
Longevity Inc - sajid
http://foundersfund.com/2016/06/longevity-inc/
======
ggambetta
Second question in the interview: "There are a lot of people out there who
actually don’t want to live longer, even if given the chance. How could
someone possibly be against living longer?"

I honestly can't wrap my head around this. The conversations I've tried to
have with people who don't want to live longer never go anywhere, because they
can't help but associate "old" (as in "high number of years") with sickness
and reduced faculties, and I can't get through to them that I mean "really
really old and really really healthy". Maybe it's as the article says, some
people refuse to believe because they don't want to create what they see as
false hope.

I myself hope to live as long as I can, ideally forever. There are so many
things to do, there are so many things to learn, the universe is just too
awesome for just one [current standard human] lifetime!

~~~
hashnsalt
Unlocking immortality would be a fantastic scientific achievement, but I see
the pursuit of immorality as being very self-centered. As Richard Muller
implies in his response to this question [1], we need death to ensure a
consistent advancement of civilization. As we age, we get more and more set in
our ways. So we need the older generation to eventually die off so new ideas
and ways of thinking can take hold and push humanity an inch forward. And the
cycle goes on.

Other than the social/resource implications (eg: there not being enough
food/water/etc to feed everyone) of everybody living forever, I also think
chasing immortality is a way of dealing with the anxiety that the looming
nature of death induces. Maybe it is the anxiety of not existing someday that
drives people to make the most of their 75 years. If everyone had an infinite
amount of time, would our society advance just as rapidly? I don't know. But
it's a point worth thinking about.

[1] [https://www.quora.com/Given-5-000-years-and-plenty-of-
resour...](https://www.quora.com/Given-5-000-years-and-plenty-of-resources-do-
you-think-science-will-be-able-to-grant-humans-immortality)

~~~
chroma
Reversal test: In a world where people didn't get old, would they decide to
invent aging? I'm certain they wouldn't.

I totally agree that there are disadvantages to indefinite lifespans. It's
just that those disadvantages are overwhelmed by the fact that aging kills
100,000 people _every day_. And it's not just that people die, it's that they
spend decades becoming frail and less capable. They can't enjoy as many things
as they used to. Their vision, hearing, and even their minds fail them.

If we lived in a world without aging, only a sadistic monster would want to
inflict such suffering on others.

~~~
hashnsalt
I agree with your point. Part of aging research is to reduce the rate of
deterioration and maybe avoid it altogether. I just have a problem with the
idea of living forever. Maybe add a cap on human lifespan?

~~~
kobeya
Let's say we live in a world where human bodies don't age. How do you suggest
enforcing that cap? Gas chambers?

~~~
hashnsalt
I don't have an answer to your loaded question
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question)).

Edit: link

~~~
secstate
The problem is that it's not really a loaded question, but a valid response to
the idea of an age cap amidst indefinite life spans. How do you propose
capping the life span of an adult without the use of a termination agent?

~~~
hashnsalt
I am not proposing anything. I don't know how we can cap the lifespan of an
adult. But I do know that if we have a cure for aging today, i.e. people stop
dying from this day onwards, the population is only going to keep growing and
that doesn't seem very sustainable. This is, of course, given that people
continue to have children. Halting the production of new offspring could be
interesting to witness from an evolutionary standpoint.

As far as the loaded question is concerned, I did sense an inflammatory tone
in kobeya's response with the gas chambers question. Your response, on the
other hand, is more discussion-oriented and open-minded.

------
VladKovac
I can't resist: "I want to live one more day. Tomorrow I will still want to
live one more day. Therefore I want to live forever, proof by induction on the
positive integers." \- [http://hpmor.com/](http://hpmor.com/)

------
superobserver
An important point made in longevity research like SENS (cf.,
[http://www.sens.org/](http://www.sens.org/) ) is that it should also improve
youthful characteristics. This is important, because we shouldn't want to live
into our 200's and be as though we're in our 80's (feeble, weak, etc.). True
longevity means longevity of youthful biology, including all the attendant
benefits that come with youth. In other words, we should seek to reach a point
where we reach full maturity (mid 20's or so given some variation) but do not
begin deteriorating.

------
kedila
There are 2 types of sexually transmitted herpes: herpes type 1 and herpes
type 2. Both types cause painful cold sores.i have not met prophet suleman but
have heard of his excellent work on people's life. i contacted prophet suleman
and he started his work on me with his Root and herbs and right now i am
cured. I was diagnosed with Herpes and after taking prophet suleman Herbal
medicine i was cured. If you have any disease Contact him: (
prophetsuleman@gmail.com

------
reasonattlm
Deming's Longevity Fund was at its founding somewhat ahead of the times, as it
should given that she put in time at the SENS Research Foundation and related
groups back in the day.

The rest of the venture community is beginning to wake up now - if even I,
with my limited connections, am aware of a couple of groups raising new
venture funds to target the biotechnologies of longevity, then I'm sure there
are a bunch more I don't know about.

Expect to see a crop of companies working with the biochemistry of aging over
the next few years now that deep pockets like Google, Abbvie, and the Human
Longevity backers have expressed their interest with dollars. That sets up all
the right signals for acquirers and other liquidity events.

Sadly I imagine that most of these companies will be garbage - either a waste
of everyone's time like Elysium or a clever way of getting for-profit
investors to pay for fundamental research that goes nowhere other than
knowledge generation, like Sirtris.

Still, there are gems in there for those who understand the science well
enough to identify high expectation value lines of research. Oisin
Biotechnologies, for example, and perhaps UNITY Biotech if they choose a good
therapy. Both are aiming to clear senescent cells, which has a lot of backing
as an approach.

------
apsec112
To me, it seems obvious that even if limited lifespans are good, aging is
still bad, and the best route would be to cure aging and then euthanize older
people Brave New World-style. I mean, which option sounds better: thirty years
of life during which you get sicker and sicker, followed by a slow, painful
death; or thirty years of healthy, active life, followed by an instant and
painless death? I know which one I'd choose.

