2045: The Year Man Becomes Immortal
Time
By Lev Grossman Thursday, Feb. 10, 2011
Kurzweil believes that we're approaching a moment when computers will become intelligent, and not just intelligent but more intelligent than humans. When that happens, humanity — our bodies, our minds, our civilization — will be completely and irreversibly transformed. He believes that this moment is not only inevitable but imminent. According to his calculations, the end of human civilization as we know it is about 35 years away.
life
Showing posts with label quality of life. Show all posts
Showing posts with label quality of life. Show all posts
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Live to 100 Plus. It's Coming Soon, to a Doctor's Office Near You.
Would we want to. What if we all could, and if we all did. Then what?
At 50 we would be half way, 60 we would have 40 more years to go. We could most certainly accomplish a great deal in our lives (if we so chose). But ...
Super-drug could eradicate Alzheimer's and diabetes and let us live into our 100s
By Daily Mail Reporter
03rd February 2010
Scientists are on the brink of developing a 'long-life super-drug' which could spell the end for Alzheimer's and diabetes whilst allowing people to live into their 100s.
Experts have pinpointed three genes which can extend life past 100 and prevent diseases that commonly strike in old age.
Two genes boost the production of so-called good cholesterol, which reduces the risk of heart disease and stroke, while the third prevents diabetes.
People whose DNA prominently includes these genes are also 80 per cent less likely to develop Alzheimer's, experts will reveal on BBC2's Horizon tomorrow night.
World renowned geneticist Dr Nir Barzilai said several laboratories were now in the process of creating a pill that mimics the genes and expects the first to be ready for testing within three years.
Dr Barzilai's team examined the DNA of 500 healthy Ashkenazi Jews with an average age of 100 to determine if they shared traits that could explain their longevity.
Amazingly, a third of the centenarians were either obese or life-long heavy smokers, said Dr Barzilai, a director of the Institute for Aging Research and Professor of Medicine and Molecular Genetics Albert Einstein College of Medicine.
The chances of living to 100 are one in 10,000 but the study group - which shared relatively few common ancestors - was 20 times more likely to hit the century.
New York-based Dr Barzilai told the programme that three slight variations in their common genetic make-up provided the answer, after ruling out fitness and dietary causes.
He said: 'Thirty per cent of them were obese or overweight and 30 per cent smoked two packs of cigarettes (a day) for more than 40 years.
'Because our centenarians have longevity genes, they are protected against many of the effects of the environment.
'That's why they do whatever they want to do and they get through anyhow.'
His team took blood samples from the group to examine two million genetic markers in their DNA.
Dr Barzilai said: 'We found three that seemed to be over-represented in our 100-year-olds. Two of these genes seem to be relevant to cholesterol.
'Basically, they increase good cholesterol in a significant way. There's no drug currently that does it so effectively.
'Another gene seemed to be very important in preventing diabetes.
'It seems that those who have this specific genotype are protected from Alzheimer's by about 80 per cent.'
Dr Barzilai, who is a director at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York, believes his findings could have huge benefits for everyone, increase average life expectancy and cut the risk of serious illness in old age.
He added: 'The advantage of finding a gene that involves longevity is that we can just develop a drug that will imitate exactly what this gene is doing.
'The biology we're trying to uncover is that if we can imitate that, then long life can be really terrific.'
Dr Barzilai revealed that normal lifespans were usually determined by 80 per cent lifestyle choices and 20 per cent genes.
However, it is the opposite way round with centenarians, which meant the answer to their longevity was predominately down to their genes.
medical
At 50 we would be half way, 60 we would have 40 more years to go. We could most certainly accomplish a great deal in our lives (if we so chose). But ...
Super-drug could eradicate Alzheimer's and diabetes and let us live into our 100s
By Daily Mail Reporter
03rd February 2010
Scientists are on the brink of developing a 'long-life super-drug' which could spell the end for Alzheimer's and diabetes whilst allowing people to live into their 100s.
Experts have pinpointed three genes which can extend life past 100 and prevent diseases that commonly strike in old age.
Two genes boost the production of so-called good cholesterol, which reduces the risk of heart disease and stroke, while the third prevents diabetes.
People whose DNA prominently includes these genes are also 80 per cent less likely to develop Alzheimer's, experts will reveal on BBC2's Horizon tomorrow night.
World renowned geneticist Dr Nir Barzilai said several laboratories were now in the process of creating a pill that mimics the genes and expects the first to be ready for testing within three years.
Dr Barzilai's team examined the DNA of 500 healthy Ashkenazi Jews with an average age of 100 to determine if they shared traits that could explain their longevity.
Amazingly, a third of the centenarians were either obese or life-long heavy smokers, said Dr Barzilai, a director of the Institute for Aging Research and Professor of Medicine and Molecular Genetics Albert Einstein College of Medicine.
The chances of living to 100 are one in 10,000 but the study group - which shared relatively few common ancestors - was 20 times more likely to hit the century.
New York-based Dr Barzilai told the programme that three slight variations in their common genetic make-up provided the answer, after ruling out fitness and dietary causes.
He said: 'Thirty per cent of them were obese or overweight and 30 per cent smoked two packs of cigarettes (a day) for more than 40 years.
'Because our centenarians have longevity genes, they are protected against many of the effects of the environment.
'That's why they do whatever they want to do and they get through anyhow.'
His team took blood samples from the group to examine two million genetic markers in their DNA.
Dr Barzilai said: 'We found three that seemed to be over-represented in our 100-year-olds. Two of these genes seem to be relevant to cholesterol.
'Basically, they increase good cholesterol in a significant way. There's no drug currently that does it so effectively.
'Another gene seemed to be very important in preventing diabetes.
'It seems that those who have this specific genotype are protected from Alzheimer's by about 80 per cent.'
Dr Barzilai, who is a director at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York, believes his findings could have huge benefits for everyone, increase average life expectancy and cut the risk of serious illness in old age.
He added: 'The advantage of finding a gene that involves longevity is that we can just develop a drug that will imitate exactly what this gene is doing.
'The biology we're trying to uncover is that if we can imitate that, then long life can be really terrific.'
Dr Barzilai revealed that normal lifespans were usually determined by 80 per cent lifestyle choices and 20 per cent genes.
However, it is the opposite way round with centenarians, which meant the answer to their longevity was predominately down to their genes.
medical
Thursday, October 1, 2009
100 years Old: Should We Feel Guilty
Should these babies all feel guilty?
Half of babies born in rich world will live to 100
Thu Oct 1, 2009 7:52pm EDT
7:52pm EDT
By Kate Kelland
LONDON (Reuters) - More than half of babies born in rich nations today will live to be 100 years old if current life expectancy trends continue, according to Danish researchers.
Increasing numbers of very old people could pose major challenges for health and social systems, but the research showed that may be mitigated by people not only living longer, but also staying healthier in their latter years.
"Very long lives are not the distant privilege of remote future generations -- very long lives are the probable destiny of most people alive now in developed countries," Kaare Christensen of the Danish Aging Research Center wrote on Friday in a study in the Lancet medical journal.
The study used Germany as a case study and showed that by 2050, its population will be substantially older and smaller than now -- a situation it said was now typical of rich nations.
This means smaller workforces in rich nations will have to shoulder an ever-greater burden of ballooning pension and healthcare requirements of the old.
Many governments in developed nations are already making moves toward raising the typical age of retirement to try to cope with aging populations.
The researchers said this was an important strategy, and added that if part-time work was considered for more of the workforce, that could have yet more benefits.
"If people in their 60s and early 70s worked much more than they do nowadays, then most people could work fewer hours per week," they wrote. "Preliminary evidence suggests that shortened working weeks over extended working lives might further contribute to increases in life expectancy and health."
LIVING BETTER?
Christensen and colleagues said huge increases in life expectancy -- of more than 30 years -- had been seen in most developed countries over the 20th century.
And death rates in nations with the longest life-expectancy, such as Japan, Sweden and Spain, suggest that, even if health conditions do not improve, three-quarters of babies will live to celebrate their 75th birthdays.
"But should life expectancy continue to improve at the same rate, most babies born in rich nations since 2000 can expect to live to 100 years," they wrote.
The researchers, who pooled and analysed data from several international studies, said they wanted to explore "a common view" that a big rise in the proportion of older people would come as a result of helping an increasing number of frail and ill people survive longer -- with huge personal and societal costs.
But they found that even though many people who live to age 85 have chronic diseases such as diabetes and arthritis, they have only become frail and disabled at a later stage, essentially postponing frail old age instead of extending it.
"This apparent contradiction is at least partly accounted for by early diagnosis, improved treatment, and amelioration of prevalent diseases so that they are less disabling," they wrote.
"People younger than 85 years are living longer and, on the whole, are able to manage their daily activities for longer."
But for people older than 85, the situation is less clear, the researchers said. Data are sparse, and there is widespread concern that exceptional longevity -- with ever larger numbers living to 100 and more -- could be grim for the people themselves and the societies they live in.
****************************
Does that mean that 50 will be the new 20?
age
Half of babies born in rich world will live to 100
Thu Oct 1, 2009 7:52pm EDT
7:52pm EDT
By Kate Kelland
LONDON (Reuters) - More than half of babies born in rich nations today will live to be 100 years old if current life expectancy trends continue, according to Danish researchers.
Increasing numbers of very old people could pose major challenges for health and social systems, but the research showed that may be mitigated by people not only living longer, but also staying healthier in their latter years.
"Very long lives are not the distant privilege of remote future generations -- very long lives are the probable destiny of most people alive now in developed countries," Kaare Christensen of the Danish Aging Research Center wrote on Friday in a study in the Lancet medical journal.
The study used Germany as a case study and showed that by 2050, its population will be substantially older and smaller than now -- a situation it said was now typical of rich nations.
This means smaller workforces in rich nations will have to shoulder an ever-greater burden of ballooning pension and healthcare requirements of the old.
Many governments in developed nations are already making moves toward raising the typical age of retirement to try to cope with aging populations.
The researchers said this was an important strategy, and added that if part-time work was considered for more of the workforce, that could have yet more benefits.
"If people in their 60s and early 70s worked much more than they do nowadays, then most people could work fewer hours per week," they wrote. "Preliminary evidence suggests that shortened working weeks over extended working lives might further contribute to increases in life expectancy and health."
LIVING BETTER?
Christensen and colleagues said huge increases in life expectancy -- of more than 30 years -- had been seen in most developed countries over the 20th century.
And death rates in nations with the longest life-expectancy, such as Japan, Sweden and Spain, suggest that, even if health conditions do not improve, three-quarters of babies will live to celebrate their 75th birthdays.
"But should life expectancy continue to improve at the same rate, most babies born in rich nations since 2000 can expect to live to 100 years," they wrote.
The researchers, who pooled and analysed data from several international studies, said they wanted to explore "a common view" that a big rise in the proportion of older people would come as a result of helping an increasing number of frail and ill people survive longer -- with huge personal and societal costs.
But they found that even though many people who live to age 85 have chronic diseases such as diabetes and arthritis, they have only become frail and disabled at a later stage, essentially postponing frail old age instead of extending it.
"This apparent contradiction is at least partly accounted for by early diagnosis, improved treatment, and amelioration of prevalent diseases so that they are less disabling," they wrote.
"People younger than 85 years are living longer and, on the whole, are able to manage their daily activities for longer."
But for people older than 85, the situation is less clear, the researchers said. Data are sparse, and there is widespread concern that exceptional longevity -- with ever larger numbers living to 100 and more -- could be grim for the people themselves and the societies they live in.
****************************
Does that mean that 50 will be the new 20?
age
Friday, July 10, 2009
Obama Health Care: Dangerous to our Health 3
11 serious errors a day in NHS surgery
By Daniel Bates
05th July 2009
Daily Mail
Eleven people are seriously harmed during NHS surgery every day, it emerged yesterday.
The number of major errors has risen by 28 per cent in five years, with more than 4,000 patients hurt in 2007/08.
Mistakes include objects such as scalpels and coils being left inside patients, organs being punctured, and the wrong dosage of drugs being given.
[I have always wondered what it would feel like to have a scalpel left inside me. Maybe we will find out one day.]
A total of 722 objects were left inside patients during surgery last year – one every two and a half days.
That number has soared by 13 per cent in the five years to 2007/08.
The figures were revealed just days after a damning MPs' report found that many hospitals are routinely covering up such mistakes.
The Commons health select committee warned that another hospital disaster like the one at Stafford, where up to 400 people died, could not be ruled out – because managers were putting
Whitehall targets and cost-cutting above patient safety.
Government policy 'too often' gave the impression that hitting waiting list targets, achieving financial balance and attaining elite foundation trust status were more important than patient safety.
'This has undoubtedly, in a number of well documented cases, been a contributory factor in making services unsafe,' the report said.
The MPs added that many mistakes were not reported by the NHS – raising the possibility that the recorded number of medical mishaps is just the tip of the iceberg.
The latest figures were uncovered by the Liberal Democrats in a parliamentary answer.
'Serious concerns': Liberal Democrats health spokesman Norman Lamb
Health spokesman Norman Lamb said: 'These figures raise serious concerns and call into question the Government's claim to be making patient safety a priority.
'There really is no excuse for leaving objects inside people. Far too many avoidable mistakes are still being made.
'Many doctors and nurses are under enormous amounts of pressure to meet Government targets.
'We have to ensure that patient safety isn't being compromised to satisfy the whims of Whitehall.
'If we really want to raise standards in the NHS then we need to give local people the power to hold their health services to account.'
The figures show that there have been a total of 17,921 errors during surgery over the past five years.
The number of cases every year has shot up by 28 per cent to 4,161 in 2007/08 – 11 a day.
Most of the cases involve people having organs mistakenly punctured, which can lead to haemorrhaging.
Oh come on, what is wrong with a lung punctured or a heart or kidney or liver. Just carry on. It is something we all have to accept in a civilized society. Keeps population down.
Over the last five years, the organs of 12,125 patients were punctured, with the annual figures soaring 33 per cent to 2,817 in 2007/08.
Hundreds of other surgical mistakes were reported, including not removing or inserting tubes properly, using wrongly-matched blood, forgetting to give drugs on time, and not sterilising equipment properly.
Failure to sterilise is a key method by which superbugs such as C. Diff and MRSA can spread.
There were also dozens of reports of the catch-all 'performance of inappropriate operations'.
The total uncovered by the LibDems represents only a fraction of the mistakes made in the NHS every year, as it only covers errors during operations.
Overall, there are around 250,000 mistakes causing harm to patients reported across the Health Service every year. More than 3,600 of those affected die as a result.
obama health care
Obama Health Care: Life Expectancy Part 2
Life expectancy gap between rich and poor is widening
Owen Bowcott
guardian.co.uk
Friday 3 July 2009
The gap in life expectancy between the prosperous middle classes and those in the most deprived homes is widening sharply, latest health figures show.
The emerging pattern suggests that the well-off are adopting healthier lifestyles while the poor are still drinking and smoking and cannot afford to change diets.
Men in Blackpool now live on average up to 73.2 years, 10.5 years fewer than their counterparts in Kensington and Chelsea. Women in Hartlepool have the lowest female life expectancy at 78.1 years, around 9.6 years less than in the central London borough.
While life expectancy rates are increasing overall, they appear to be rising much faster for the affluent than for those who struggle to make ends meet, according to the latest district-by-district NHS health profiles, published this week.
Over a three-year period – from 2004-06 to 2005-07 – the figures reveal that the gap between local authorities at opposite ends of the health spectrum grew by 0.4 years for men and 0.8 years for women.
Average male life expectancy in England has now risen to 77.7 years, compared with 77.3 years three years ago; average female life expectancy has risen to 81.8 years from 81.6 years. The minister for public health, Gillian Merron, welcomed the figures: "The health of the nation is improving ... It is good to see that people can expect to live longer, that early deaths from heart disease, cancer and smoking-related diseases are decreasing.
"But people living in some areas are still healthier than those living in other areas, which is unacceptable. The NHS and local authorities need to work with this published information to identify what the issues are in their area and take action for the sake of the health of their local population."
Alan Walker, professor of social policy and social gerontology at the University of Sheffield, said: "Messages about wellbeing and healthy lifestyles penetrate more rapidly into the middle-class professional households than they do into working-class homes and households on benefits.
"It's easier on a comfortable income to make those lifestyle choices. When you are poor you simply can't choose what you eat. Try to tell a hard-pressed mother to stop smoking – she may say thats it's the only thing that gets her through the day.
"It's much easier for those on higher incomes. The health inequality statistics are a mirror of other inequalities. Those differences are getting wider. It's hard cash, like child benefits, that is going to make a difference."
Life expectancy has been increasing for at least the past 180 years – since records in the UK began. It is increasing, on average, at the rate of one month every six years.
******************************
Thing is ... it isn't in the US.
Just over there ... you know, those places where they have universal and free health care!
Obamanation
Owen Bowcott
guardian.co.uk
Friday 3 July 2009
The gap in life expectancy between the prosperous middle classes and those in the most deprived homes is widening sharply, latest health figures show.
The emerging pattern suggests that the well-off are adopting healthier lifestyles while the poor are still drinking and smoking and cannot afford to change diets.
Men in Blackpool now live on average up to 73.2 years, 10.5 years fewer than their counterparts in Kensington and Chelsea. Women in Hartlepool have the lowest female life expectancy at 78.1 years, around 9.6 years less than in the central London borough.
While life expectancy rates are increasing overall, they appear to be rising much faster for the affluent than for those who struggle to make ends meet, according to the latest district-by-district NHS health profiles, published this week.
Over a three-year period – from 2004-06 to 2005-07 – the figures reveal that the gap between local authorities at opposite ends of the health spectrum grew by 0.4 years for men and 0.8 years for women.
Average male life expectancy in England has now risen to 77.7 years, compared with 77.3 years three years ago; average female life expectancy has risen to 81.8 years from 81.6 years. The minister for public health, Gillian Merron, welcomed the figures: "The health of the nation is improving ... It is good to see that people can expect to live longer, that early deaths from heart disease, cancer and smoking-related diseases are decreasing.
"But people living in some areas are still healthier than those living in other areas, which is unacceptable. The NHS and local authorities need to work with this published information to identify what the issues are in their area and take action for the sake of the health of their local population."
Alan Walker, professor of social policy and social gerontology at the University of Sheffield, said: "Messages about wellbeing and healthy lifestyles penetrate more rapidly into the middle-class professional households than they do into working-class homes and households on benefits.
"It's easier on a comfortable income to make those lifestyle choices. When you are poor you simply can't choose what you eat. Try to tell a hard-pressed mother to stop smoking – she may say thats it's the only thing that gets her through the day.
"It's much easier for those on higher incomes. The health inequality statistics are a mirror of other inequalities. Those differences are getting wider. It's hard cash, like child benefits, that is going to make a difference."
Life expectancy has been increasing for at least the past 180 years – since records in the UK began. It is increasing, on average, at the rate of one month every six years.
******************************
Thing is ... it isn't in the US.
Just over there ... you know, those places where they have universal and free health care!
Obamanation
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Limbs - Regrowth
Fascinating possibilities.
Regrowing Limbs: Can People Regenerate Body Parts?
Progress on the road to regenerating major body parts, salamander-style, could transform the treatment of amputations and major wounds
Also articles have appeared on regrowing teeth or causing our teeth to continually regrow when they fall out or are pulled out.
Revolutionize human life for the better.
This is science we can live with
Regrowing Limbs: Can People Regenerate Body Parts?
Progress on the road to regenerating major body parts, salamander-style, could transform the treatment of amputations and major wounds
Also articles have appeared on regrowing teeth or causing our teeth to continually regrow when they fall out or are pulled out.
Revolutionize human life for the better.
This is science we can live with
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Subscribe To
Posts
All Comments