CronoDAS comments on Open Thread: October 2009 - Less Wrong

5 Post author: gwern 01 October 2009 12:49PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (425)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: CronoDAS 01 October 2009 08:59:45PM 3 points [-]

But human beings are exceptional in a number of ways, so I suppose it's possible it doesn't work for us.

Indeed. Most mammals tend to have roughly the same number of heartbeats in a lifespan; short-lived mammals such as mice have much faster heartbeats than long-lived mammals such as elephants. Nearly every mammal on the planet (except those that hibernate) has a lifespan of about one billion heartbeats, give or take a few hundred million here and there.

Humans have a lifespan of two billion heartbeats.

Compared to other mammals, we already have a greatly enhanced lifespan. It's quite possible that whatever switch calorie restriction turns on in mice, humans already have turned on by default.

Comment author: gwern 20 December 2009 03:59:24AM 1 point [-]

It's quite possible that whatever switch calorie restriction turns on in mice, humans already have turned on by default.

This is, incidentally, the exact same argument David Brin gave me. (He also argued that if CR/IF really worked, we ought to know already based on millennia of religious practices that imply CR/IF and said communities' intense interest in health matters such as herbal remedies.)

Comment author: CronoDAS 20 December 2009 06:30:32AM 0 points [-]

That's where I got my argument from, actually.