Changing the way humans age

[Sarevok]

People these days can hope to live for a really long time. However most of that potential century long lifespan is old age. If predictions pan out we would be living most of our lives with grey hair than not. That's the sucky thing about humans; they have a huge period of time in which to watch their bodies painfully fall apart. This creates a dilemma - is it better to live longer or live a shorter but overall healthier and youthful life ? Consider a hypothetical scenario. By an act of Thread Creator you get to change human genetics such that average lifespan is hardwired to precisely 60. After that the person simply passes away in their sleep. However in the meantime they do not age at all after 25. Would you consider this arrangement to be better overall for human species than the current way people age ?

[/RAR]

[Samuel]

No. I wouldn't be able to have grandchildren

Also, youngsters will never be able to get a leg in as their elders don't lose their edge.

[Singular Intellect]

Better in what way? How people would like it? Chances are you'd have people in an uproar and disgusted their lives have been crippled this way.

On the other hand it would be possible to argue this would solve quite a few problems, like population control, retirees needing care, medical issues, etc.

There's never a black and white answer until you assert a particular premise upon which to define it as such.

[Junghalli]

Well, I know I'd rather have my full span of years, and I suspect most people would agree with me, so I tell the ROB to buzz off.

[Broomstick]

People these days can hope to live for a really long time. However most of that potential century long lifespan is old age. If predictions pan out we would be living most of our lives with grey hair than not.

Oh lordy! GREY HAIR, THE HORROR!

Speak for yourself - my father is 79 and just starting to go gray. People deteriorate at different rates, and in fact, different systems in humans deteriorate at different rates.

That's the sucky thing about humans; they have a huge period of time in which to watch their bodies painfully fall apart. This creates a dilemma - is it better to live longer or live a shorter but overall healthier and youthful life ? Consider a hypothetical scenario. By an act of Thread Creator you get to change human genetics such that average lifespan is hardwired to precisely 60. After that the person simply passes away in their sleep. However in the meantime they do not age at all after 25. Would you consider this arrangement to be better overall for human species than the current way people age ?

Fuck no, that's a shitty idea. Some of us could live to be active, healthy 90 year olds. Granted, not as frisky as when we were 20 but still healthy and strong enough to live independently and enjoy life.

[Starglider]

Perhaps a better question would be 'how many years would you lower the average lifespan by', in return for not ageing significantly until death'.

The average human lifespan in developed countries, correcting for non-age-related disease and accidental/violent death, is a little over 80.

You are proposing to lower that by 20 years, which most people seem to find unacceptable.

I would agree, but I would accept lowering it by 10 years. 12 even. 15 is probably too much.

An arbitrary decision, but sometimes arbitrary is the best you can do, and so be it.

That said this is of course pretty unrealistic, because given the requisite control over genetics you should be able to (virtually) eliminate aging while greatly extending the average lifespan.

[Sarevok]

Perhaps a better question would be 'how many years would you lower the average lifespan by', in return for not ageing significantly until death.

Yeah that was the general idea. I should have mentioned that instead of including a random number like 60.

That said this is of course pretty unrealistic, because given the requisite control over genetics you should be able to (virtually) eliminate aging while greatly extending the average lifespan.

Nah I was thinking of affect it would have if the change was performed early in human history. How would society, civilization and life generally be like if people stayed younger longer but fell died earlier was something I was curious about.

[CaptainChewbacca]

Professional sports would get pretty interesting, if athletes can be in their prime for 35 years.

[Broomstick]

There would still be injuries to deal with, some of which could be career ending even with anti-aging drugs.

[Molyneux]

Honestly, I'd keep it as-is for one major reason - we die largely because we deteriorate. As we find ways to limit or reverse the deterioration, aging itself becomes less of an issue.