New insights into mitochondria reveal how life expends energy
aging.nautil.us
aging.nautil.us
So, as humans already have rather extreme lifespans relative to most organisms meaning our bodies are likely already using the low hanging fruit in terms of extending lifespans. But, without that context it seems like birds have some advantages we could copy.
This then hidden by first referencing a U shaped curve and ‘our place’ on it without clarifying it’s a metabolic curve not a lifespan curve.
Finally “In a 2007 analysis it was shown that, when modern statistical methods for correcting for the effects of body size and phylogeny are employed, metabolic rate does not correlate with longevity in mammals or birds.”
I'm not finding this quote.
It’s relating to this study: https://academic.oup.com/biomedgerontology/article/62/2/149/...
E-coli has a similar problem with iron/manganese/zinc: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4192467/
The general problem with iron is that while it is faster, it's also reactive in its free form, unlike manganese, which only works in proteins.
The majority of the world population is supposedly iron deficient, but the numbers are likely based on populations that already suffered from iron overload; it is possible that animal lifespans were substantially shortened as the result of human activity which disrupted the mineral balance to the degree no animal evloved to deal with.
Life is really not that bad when you're old. Like, even when you're 60 there's a lot to live for. If I had to choose between living 40 years as a 40 year old or 25 years as a 25 year old it's not even close - I'd take being longevity at 40 in a heartbeat. Judging from how active my parents seem to be, I'd be happy to spend 100 years at retirement age too.
If people lived longer, healthier lives they might delay having children or put off having children entirely. It is not true that countries with lower life expectancy have smaller family sizes. One of the reasons people have children is because it is a sort of immortality - they want their genes and family to be carried on. But if you actually live longer, that particular reason for having kids is weakened.
this planet cannot support everyone living to 80
It likewise can't support couples producing 4+ children.Pure speculation, but based on its pervasiveness, I've wondered if depression could have been selected for through a mechanism such as this.
Personally, I have always liked the idea of depression being a sort of strike. A social signal “baked into” genetics.
(Not that that interpretation has any more direct evidence. Maybe depression is just one of those bugs inevitable in billions of lines of self-modifying spaghetti code.)
This is a very interesting statement - in some of the Esoteric Teachings I have read throughout my life - they specifically say that masturbation for simple pleasure (ejaculation in males) -- drains you of your life essence and is seen spiritually as a selfish-wasteful use of your life - and this shortens your lifespan and reduces your spiritual power. (additionally, doing very deliberate things with sexual energy is a basis in sex magick)...
The idea being that you're pulling life-force from yourself and then 'projecting' intentionally toward what you're doing with that sexual energy -- which would be interesting if you were draining energy from mitochondria in general.
I find this protein folding talk to be relevant: