35 percent; no adverse effects found

>Source: Mayo Clinic
>Summary: Researchers have shown that senescent cells -- cells that no longer divide and accumulate with age -- negatively impact health and shorten lifespan by as much as 35 percent in normal mice. The results demonstrate that clearance of senescent cells delays tumor formation, preserves tissue and organ function, and extends lifespan without observed adverse effects.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/02/160203145723.htm

>>8988833
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Xdyj0GS0Vg

>>8988837
The same technology that expanded the lifespan of the mice has potential to cause cancer if the doses are too high

>>8988840
>ted talk science
yeah you might want to stick to the popsci kiddo

>>8988842

You can overdose on aspirin or even water, too. SFW.

>>8988845
That guy donated 13 million dollars of his own money to rejuvenation research. Not invested. DONATED.

File: 1492725282488.gif (285KB, 462x500px) Image search: [Google]

285KB, 462x500px

>>8988857
and those millions led to what results?

>>8988756
>Aging is the result of autoimmunity
Sure, if you've got lupus. Kek

>>8988860
Results and conclusions so promising that companies like Google decided to invest billions in the field. Some of the fruits of this interest can be seen here >>8988837

If you think you are clever by posting an anime pic and implying that "LMAO, he donated 13 million and we still haven't cured aging, HAHA" then think again. These things take time and money.