Hacker News Reader

Comment by pat2man | Hacker News Reader

> The technique, which requires genetic engineering, cannot be applied directly to people, but the achievement points toward better understanding of human aging and the possibility of rejuvenating human tissues by other means.

Still a ways off for human use but definitely interesting research.

View on HN

You have to understand all the rich people in the world are scared of death and will pay anything to avoid it for as long as possible. So if aging can be reduced or cured we will be able to do it and probably relatively soon.

And this quest is as old as civilization, maybe even older:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qin_Shi_Huang

"He ruled until his death in 210 BC after a futile search for an elixir of immortality"

> all the rich people in the world are scared of death and will pay anything to avoid it for as long as possible

This is generally true of poor people as well.

Yes, but poor people can't pay. That's why they can't solve anything. Google can spend a billion dollars on this. Multiple billions can be easily spent on this. And it's a great time for that. So much excessive capital. So many millionaires and billionaires. All going to die. What can scientists do to help them?

We're looking for extended life for some people, without being able to guarantee a regular life for all.

What a world.

Old people are expensive. If the people on Medicare were as healthy as the average 50-year-old, it would basically solve Medicare's long-term funding problem. If it cost, say, $100K every 10 years, it'd be worthwhile to give it to everyone for free.

Edit: checked numbers. There are about 40 million Americans 65 or older, and Medicare spends about $600 billion/year, for average annual spending of $15K each.

50% of your lifetime medical cost occur in your last year of life. Old people aren't expensive, unhealthy and nearer death people are expensive. Delaying that last year of life by remaining robust is very profitable.

However, this technology would ostensibly over time get commoditized and available for everyone, like practically every other piece of technology so far.

That's what we'd like to believe about ourselves. But until we're post-scarcity -- as long as other people are competition for limited resources (land, food, water, health care, even attention) -- I wouldn't be too quick to believe it.

No, ultimately we're looking for unlimited life for everyone. We will not sell anyone to the dark.

I don't think "regular" is the adjective you are looking for. By definition there will always be lives that are not regular, both positively and negatively.

One is easier than the other I am afraid.

Rich people would get this first, but there'd be so much demand that unless there was something intrinsically expensive about a life extension tech (e.g. it required surgical intervention) you'd see geometric decreases in price. Then the patents would expire and it'd get mass produced in India for $0.05/pill.

> Then the patents would expire and it'd get mass produced in India for $0.05/pill.

Forget patents. This is the sort of thing that will flood the black market, and could conceivably be a target for eminent domain. In any case, it will make it out to the public in some manner if it becomes a reality, I'm sure of that.

Not to put too cynical a point on it, but if I were getting paid by the world's rich for a cure for death... the last thing I would want to do is release it if I found it.

Grow a new genetically engineered body from your stem cells then transplant your head.

Maybe wait and see if that Russian head transplant experiment is a success.

Head will die anyway. Death sequence is embedded in the cell, to prevent unlimited growth. You can extend your lifespan by 30% by removing aged cells, so stem cells will divide and produce a slightly younger cells, which reverse lot of age related malfunctions.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com