The Real deal about Immortality

[sycogrim]

Hey guys check this out!!

It's quite scary to think that, we could become immortal

Regular readers of SmartPlanet may recall Christina Hernandez’ July piece on Weihang Chai of Washington State University, who found a way to kill cancer cells by deactivating the enzyme telomerase, and thus causing them to age and die like normal cells. Telomerase acts on the ends of DNA strands, which are called telomeres. The 2009 Nobel Prize in Medicine was given for research showing how this works, the telomerase building the equivalent of caps at the end of DNA shoelaces.
If the enzyme keeps building new caps, a DNA strand can replicate indefinitely. It’s immortal. But that’s what differentiates cancer cells from “normal” ones — they have the enzyme, they have the secret to immortality. An immortality which kills its host, namely you.
Now Harvard scientists have opened this door, using telomerase to reverse the aging process in mice. Writing in the journal Nature, a group under Ronald DePinho (above, from Harvard) say they “engineered a knock-in allele” that turned the cap-making process back on, making old mice young again.
Here’s the problem. Mice make telomerase throughout their lives. People stop making it once we’re grown.
It may be possible to add telomerase to the human body and halt the aging process, in other words. But the word for that may well be cancer.
This may be the most bittersweet irony I have ever covered for SmartPlanet. Cancer is caused by the same chemical that can make cells immortal.
Immortality and cancer, two trains running on one line. One train’s me and the other’s a friend of mine.

http://www.smartplanet.com/technolog...nd-death/2196/

[Tsar]

But I think after awhile allot of people will end up killing themselves and not to mention that our mind will eventually go insane.

[Duke Dude]

Interesting... really thought provoking.
But wouldn't it - by reversing aging - make you enter puberty again and such? Or could they halt the aging process at the "perfect" age?

[Raven Gold]

I've allways said that cancer only has 2 possible cures.
The one that can be applied right now is to stop those with recent history of cancer in their families from procreating.
The second, more sci-fi aproach is nanomachines capable of detecting and destroying cancer growths.

As for immortality. The Nanomachines could probably take care of that anyways.

[OmegaFenix]

When their ready to run human trails I'll sign up.

[Shamrock]

They also reversed ageing in mice, but apparently everyone's calling bullshit on it.

[Voicy]

I've allways said that cancer only has 2 possible cures.
The one that can be applied right now is to stop those with recent history of cancer in their families from procreating.
The second, more sci-fi aproach is nanomachines capable of detecting and destroying cancer growths.

As for immortality. The Nanomachines could probably take care of that anyways.

My professor in my varsity days is still working on a ultra-sound device that focuses on cancer cells below the skin by extending the focal point to the exact area and then toasting them. They're still trying to get the right resonant frequencies sorted along with effects of how the body deals with toasted cancer cells.

[DenSweeP]

I wish I could make my pets live forever! That would rock! Or at least extend their lives.

[Voicy]

Watch "The man from earth". It's about a regular dude from the paleontological era (caveman) who had 100% regenerating cells with no degenerative dna. He just kept on living until present day. Not being any more superior than those around him, just an old man who looks like he's 40.

The whole movie is about a discussion between him and his friends who don't know he is one before him revealing it. Very interesting. I watch it once a year +/- and always pick up more stuff.

[shadowfox]

I've allways said that cancer only has 2 possible cures.
The one that can be applied right now is to stop those with recent history of cancer in their families from procreating.

Ummm ... no. While people who have a history of cancer in their family may be more susceptible to certain types of cancer, you can't regard cancer as a simple genetic anomaly that gets passed along generationally. First person in my family who had cancer was my mom. No-one before that - so your argument falls nicely flat.

And then, how would you apply it right now. They can't even stop people who are HIV+ from sleeping around. Trying to track future cancer-possibilities would be like trying to track a single hydrogen molecule in the damn sun.

Try thinking before speaking.