# New Drugs May Extend Our Lifespan to 150 Years



## Gahars (Oct 17, 2011)

This is a bit of an update on something I'm sure a few of you have heard of, but I still figured it was worth sharing. 

Basically, scientists are testing a drug that would use a synthetic molecule called resveratrol, which works by stopping or slowing down the genes that cause aging. It has already been test sucessfully on worms, yeast, flies, and mice, and some of the people involved are predicting that the drug could potentially extend our lifespan to 150 years. 

Source: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/113671-New-Drugs-May-Extend-Our-Lifespan-to-150-Years

The potential implications of this treatment are mindboggling, and it opens the door to further enhancement. Sure, some serious testing will need to be done in order to ensure that this is safe for us, but if it works... well, what do you think? Would it be worth it?

Me? I'm all for living twice as long as the average rate. Besides, I want to see where we go from here; singularity anyone?


----------



## plasma (Oct 17, 2011)

I wonder how many Pokemon there would be when im 150?!?!?! lol New drug = Tis cool XD


----------



## Zetta_x (Oct 17, 2011)

I have a feeling that doubling the average life expectancy will be very detrimental for the human race in general (mainly because of population control). (Imagined if you just doubled the amount of people living on the planet (It would be more like 1.75); that would mean stuff like unemployment rate would increase.

Also, if this slows the aging process; can we expect puberty  to be hit at later dates, will this affect fetuses and embryos; will pregnancy take 18 months on average until birth?

Lastly, Gene's age? It probably meant orgrans and tissues we don't replace daily already. But most failure isn't due to old age, it's due to attracting some kind of abnormality (which I presume would have the same chance regardless of how much longer you can live). The statistics on how many people who die of natural deaths would decrease significantly considering you have twice the chance to contact some type of cancer in a lifetime.


----------



## DarkWay (Oct 17, 2011)

Living longer might be all well and good but you have to think about how your body will deteriorate over that time.


----------



## DiscostewSM (Oct 17, 2011)

"I went to a rejuvenation clinic and got a whole natural overhaul. They took out some wrinkles, did hair repair, changed the blood, added a good 30 to 40 years to my life. They also replaced my spleen and colon. What do you think?"


----------



## Jakob95 (Oct 17, 2011)

But you can still die from cancer and heart attacks and stuff like that.  So I don't really understand how everyone will be able to live up to 150 with this.


----------



## spinal_cord (Oct 17, 2011)

It's band enough they keep putting back the age at which you can claim your state pension, now they're you'll have to work until you're 140 before you can claim.


----------



## Gahars (Oct 17, 2011)

Well, the longer people live, how much we reproduce would have to decrease. This would shake up the norms of society, true, but that's happening now anyway (Issues with retirement age and social security when people live far longer than they used to). There will be growing pains, sure, but they can be overcome. As for employment, more long term services would be required in order to cater to everyone living so long, so that could possibly balance it out.

As for the effects, I wouldn't know how it affects fetal development in the womb. However, it wouldn't be that drastic; it would just probably mean that your healthy "prime" would last a whole lot longer than it does now.

Also, this is assuming that everyone will get access to the drugs, which definitely won't be the case. It will probably be very highly priced at first, and it might not make its way to poverty stricken nations for a good deal of time, unfortunately.

Ultimately, these are a beginning, a stepping stone on the way to bypassing death itself. It's nice to know that it is on track to happen in my lifetime.

EDIT:

Also, diseases or ailments would still be a factor (for now). The idea is that you could live to 150 with this treatment, not that it would be absolutely guaranteed (After all, you could live up to your 70's and beyond if you're lucky, but that doesn't necessarily mean it will happen. Life gets in the way sometimes.)


----------



## Thesolcity (Oct 17, 2011)

spinal_cord said:


> It's band enough they keep putting back the age at which you can claim your state pension, now they're you'll have to work until you're 140 before you can claim.



Retirement in the U.S.: 65 lolno *149!!! *


----------



## nando (Oct 17, 2011)

that's awful. we don't need cher strutting her koosh for another century.


----------



## spotanjo3 (Oct 17, 2011)

No proof.


----------



## notmeanymore (Oct 17, 2011)

I'll pass on that offer, thanks.


----------



## Mantis41 (Oct 17, 2011)

I laughed at the name of the drug and thought of  'reverse a trol' and assumed it was a hoax.


----------



## alidsl (Oct 17, 2011)

Also only the rich will get access to drugs, there will probably be laws in place to stop you from taking the drug before puberty and the birth rate of the world is going down, so this will only affect a small minority of people


----------



## ilman (Oct 17, 2011)

the more time a programmer lives=the more time he can make games
the more time I live=the more time I can play games


Spoiler


----------



## OJClock (Oct 17, 2011)

I think this probably works by counteracting the molecules which decrease telomeres on the end of the chromosomes.
not enough is known about telomeres for this to be in any way safe for human trials, but this is an interesting prospect.
i'd like to see what happens when they test it on more closely related subjects.

As for people's concerns with when to give this drug, I'd think it would only be safe after a certain age when you have fully developed, because otherwise if the drug didn't get to all of your cells equally it could fuck you up developmentally. Also interested to see how this affects the brain/where it actually has an effect in the human body


----------



## shakirmoledina (Oct 17, 2011)

eh can still get killed by car accident and besides chuck norris eats a pill after every meal

its quite interesting actually and its really possible. but side-effects in "super" things are always there (look at driver SF)


----------



## 431unknown (Oct 17, 2011)

Why would any one want to live that long? Personally I hope I kick off by 85 or so.


----------



## Depravo (Oct 17, 2011)

With the world becoming more and more overpopulated it seems like an incredibly irresponsible thing to create.


----------



## Nimbus (Oct 17, 2011)

The word of the day is "May"

Doesn't mean it will, and if we do this..aren't we technically playing god.

Personally something about that doesn't seem right, but that's just my thought on the matter, no need to agree with it.


----------



## Necron (Oct 17, 2011)

Aside from overpopulation, people would be obligated to work more years, they will be able to control people a lot more, so that way they don't have to start over so repeatdly.


----------



## pubert09 (Oct 17, 2011)

DarkWay said:


> Living longer might be all well and good but you have to think about how your body will deteriorate over that time.


That was my first thought. I think someone would do it, then end up miserable and wanting to die. I guess assisted suicide might be a problem again with that...
If this worked, I wonder if we would adapt to having that long of a life span. Like would we age slower where 20 would be like what 7 is now...hmmmmm....





431unknown said:


> Why would any one want to live that long? Personally I hope I kick off by 85 or so.


I know, right?!?!
I have told people before that if I ever become old and I can't take care of myself, then just kill me off. 
I CANNOT stand the idea of someone having to take care of me. I love being self sufficient.


----------



## gokujr1000 (Oct 17, 2011)

If your desperate to live that long without a Pill be healthy. The Human lifespan can be greater than one hundred if you know how to treat your body.


----------



## Elrinth (Oct 17, 2011)

DarkWay said:


> Living longer might be all well and good but you have to think about how your body will deteriorate over that time.



As long as you produce fresh blood then you're all good to go


----------



## AshuraZro (Oct 17, 2011)

Two Words: Zombie Apocalypse.


----------



## Gahars (Oct 17, 2011)

gokujr1000 said:


> If your desperate to live that long without a Pill be healthy. The Human lifespan can be greater than one hundred if you know how to treat your body.



Only if you're extremely, extremely, extremely lucky. It isn't just "healthiness" that goes into a long life; a lot of genetics factors go into it too. 



Nimbus said:


> ...aren't we technically playing god.
> 
> Personally something about that doesn't seem right, but that's just my thought on the matter, no need to agree with it.



So any medical technology used to enhance the lifespan of people is "playing god"? Yeah, that's an argument I've always had a problem with.

The way I see it, the world is at our disposal, and it is our obligation to use it for the betterment of all of mankind. Of course, like you said, opinions will differ.


----------



## kupo3000 (Oct 17, 2011)

This has the means of being applicable for space exploration. Not so much right now due to overpopulation issues and irresponsible depletion of resources.


----------



## Densetsu (Oct 17, 2011)

Gahars said:


> Nimbus said:
> 
> 
> > ...aren't we technically playing god.
> ...


Imagine if GBAtemp existed 700 years ago and someone posted a topic "Bathing may increase lifespan to 60 years" and the people at the time said "That's playing God!" 

Flying in the sky? If God had meant for us to fly he would've given us wings! That's playing God!

Sending information at the speed of light across the world?  Playing God!

etc.  

*ON TOPIC*
Like others have already said, your chances of dying of cancer is greater than living to 100, let alone 150.  It would be pointless to live that long if the quality of life is so horrible that you want to die anyway.  Now if we could find a definitive cure for cancer, that would be another story.  

Drink red wine.  Resveratrol is the active ingredient that makes it good for you.


----------



## Velotix (Oct 17, 2011)

Ohh! We are going to need very good population control if this happens. I'll vote for constant wars so we weed out everything. Then we Akumetsu the rich..... Then when the population gets to big again....

Man I'm crazed right now.


----------



## Zerousen (Oct 17, 2011)

it could affect the baby in a pregnant mother's womb, could it?


----------



## Midna (Oct 18, 2011)

Can't you guys read?

You're all worrying about potential side effects and such. This is a chemical found in grape skin. Scientists have suggested that it is why the life expectancy of the French has historically been so high. If this is bad for you then so is concord grapes.

Also I read about this in a science magazine yeears ago. They've probably made progress on testing it since then, but this is hardly new news.

Still, I would be excited to extend my own life span a touch. I'm not a fan of death, personally.


----------



## Grawly (Oct 18, 2011)

Midna said:


> You're all worrying about potential side effects and such. This is a chemical found in grape skin. Scientists have suggested that it is why the life expectancy of the French has historically been so high. If this is bad for you then so is concord grapes.


ITS FOUND IN NATURE GUYS THAT MEANS ITS COMPLETELY SAFE
ITS ALL NATURAL


----------



## Midna (Oct 18, 2011)

Grawly said:


> Midna said:
> 
> 
> > You're all worrying about potential side effects and such. This is a chemical found in grape skin. Scientists have suggested that it is why the life expectancy of the French has historically been so high. If this is bad for you then so is concord grapes.
> ...


----------



## TheDarkSeed (Oct 18, 2011)

Zetta_x said:


> will this affect fetuses and embryos; will pregnancy take 18 months on average until birth?


This->: "which works by stopping or slowing down the genes that cause *aging*."
I don't think reproducing has much to do with aging.(except for the egg thing)


----------



## Clydefrosch (Oct 18, 2011)

does it make one more healthy too? i mean, i can grasp that something might be able to slow down the termination of cells, but will it also keep the immune system running high too? or will we just look younger but get sick more and more?

i wonder if they even checked that on mice... they are usually kept very sterile in tests of any sort, so that random pathogenes wont disturb the tests.
i sure are hell dont want to have the sick years to take too long...


also... i mean, do we really need to live longer? do we really want this generation to stay for another 50 years? there is hardly any world left for us, and we want them to have even more time to take the rest? no.
allow the intelligent, the true inventors and, should there ever be, the fair and just leaders have a few sips, but everyone else, no.


----------



## J-Machine (Oct 18, 2011)

just with diet and healthcare alone we've managed to double our life expectancy and it is still rising (you gotta be 70 to be considered "young old" now) adding a pill is just overkill at this point (pardon the pun)


----------



## Zetta_x (Oct 18, 2011)

TheDarkSeed said:


> Zetta_x said:
> 
> 
> > will this affect fetuses and embryos; will pregnancy take 18 months on average until birth?
> ...




I'm pretty sure the genes of the parents get passed down to the child and the mother's blood runs though the baby's blood on top of you start as a sperm and grow into a new born baby. Everything in there says reproducing is affected by aging =P

A person is not randomly born, when they reach a certain growth and criteria it's natural for the egg to burst and thus out comes a baby.

----

Not many people are worrying about side effects, most people are explaining possible hindsight that may come from it. The average lifespan is like 75 years old. If they are talking about someone living to be 150, they aren't talking about eat a couple of these a day, they are talking about highly concentrated stuff.

Besides, I doubt I would want to live past 40; any chance of tripling that yet almost quadrupling that age is just asking for an unnatural death.


----------



## chrisrlink (Oct 18, 2011)

dude man at this rate im gonna die young anyways (type 2 diabeties and high colesterol not to mention bi polar and a late blooming love life) im trying to get healthier but i have no motivation


----------



## Zetta_x (Oct 18, 2011)

chrisrlink said:


> dude man at this rate im gonna die young anyways (type 2 diabeties and high colesterol not to mention bi polar and a late blooming love life) im trying to get healthier but i have no motivation



Late blooming love life means you are going to live longer.
Besides, being bi-polar you should be unsure whether or not your next moment you will have motivation or not.


----------



## roastable (Oct 18, 2011)

so like, how will they actually be able to legitimately measure the effect of the drug until the test subject actually exceeds 150 years old? lol


----------



## Snailface (Oct 18, 2011)

Time to invest in space travel.


----------



## geminisama (Oct 18, 2011)

Grawly said:


> Midna said:
> 
> 
> > You're all worrying about potential side effects and such. This is a chemical found in grape skin. Scientists have suggested that it is why the life expectancy of the French has historically been so high. If this is bad for you then so is concord grapes.
> ...



Epic Mechazawa avatar.
On topic, I wouldn't mind living a little longer, but 150 seems a bit too long.


----------



## Lacius (Oct 18, 2011)

Some people like Ray Kurzweil think immortality is only 20 years away.


----------



## DiscostewSM (Oct 18, 2011)

If there is one thing I learned about experimental (and even non-experimental) drugs, is that they have warning labels littered with all sorts of possible side effects.


----------



## VashTS (Oct 18, 2011)

no thanks. i'll take a natural life...however a cyborg life would kick ass! screw biological life, biological creatures deteriorate too fast. give me half steel, half human and im good.


----------



## LightyKD (Oct 18, 2011)

Time to start eating grapes. I would love to live to 150. If I can live long enough to see humanity make it out the Sol System and a global government, I will die happy!


----------



## Yuan (Oct 18, 2011)

~70 years lifespan is more than enough to me. Although I wish I could skip some decades on cryogenic sleep (while retaining my age).


----------



## Nujui (Oct 18, 2011)

I'll die when I die, the grapes may extend it, though you never know what's going to happen to you in that span of time.


----------



## SinHarvest24 (Oct 18, 2011)

Just skimmed though the article, didn't seem like they talked about any side effects.

Looks promising so far....might follow this up a bit.


----------



## epicCreations.or (Oct 18, 2011)

Gross. I don't want to live that long. Hell I'm not even sure if I want to live to be 80


----------



## ZAFDeltaForce (Oct 18, 2011)

Many first world countries are already facing the problem of an ageing population. This will merely exacerbate it


----------



## TheDarkSeed (Oct 18, 2011)

If I did this and lived past 114 I'd be the longest living relative in my family. But I'll let fate decide that and leave the title to my great great grandma.


----------



## Hyro-Sama (Oct 18, 2011)

Thank goodness a religious battle hasn't broken out. Anyway, why can't I just add grapes into my daily eating routine? Won't that have a similar effect? Who needs pills.


----------



## grubbymitts (Oct 18, 2011)

nando said:


> that's awful. we don't need cher strutting her koosh for another century.



Oh, I don't know.  I could handle that.


----------



## Ace (Oct 18, 2011)

grubbymitts said:


> nando said:
> 
> 
> > that's awful. we don't need cher strutting her koosh for another century.
> ...


Isn't the amount of media-attention-whoring things in our lives already a good enough reason to achieve rigor mortis a long time before our projected livespans end?


----------



## FAST6191 (Oct 18, 2011)

Some interesting replies although some serious speculation with little grounding. I am not sure I can claim enough knowledge on the subject to debate it properly but there is a rather large difference between human development and aging and if this targets the latter (others mentioned telomeres which would be in line with what I was hearing about over the last few years- http://ds9a.nl/amazing-dna/ might be good reading)- if it works as it describes it changes a lot of things with regards to disease.
This being said regarding the "youth lasting longer"- you mean the point where most are in their early 20s or worse before starting a proper career and such does not count? Equally it can take even longer to get a proper trade sorted these days and specialise in something do you really want to get good and then retire?

For what it is worth I would forgo kids so as to live significantly longer if population is an issue. Granted I would rather be robot or AI-FAST6191 but a long lasting meat-FAST6191 works as well.


----------



## Gahars (Oct 18, 2011)

Well, FAST6191, many scientists have predicted that brain uploading is a possibility. We don't have the memory/technology to do such a thing now, or probably for some time, but still; it is something to look forward to.


----------



## coolness (Oct 18, 2011)

YES, now i can live and play longer
take that nature!!


----------



## Hop2089 (Oct 18, 2011)

Roseveratrol, that's the main ingredient in that bittersweet tasting juice in my fridge.

I wouldn't mind the drugs though if the side effects are mostly minor (like dry mouth), if it has extreme side effects that are common, not worth it.


----------



## ShinyLatios (Oct 18, 2011)

Take that nature! now I wont die when you want me to! HAHAHAAA--- *gets struck by lightning*


----------



## lukecop80 (Oct 18, 2011)

NONONONO
THIS WILL CAUSE SO MANY PROBLEMS!


----------



## 310301288 (Oct 18, 2011)

i agree that this sort of science is extrodinary, and evolves our knowledge. but expanding our lifespan defeats the purpose of living. we should be able to live life with the knowing that we might not survive tomorrow, especially at an older age, but once this "drug" is sucessfully developed, people arre not gonna realize the actual life they've been giving.


----------



## Ace (Oct 18, 2011)

Yeah, with a longer life, we have more time to do things, hence, we'd likely get higher unemployment, which is already pretty high... I dunno, doesn't look like a good plan for me.


----------



## Uchiha Obito (Oct 18, 2011)

Unemployment (like someone has already said) will be a big problem... Even if the maximum age stops at 70 (like here, although at 65 with can go and say I'm an oldie and we have to pay him/her a misery of a payment for being old), your body wont be that good... And the problem of aging is that the DNA has molecules (or enzimes if you like it more) that corrects it from it's use... You know, a DNA molecule that has already been multiplied 20 times, won't be as good as a new DNA molecule... Mutations, errors, etc. cause this...

So, having a medication that stops it, and slows it down... Hmmmmmmmm, you know, there's something fishy here, how are you supposed to have new cells to regenerate the skin, or even producing sperm or ovules? I'll say fake until I see the results with these very eyes


----------



## ProtoKun7 (Oct 19, 2011)

Intriguing, but in the long run, it still won't work in extending life for very long.


----------

