It's ok if you get my viewpoint mixed up w/ someone else's. These
threads are hard to follow anyway. We're just hoping for more constructive
ideas about immortality via genetics. We intend to collect and expand on
all commentary including positive or negative attitudes about it.
On Mon, 27 Feb 1995, Robert Luly wrote:
> Hello Don
> An interesting thing is happening with regard to life span. (ref.
> international population report p95/92-3)
> I have a graph that shows _human longivity throughout history_. The x
> axis has age in years and the y axis has percent survival (Industrialized
> countries) and it shows *NO* "right shift" in the *maximum* life span going
> back to 100,000 B.C. (I am not sure how they estimated that) to today. It
> shows the MAXIMUM life span to be some where between 110 and 120 years.
> The really interesting thing I find is when I mark the number of years
> between the point of 80 percent survival and then mark the 20 percent
> survival I find it is the same (about 10 to 11 years)(a fairly rapid "die
> off" rate) for the last 10,000 years....until 1950. Then the 80% to 20%
> survival span streches out to *25 YEARS!!!*
> The common view is things are going to hell in a handbasket but the facts
> simply do not bear this out. I know there are alot of "yeah but"
> rationalizations out there to justify your particular point of view but
> the facts are the facts. In spite of ozone holes, over population, aids
> etc.etc.
> We ARE:
> 1. Living longer than ever (AVERAGE life span)
> 2. When we get older it is getting harder to kill us.
> 3. There has been no change in MAXIMUM life span.
>> In the 1950's I remember the grown up people saying that by the year 2000 we
> would be out of oil and the world would be so over populated that there
> would be no room for any one and we could not possibly feed that many
> people and they could *proove it*.
> These were not stupid people they were just wrong. They assumed the world
> is static and it isn't. Changes cause more changes. You cannot CONTROL
> everything. Sometimes that is worse than no control at all.
>> Don Ashley (dashley at TENET.EDU) wrote:
> : Some suggest that we have a genetically programmed life span, with
> : varying ranges of 5-10 years due to lifestyle.
>> : Exercise, nutrition, safety, stress mgmt add 10 years max. The opposite
> : reduces the programmed longevity of cellular reproduction.
>> : Certain immortalists believe that with advanced research in genetics, the
> : programming can be altered to perpetuate cell division instead of the
> : typical 70-80 limitations.
>> : Even w/o genetic manipulation, lifespans have doubled since 1850, having
> : gone from 45 @1900 to 78 now. (#'s approximate)
>> : Lifespans are increasing at the rate of one year every 2.2 years.
> : On 26 Feb 1995, Rick Abrams wrote:
>> : > Please define natural life span. Is it the 120 years of the
> : > woman in France; or my father's, who died two years younger
> : > than I am today (heart failure).
> : >
> : > You toss around terms as if you understand them.
> : >
> : >
> : > --
> : > rha
> : >
> : >
>>
