= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Punoxysm comments on The guardian article on longevity research [link] - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (27)
Sadly it seems like all the researchers are still at the early hypothesis / vaguely-grounded speculation stage.
Of course, everything has to start somewhere, and the true hypothesis is built on the bones of the false ones, but it also means that it's hard for these efforts to gain the scale of funding that could really accelerate them.
When somebody manages to substantially slow aging in an animal (preferably a mouse, but maybe a fruitfly would be enough), I think the faucet will really turn on.
Quick Google search shows plenty of results, including several papers in Scholar
The first in Scholar is http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1474-9726.2012.00832.x/full, which quotes several other ones in the beginning that found increases in mice lifespan.
Are you unaware of these, or are they "not substantial" enough for you? If the latter, how much would mice lifespan have to be increased for it to count in your book?
I'm moderately familiar with the work that exists. No need to google it for me.
I'm talking about something on the order of winning the Methusaleh mouse prize (20 years). Something that could show a concrete path towards indefinite lifespan. Calorie restriction doesn't look like it will get us there.
Sorry I wasn't clear.
I just saw this, published yesterday. Is it relevant?
Also, what is it adding over this from 2011?
Maybe you can enlighten me if you're familiar with the field?