Is any progress being made with anti aging stuff or is it all venture capitalist hocus pocus
Sorry boomer, just enjoy the life you are left with.
>>16788163according to aubrey de grey, the reason why anti aging research hasn't advanced at all during the last 30 years is because you faggots aren't donating enough money
>>16788407partially true...all the money for smart people is in AI and other bullshit. our resources are being allocated to the wrong things.
>>16788163It really shouldn't concern you either way. Basic game theory, combined with basic facts about the system you're living under, dictates that you - personally - will NEVER enjoy the benefits of such a thing even if it were possible. They put this idea in your head solely as a means to make you a hostage to their system. If you're one of the morons who believe in anti-aging, it works better than a gun pointed at your head: you better do everything you can to keep this system running, or else you lose not just 50 years of life (30 of which aren't even worth living) but potentially infinite youth. And they can deny this to you for any reason, so you better do as they say, or you will be murdered, passively but times infinity.
>>16788416When did this board get so schizo? 2020?
>>16788163I'll tell you when you're older
>>16788163Yup, very major recent progress.>Reprogramming Factors Activate a Non-Canonical Oxidative Resilience Pathway That Can Rejuvenate RPEs and Restore Vision>https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2025.08.30.673239v1.abstract>>16788407Aubrey De Grey looks like Kenny the Tiger got turned into a wizard. All his test mice keep dying because he's just skill issues.
>>16788163What's the point of immortatily if I can't get a girl like that.
>>16788163There is. But unless you read actual scientific papers on the matter, you won't know. Because real scientists don't do interviews, write books for lay people, advertise or talk to the public much in any fashion. But there has been good progress on understanding the molecular mechanisms of ageing, and on targeting the right cells or tissues and there has been a lot of good work on what kind of theraputics would be best for treating which hallmark of ageing.Just avoid grifers like degray or sinclair. If you want papers, read López-Otín 'hallmarks of ageing' (the 2013 and the 2023 versians show some progress, but he did get stuck in his one approach), read Gorbunova et al 2021 on transposons in ageing.. read the latest reviews and go from there.
>>16788256This is good advice for anyone. We are making progress, but you never know when we'll actually cure or significantly slow ageing. So live with the idea you'll die like anyone else, and maybe you'll be plesently surprised with extra time. But don't count on it in advance.>>16788407That retard is a grifter, there are plenty of grants for ageing related research.>>16788412Not all, but sure. A lot of money is misalocated. But the thing is, money isn't the bottleneck in ageing research. The weakest link is too few actually decent researchesrs in the field, even though we would have enough grants. >>16788416This is just silly. There are several scientists working on anti ageing, and we have made decent progress. We can get some model organisms to live up to10 times their original lifespan. We have identified several mechanisms which when up or down regulated increase or slow ageing, and vica versa. We also have identified several non ageing species, and have isolated some of the main components they differ in.
>>16789339>money isn't the bottleneck in ageing research>The weakest link is too few actually decent researchesrs in the fieldyou need money to hire more researchers
>>16789341You are missing the point. We have the money to hire more people. But who to hire? At best you get a labtech or research assistant who won't fuck shit up too bad. But there are not enough talented, passionate people interested in the field to hire. We have enough money to hire more people, it just isn't worth it, because you won't get enough in return. You are better off spending that money on an automated pipetting machine.
>>16789339>The weakest link is too few actually decent researchesrs in the fieldWouldn't 't it be an lack of ability to do much of real research?Sure we can experiment on mice and such but we have no way of knowing if results would work with humans and to check that we would need to conduct decades long experiment on humans, that can go spectacularly wrong, and no ethics board will green light this.
>>16789339>several scientists working on anti ageing ... decent progress ... model organisms ... dentified several mechanisms ... identified several non ageing species ... isolated some of the main components they differ inNice marketing tripe, but this in no way refutes anything I wrote. They have all the incentive in the world to make you believe this shit, but no incentive whatsoever to ever let you have this.
>>16788774>muh schizosNormies like you get way too caught up on issue of premediation in the top-level human actors of a system. Any dynamic you can derive from the structure, interests and incentives of a system is going to play out through its actions and the purpose of a system is what it does.
>>16789368Even if the operators themselves fail to foresee some dynamic, they WILL notice it when a real-world situation invokes it and they WILL integrate it into their strategy.
>>16789364They, they, they. More schizo babble
>>16789419I used to be more specific about that until I noticed how assblasted lowgrade midwits get when someone just says "they". Immediately exposes hivemind automatonism.
