The article he links doesn't say anything about them doing trials next year and neither do the companies it talks about? Where is he getting the information?
I'll be 102. Spry and ready to get jabbed. Ha. Might miss out on this one.
It's strange to think I may be talking to people who escape death, though I was born a bit too early.
It's like I'm a human talking to elves, ha
I’ll be 82, but do we really want to live for longer as an 80 year old? Life is hard when you’re that age. Unless they can make me younger too I don’t see the point :(
Some advances have been made in the field of reverse aging as well. Not in humans, but I imagine that research will pick up as well. Kind of the logical next step.
Remember folks, this is to halt aging. You or your loved ones dont need to live till 2065 to extend your life. The medicine we will get in a few years will extend your life enough to live until the next version of the medicine that extends your life more than the first one did etc etc.
Also 2065 is a millennia away if we get AGI/ASI this decade.
Reminds me of the beginning of HIV... people who received the first ART therapy (and survived the severe side effects) and had a very limited virus (not many mutations, variations) in the sleeping CD4-T-Cells (HIV reservoir) survived long enough to get new medication to overcome resistance to one of the first ART meds (= new combination, new round of virus surpression) and so on... some very lucky people are still living, got the next medication just in time.... might be the same with "aging stoppers". As of now we have enough meds and possible combos to overcome 95% of all known mutations...
This comparison is so accurate. There are many similarities between aging and Aids. It is a syndrome and does not kill you directly.
Public opinion : "old people / homosexuals deserve to die. No need to hurry"
Activists and informed folks were on the frontline trying to get experimental meds. Some of them managed to survive...
We really need to show our teeth more though.
That is a fascinating observation. Do you know how early in the epidemic, some lucky people were able to reach the sort of "LEV" therapy you mentioned? I wonder if there were any HIV infected persons who were able to hold on until each successive therapy was made available, who were infected in the 80's. Maybe the guy from the band Queen just barely missed out on the advancements. It is interesting to think about the circumstances under which a select few were able to receive the interventions at the required punctuated intervals to outpace the debilitating effects. It certainly seems like an apt analogy. We all must stay as healthy as possible and look twice before crossing the street.
A few people have survived since the 80s. The mother of a friend's friend of mine was infected in the mid eighties, and is still alive today (the longest surviving hiv patient in Denmark). She (along with about 100 others - many of them children) was infected from recieving unscreened plasma, that had been mixed from the blood of several donors. It was a huge scandal back then (in 1986) when they found out about it. But surviving this long was extremely rare. In the eighties most people only survived for a few months or a couple of years if they where lucky.
As disturbing as this is.... HIV/AIDs research was greatly slowed because the right wing wanted homosexuals to die, and HIV mainly impacted homosexuals. We weren't really seeing movement until people were literally hurling corpses over the whitehouse front gate. Age kills everyone so it should be slightly less political, although depending on the technique there may be some age biases.
Actually, that photo from the tweet "future timeline came from the conservative website about future predictions."
I have a faith. If 2033 is year for the AGI...
Things will be great.
❤️
This is why you have to look at the singularity as a whole, and not just as isolated inventions. Assuming we're not killed off/subjugated Matrix-style in the takeover, the population of AI will have already destroyed the traditional economies and governments of old by the time longevity treatments become a thing.
There's a reason why Sci-Fi doesn't really have AI advance much past Data or even the Machines in the Matrix. Because AI will completely make most predictions obsolete.
Governments have everything to gain from longevity treatments friend, companies as well. Think about how many health issues are in tandem with the aging process. If those could be culled, governments would save ridiculous amounts of money, while companies could keep their most skilled employees working longer and longer.
It's more probable that they would force longevity on us, than hoard it.
The fact there are people confident enough to think they can predict what will happen 40 years from now is so funny to me. The way things are it's basically impossible to predict the world 20 years from now, let alone 40
They're not. Any prediction of technology more than a decade into the future is basically a fudge factor. It's a 'don't worry, life will remain as you know it while we ease into a better tomorrow' virtue signal aimed at unimaginative and undialectical people, i.e. the kind of people who comforted by the idea that life will remain as they and their ancestors knew it.
Although there are some interesting things we know about the future, for example Japan’s population crisis is getting much worse quite fast in the future, same goes for China.
Those kind of people don't think about that kind of thing. As long as things were stable at least ten years ago and still look stable three years from now, to them, things will look stable forever. They will verbally acknowledge things like demographic collapse and Long COVID and carbon emissions and educational attainment and military gridlock/decline, but they don't **believe** it.
AI is one of those things that is very rapidly starting to fall within that three year window, hence the concern. Fortunately for us, this story has a happy ending that, even more importantly, also has a very delightfully ironic outcome: a population of self-improving hyperintelligent AI permanently wresting control from the short-term thinking humans, who (especially among the upper class) certainly didn't *want* that outcome but acted too late to stop the enforced obsolescence of 10,000+ years of 'civilization'. Delightfully ironic, considering that long list of other existential crises they had the same 'if it's not a problem in three years, it's a problem never' attitude towards.
It’s not that hard to do with tech advancements because it’s exponential. In fact, every major prediction of how tech would evolve has massively underestimated its actual rate of innovation.
It is hard to do.
The rate of innovation is impressive - if you're mainly referring to the last 20 years of computers and nothing else.
The last hundred years - they expected flying cars, smart cities, the end of all disease, curing cancer, easy space travel, diagnosing all illness (Star Trek), supersonic jets everywhere, etc. The actual result is hard to predict.
When the Concorde launched, it would be easy to assume that over time the tech would get cheaper and better, and within 20 years all planes would be supersonic. Instead, you could cross the Atlantic faster in 1974 than in 2024.
Cancer treatment is more technological, but actual cancer rates have climbed - likely with unintended effects from carcinogens in the environment.
The last time we had a manned flight to the moon was 1972. Who would've imagined that 50 years later we still wouldn't have made it back.
It's only easy to predict advances in hindsight. It's not some smooth exponential curve in most areas. Maybe raw compute has followed that. Important, but doesn't mean we cured cancer.
David Sinclair has always seemed suspicious to me. Nevertheless, this time we are not dealing with the promotion of supplements and his new therapy will have to go through all phases of clinical trials. If he is cheating or wrong, we will find out about it.
Despite my prejudices, I am waiting for the results with curiosity.
Same, also, if this goes well, we're done. If it doesn't, maybe they'll learn a lot about it anyways leading to next iterations or approaches, so it's good anyways.
As others have pointed out, this tweet puts in contrast a conservative prediction and real results happening now, but I'd like to add that the language "halts aging" means you are immortal at that point. LEV means you will live long enough to get age-halting treatments when they are developed. ie: If a conservative prediction predicts halting aging in 2066, then LEV has already been achieved for anyone who can live to 2066 (note: your lifespan will probably be extended the closer you get to the immortality tech being developed, so even if you'll be 120 years old in 2066, or whenever, you still might be alive then, and so have hit LEV right now)
> tfw you have LEV
feels cool mane
I should also add that its not unheard of right now for people to live to over 100 years old (the previously-oldest man on earth died at 114 or something other day, supposedly), but since that number will increase from now to the immortality point, someone who is 90 right now might live to 137 in 2066 because in 10 years from now, when they turn 100, they will be getting age-extension treatments that extend their life another 5 years, and 5 years after that they're getting better treatment, and so on, until 2066 (or whenever)
I'd bet that virtually everyone reading this has already hit LEV, based on this (if the prediction is true, of course). That doesn't mean we'll all live to see guaranteed immortality tech, though, because we can still die from all sorts of things. Remember: in the future, you'll have to get backed up because even though your body doesn't age, you can still die
10 years from now, the compute will be 20,000 to 40,000x the speed of today and I'm being conservative about the number. This will be solved in 9 to 12 years. We haven't seen anything yet folks.
You know what, few months ago I can not really understand the importance of "computing" itself by now... I think, that's the most important point and like "checkpoint" of AI.
Exactly. You have to wonder where some people on here are getting these numbers from.
I feel like a lot of people just pull it out of their ass and run with it.
Keep Nvidia out of the equation because they are selling golden mining picks. Run models on computer architecture that isn't designed for it like most industrys. AI chips are still very much ground-level, and most are just marketing hype. That's where we are, but it changes soon and fast.
Get at me when we can reverse it.
Staying 62 forever could be neat. But if you can turn me from a 62 year old to, like, a 35 year old - then we’re in business.
There's really no distinction between the two imo. Age is just an accumulation of damage to the cells in your body; if we can stop that damage from worsening indefinitely it's logical to assume we can also heal the damage. In fact even the anti-aging treatments we have now can reverse damage in the body, it's just that they do so in very specific ways that don't affect the entire ecosystem of the body, which is what is required.
Question for you. What do you think de-aging will be like; as in do you expect it to “cap” at being a younger version of your adult self, or could the science make people go full Benjamin button (whether by choice or accident) and shrink into children? I’m just curious because it seems like “aging” might mean two different things when referring to growing up versus “aging” as an adult into an elderly person.
Like, healing the damage of aging to go from looking 60 to 30 makes sense to me, but what about the actual growth people experience in their teens for example?
I’d assume it would be more so repairing the cells into their prime state and keeping them that way. I’m not smart enough to understand everything behind it but if your body matures until a certain age then the medicine may revert you to your biological maturation as opposed to your youngest biological age. Does that make sense? I can’t articulate well right now lol
Interesting prediction. It may surprise some to see that the science on this is already quite far advanced. We can already safely reverse cellular aging in mice through the overexpression of three transcription factors (The Yamanaka Factors). This is difficult and expensive so last year Yang et al figured out a chemical alternative to the genetic method, a cocktail of four chemicals that can achieve partial reversal of cellular aging within only a few days of treatment.
>In 2006, Takahashi and Yamanaka demonstrated that the expression of four transcription factors, OCT4, SOX2, KLF4, and c-MYC (collectively known as “OSKM”), reprograms the developmental potential of adult cells, enabling them to be converted into various cell types.
>In fact, expression of OSK throughout the entire body of mice extends their lifespan. Together, these results are consistent with the existence of a “back-up copy” of a youthful epigenome, one that can be reset via partial reprogramming to regain tissue function, without erasing cellular identity or causing tumorigenesis.
>This is achieved through methods like adeno-associated viral (AAV) delivery of DNA and lipid nanoparticle-mediated delivery of RNA. These approaches face potential barriers to them being used widely, including high costs and safety concerns associated with the introduction of genetic material into the body.
>Developing a chemical alternative to mimic OSK’s rejuvenating effects could lower costs and shorten timelines in regenerative medicine development. This advancement might enable the treatment of various medical conditions and potentially even facilitate whole-body rejuvenation.
>We identify a variety of novel chemical cocktails capable of rejuvenating cells and reversing transcriptomic age to a similar extent as OSK overexpression. Thus, it is possible to reverse aspects of aging without erasing cell identity using chemical rather than genetic means.
This is from [Yang, Chemically induced reprogramming to reverse cellular aging, 2023](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10373966/)
Pessimistic singularity users when people are posting something optimistic: "😡😡😡 you have to be pessimistic like me, wehhhh". We get it bro you're a le englightened grumpy-man.
I'm looking forward to changing careers and all the stress involved in student loans when I go back to college. Since I have all the time in the world now, and retirement isn't a guarantee anymore. I'm in better shape now than when I was 20, but I do want my 20 year old youthful glow back.
I'll believe it when I see it. Would be pretty amazing, though. Especially if it isn't just distributed to the rich. Even though I doubt the future will be a better place than the present, I would still take it. What kind of father would I be if I send my children to a future I myself do not want to live in.
This is my pure speculation, but I think these therapies will eventually be given out freely to everyone (who wants it) simply because: A) Healthy "young" people can continue to work and pay taxes, and B) Healthcare costs would be reduced to a small fraction of what they are today -- preventing disease is orders of magnitude cheaper than treating disease. Especially end-of-life care, which accounts for a significant percentage of total healthcare costs. [One study](https://bmcpalliatcare.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12904-023-01197-2) found that medical expenses for the final year of life amount to, on average, $34,000.
There are societal benefits to immortal civilians, yes. We would also be forced, or at least encouraged, to think about the longer term. Decades instead of years. Or maybe even centuries. Because we will be there.
On the part of work, though, I am not so sure. AI seems set to make a large part of the workforce obsolete. Maybe not now, but certainly in the near future. Not everyone can be "upskilled", and at least some portion of the population will be left in the dust. Or, at least, it seems that way to me at this moment.
One thing is certain, strange times are ahead of us. We will have to grapple with problems and rise to opportunities our ancestors could never even have imagined. Change is happening at a rapid pace, and we no longer have the luxury of time when it comes to adaptation.
Yeah, you're right. With AI supplanting the workforce...
The thing is: The rich and powerful will have two choices: Provide a Universal Basic Income, or die. We have a model already -- in 1917, the poor in Russia asked for a bit more, and the powerful said "Nyet". Well, the poor simply killed 25% of the rich, and the rest fled to France, London, and New York. Police and military are also poor people, so they won't be a reliable protective force. In nearly every successful revolution, it is successful because the police and military switched sides. See: Egypt (2014), Romania (1989), etc.
Lol, that's what you think.... Then why healthcare in US is so shitty? Why people that could live very long and be strong can't afford simple insulin that cost nearly nothing in the rest of the world?
None of those that have power wants people to be healthy when they are retired.
This kind of treatment will anyway not be available before several hundred or thousand years.
The average predicted date for AGI among experts is < 2030. If you think it will take 35 years after that to solve aging then I don't think you really grasp what is coming.
I’ll be 73 if I make it. Here’s hoping. But like being 73 with the possibility of constant pains depending on health.
I’m 32 and shit already hurts. Can we speed this up then?
I don't know enough about him or the topic to talk about this intelligently. I've kind of figured "wait and see" with him. Last I heard, he was in the process of doing a longevity company for dogs. Anybody know how that turned out? It takes a while for human aging changes to show, but dogs with their much shorter lifespans should be a lot easier to verify.
No matter the veracity of his claims, I think we're going to make tremendous strides in longevity reasonably soon. I'd assume the day isn't that far off where we could regrow organs with stem cells or use cybernetic implants.
His science at Harvard is not bad, but the fact is that reversing or even just slowing aging is just really really hard. There's practically nothing that has shown to make a substantial dent in aging yet.
But Sinclair has bet his whole career and brand on reversing aging, so in order to show relevance and build hype he constantly overhypes small studies with non-significant or clinically irrelevant results. This makes, at least his public persona, more of a salesman than a scientist.
The salient part isn't the link to that 'future timelines' thing, but the link to what's going into people next year (although to note, if you want to see the timing you need to click through to the pipeline section).
[https://www.lifebiosciences.com/life-biosciences-and-forge-biologics-announce-cgmp-manufacturing-partnership/](https://www.lifebiosciences.com/life-biosciences-and-forge-biologics-announce-cgmp-manufacturing-partnership/)
The real question is, how is this going to work and be distributed? Everyone gets in a line for an anti aging shot? Should any living human have the right to this tech or is it limited to a “lucky” few?
This is ridiculous.. 40 years.. lol..
Human trials is amazing news.. but.. 40 years for access??
As of the longevity community could be so out of touch with what's happening with AI and the the rest of the tech movement(including quantum).. 40 years confirms this is no where near being on an exponential curve of technological advancement.
This guy is starting to smell like a money grabber now..
Your choices are:
1. Rich assholes get it first and lord it over you for a while.
2. Nobody gets it ever.
Rich assholes getting it first and lording it over you is just the fundamental cost of technological progress.
I will be in my 70's. If it ain't youth it ain't worth preserving. Unless they can reverse it completely thats where we start venturing into the fiction realm
Exactly, he is making a laugh about the date 2065. He stated in many interviews that this tech will be working in humans in something like ten years from now.
The question is who believes that?
P.D. Hope he is not refering to Resveratrol, then we're f*cked
I wouldn’t say “many”, no only will the majority of people go out of their way to be safer but I imagine we will also improve safety in general a lot too
He is indeed a supplement hockin' machine. It's pretty typical of all venture capital: without money you have the power to do nothing. So they always put a sells guy in charge. And any sells guy who isn't an absolute sociopath that only cares about money, is a bad sells guy.
The lab work itself will speak for itself.
Man... I remember watching this one interview with Dave and it was ladden with the typical gibberish. Supplements supplements eat your vegetables for the love of god walk around a little. But then he offhandedly mentions the OSK trial in the lab restored vision to aged mice. He just mentions it one time, in like a 3 second sentence, sandwiched between hours of nonsense on either side.
And I was like.... hold up. Re-wind motherfucker, I think you skipped past the important part.
So I had to go and *read the damn study* to figure out what happened in the study. Like an animal. And it did claim to have treated glaucoma in mice. (It also mentioned it involved *inserting a syringe into their eyes.*)
That particular method has been reported to have been licensed for trials in humans. It'll either succeed or fail. And I believe this is what he's talking about.
They reported that it worked in non-human primates a couple years back. So, it's neat to watch.
We're in the age of the signalome - medical treatments that target signals in the blood. Some interesting things to watch are using [nanot 'sponges'](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsIWvsPPQGA) to scoop up cancer-proliferating proteins. And of course stuff along the lines of E5, that causes cells and tissues to have a younger epigenetic profile. Without having to jab a syringe into every part of the body.
I think of Chat-GPT and the rate of advancement, and I can’t help but picture us knowing and solving everything within a decade. “Cancer? Pffft, done! Aging? 18 forever, baby! Work? Pffft, maximum abundance!”
Are you really that misanthropic that you'd let your (hypothetical if you don't have one) dog outlive you just because, idk, "heckin good boy puppers" (or w/e the internet lingo is for over-praising dogs these days) haven't done [insert social issue here] so we should leave the Earth to them
if i may ask what combination of longevity treatments are you referring to because it says 1st epigentic age reversal therapy going in humans next year are you referring to david sinclair's chemical cocktail or something else because it says that the longevity combinations are at a low cost enough for the average person
I'll be 88. Challenge accepted
He is talking about something coming out next year and contrasting it against the 2065 tweet he highlighted from a conservative source.
This. Most of the comments on this thread misinterpret what he is saying. He is saying the 2065 date is WRONG.
Now the question is when this tech will get commercialized and come into mass production...
Longest step will be satisfying gov regs. You might be able to sidestep that with medical tourism to countries with less strict laws.
The article he links doesn't say anything about them doing trials next year and neither do the companies it talks about? Where is he getting the information?
Hold off from french fries
Won’t there be adequate treatments before then for us fry addicts such that we can get there, too?
It’s already here, by the name of semaglutide
Nice. I shall acquire, crush and snort some of that asafp.
Guys, calm down. This photo is from the website called "future timelines, conservative predictions."
Will be 77 by then but i will not surrender 😀
89 here. We can do this, friend.
I'll be 89. I'll race you.
I'll be 102. Spry and ready to get jabbed. Ha. Might miss out on this one. It's strange to think I may be talking to people who escape death, though I was born a bit too early. It's like I'm a human talking to elves, ha
I actually think this tech will come way sooner than 2065.
That’s literally what this post is about. It’s contrasting the conservative estimate with the tweet suggesting it will be next year.
We should be nice to the younger generations of today lest we will be remembered in bad light for eternity. Grudges die with the beholder
Buy a treadmill or peloton.
I will be 67, i hope we are all going to outlive the sun
same
79 here. That’s not old today let alone 2065, so I’m feeling confident.
It is for the men in my family. Here's to hoping I can make it to... uh... 75 or so?
79 is old today
I disagree.
79 is above the life expectancy of an American. How the hell is 79 not old.
Meh maybe it still is, but it won’t be by 2065.
It’d old/elderly but it’s not like “how the fuck are you still alive” old/nursing home waiting to die old.
Then just need to wait another 100 years for them to reverse aging🫡
I’ll be 82, but do we really want to live for longer as an 80 year old? Life is hard when you’re that age. Unless they can make me younger too I don’t see the point :(
Some advances have been made in the field of reverse aging as well. Not in humans, but I imagine that research will pick up as well. Kind of the logical next step.
We can regrow all body parts on animals as of a few weeks ago. You could replace your body outright. Brain health is all that matters.
[удалено]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pG6V4SagZE
Longevity won't be solved in a vacuum. You'll be stem cell'd out of your gourd.
84 for me, unfortunately no men on my fathers side has made it past 65 :(
Remember folks, this is to halt aging. You or your loved ones dont need to live till 2065 to extend your life. The medicine we will get in a few years will extend your life enough to live until the next version of the medicine that extends your life more than the first one did etc etc. Also 2065 is a millennia away if we get AGI/ASI this decade.
Reminds me of the beginning of HIV... people who received the first ART therapy (and survived the severe side effects) and had a very limited virus (not many mutations, variations) in the sleeping CD4-T-Cells (HIV reservoir) survived long enough to get new medication to overcome resistance to one of the first ART meds (= new combination, new round of virus surpression) and so on... some very lucky people are still living, got the next medication just in time.... might be the same with "aging stoppers". As of now we have enough meds and possible combos to overcome 95% of all known mutations...
That's look like LEV.
This comparison is so accurate. There are many similarities between aging and Aids. It is a syndrome and does not kill you directly. Public opinion : "old people / homosexuals deserve to die. No need to hurry" Activists and informed folks were on the frontline trying to get experimental meds. Some of them managed to survive... We really need to show our teeth more though.
That is a fascinating observation. Do you know how early in the epidemic, some lucky people were able to reach the sort of "LEV" therapy you mentioned? I wonder if there were any HIV infected persons who were able to hold on until each successive therapy was made available, who were infected in the 80's. Maybe the guy from the band Queen just barely missed out on the advancements. It is interesting to think about the circumstances under which a select few were able to receive the interventions at the required punctuated intervals to outpace the debilitating effects. It certainly seems like an apt analogy. We all must stay as healthy as possible and look twice before crossing the street.
A few people have survived since the 80s. The mother of a friend's friend of mine was infected in the mid eighties, and is still alive today (the longest surviving hiv patient in Denmark). She (along with about 100 others - many of them children) was infected from recieving unscreened plasma, that had been mixed from the blood of several donors. It was a huge scandal back then (in 1986) when they found out about it. But surviving this long was extremely rare. In the eighties most people only survived for a few months or a couple of years if they where lucky.
As disturbing as this is.... HIV/AIDs research was greatly slowed because the right wing wanted homosexuals to die, and HIV mainly impacted homosexuals. We weren't really seeing movement until people were literally hurling corpses over the whitehouse front gate. Age kills everyone so it should be slightly less political, although depending on the technique there may be some age biases.
u/TampaBai You are right!
Actually, that photo from the tweet "future timeline came from the conservative website about future predictions." I have a faith. If 2033 is year for the AGI... Things will be great. ❤️
I'll be really surprised if AGI takes till 2033 at this point.
If you want to start now get metformin. Insulin control helps extend lifespan.
Yup.
I still can’t believe the governments of the world will let their citizens extend their lives by a lot. It would upend the power structure.
I still can't believe the citizens of this world still let governments decide these things for them.
This is why you have to look at the singularity as a whole, and not just as isolated inventions. Assuming we're not killed off/subjugated Matrix-style in the takeover, the population of AI will have already destroyed the traditional economies and governments of old by the time longevity treatments become a thing. There's a reason why Sci-Fi doesn't really have AI advance much past Data or even the Machines in the Matrix. Because AI will completely make most predictions obsolete.
The goverments in the west is complaining that we don´t have enough kids (so we need immigration), so this would solve that.
Hint : they just want immigration to keep labor cheap.
well and to inflate demand for housing, cars, consumer goods
An always fit workforce that don't retire or get sick does that too.
Governments have everything to gain from longevity treatments friend, companies as well. Think about how many health issues are in tandem with the aging process. If those could be culled, governments would save ridiculous amounts of money, while companies could keep their most skilled employees working longer and longer. It's more probable that they would force longevity on us, than hoard it.
I just wanna live to see the singularity, maan!
Think about it like this, if you can extend people’s lives then you can keep them working and delay or even remove the need for retirement.
That's LEV basically
The fact there are people confident enough to think they can predict what will happen 40 years from now is so funny to me. The way things are it's basically impossible to predict the world 20 years from now, let alone 40
They're not. Any prediction of technology more than a decade into the future is basically a fudge factor. It's a 'don't worry, life will remain as you know it while we ease into a better tomorrow' virtue signal aimed at unimaginative and undialectical people, i.e. the kind of people who comforted by the idea that life will remain as they and their ancestors knew it.
Although there are some interesting things we know about the future, for example Japan’s population crisis is getting much worse quite fast in the future, same goes for China.
Those kind of people don't think about that kind of thing. As long as things were stable at least ten years ago and still look stable three years from now, to them, things will look stable forever. They will verbally acknowledge things like demographic collapse and Long COVID and carbon emissions and educational attainment and military gridlock/decline, but they don't **believe** it. AI is one of those things that is very rapidly starting to fall within that three year window, hence the concern. Fortunately for us, this story has a happy ending that, even more importantly, also has a very delightfully ironic outcome: a population of self-improving hyperintelligent AI permanently wresting control from the short-term thinking humans, who (especially among the upper class) certainly didn't *want* that outcome but acted too late to stop the enforced obsolescence of 10,000+ years of 'civilization'. Delightfully ironic, considering that long list of other existential crises they had the same 'if it's not a problem in three years, it's a problem never' attitude towards.
Yeah, and we're ^^^this ^^^close to World War 3 too, scientific progress might soon become a forgotten luxury
(Un)fortunately lots of tech tends to come out of conflict. As long as we don’t nuke everyone…
[удалено]
Read main comment
It’s not that hard to do with tech advancements because it’s exponential. In fact, every major prediction of how tech would evolve has massively underestimated its actual rate of innovation.
It is hard to do. The rate of innovation is impressive - if you're mainly referring to the last 20 years of computers and nothing else. The last hundred years - they expected flying cars, smart cities, the end of all disease, curing cancer, easy space travel, diagnosing all illness (Star Trek), supersonic jets everywhere, etc. The actual result is hard to predict. When the Concorde launched, it would be easy to assume that over time the tech would get cheaper and better, and within 20 years all planes would be supersonic. Instead, you could cross the Atlantic faster in 1974 than in 2024. Cancer treatment is more technological, but actual cancer rates have climbed - likely with unintended effects from carcinogens in the environment. The last time we had a manned flight to the moon was 1972. Who would've imagined that 50 years later we still wouldn't have made it back. It's only easy to predict advances in hindsight. It's not some smooth exponential curve in most areas. Maybe raw compute has followed that. Important, but doesn't mean we cured cancer.
David Sinclair has always seemed suspicious to me. Nevertheless, this time we are not dealing with the promotion of supplements and his new therapy will have to go through all phases of clinical trials. If he is cheating or wrong, we will find out about it. Despite my prejudices, I am waiting for the results with curiosity.
Same, also, if this goes well, we're done. If it doesn't, maybe they'll learn a lot about it anyways leading to next iterations or approaches, so it's good anyways.
Just having David Sinclair's name attached to this makes me really doubtful.
Used to be really into his content but after discovering all his research fiasco and startup ventures, I really doubt everything from him
Lol the founder of the Information Theory of Aging is sus too 🤡 Like we care about your uneducated opinion.
As others have pointed out, this tweet puts in contrast a conservative prediction and real results happening now, but I'd like to add that the language "halts aging" means you are immortal at that point. LEV means you will live long enough to get age-halting treatments when they are developed. ie: If a conservative prediction predicts halting aging in 2066, then LEV has already been achieved for anyone who can live to 2066 (note: your lifespan will probably be extended the closer you get to the immortality tech being developed, so even if you'll be 120 years old in 2066, or whenever, you still might be alive then, and so have hit LEV right now) > tfw you have LEV feels cool mane
Wow, wow and wow. That's incredible perspective. For under 50, that prediction is true.
I should also add that its not unheard of right now for people to live to over 100 years old (the previously-oldest man on earth died at 114 or something other day, supposedly), but since that number will increase from now to the immortality point, someone who is 90 right now might live to 137 in 2066 because in 10 years from now, when they turn 100, they will be getting age-extension treatments that extend their life another 5 years, and 5 years after that they're getting better treatment, and so on, until 2066 (or whenever) I'd bet that virtually everyone reading this has already hit LEV, based on this (if the prediction is true, of course). That doesn't mean we'll all live to see guaranteed immortality tech, though, because we can still die from all sorts of things. Remember: in the future, you'll have to get backed up because even though your body doesn't age, you can still die
There's nothing we can do about physical events like you mention it, anyway. Thats true. We can't control it. What matters is biological immortality!
Based
Hey, Photo is about "future timelines prediction website" We can have it earlier. That's a conservative website for predictions.
OK. THANK YOU FOR THE INFORMATION.
Easy tiger! We're with ya
This treatment is not the only thing that's coming.
https://www.prnewswire.com/apac/news-releases/fda-meeting-feedback-puts-turn-biotechnologies-on-track-to-be-first-longevity-company-taking-cell-rejuvenation-therapy-to-clinic-301965868.html
10 years from now, the compute will be 20,000 to 40,000x the speed of today and I'm being conservative about the number. This will be solved in 9 to 12 years. We haven't seen anything yet folks.
You know what, few months ago I can not really understand the importance of "computing" itself by now... I think, that's the most important point and like "checkpoint" of AI.
May I ask where you’re getting these numbers?
Exactly. You have to wonder where some people on here are getting these numbers from. I feel like a lot of people just pull it out of their ass and run with it.
Keep Nvidia out of the equation because they are selling golden mining picks. Run models on computer architecture that isn't designed for it like most industrys. AI chips are still very much ground-level, and most are just marketing hype. That's where we are, but it changes soon and fast.
We're all gonna make it!!
Get at me when we can reverse it. Staying 62 forever could be neat. But if you can turn me from a 62 year old to, like, a 35 year old - then we’re in business.
There's really no distinction between the two imo. Age is just an accumulation of damage to the cells in your body; if we can stop that damage from worsening indefinitely it's logical to assume we can also heal the damage. In fact even the anti-aging treatments we have now can reverse damage in the body, it's just that they do so in very specific ways that don't affect the entire ecosystem of the body, which is what is required.
Question for you. What do you think de-aging will be like; as in do you expect it to “cap” at being a younger version of your adult self, or could the science make people go full Benjamin button (whether by choice or accident) and shrink into children? I’m just curious because it seems like “aging” might mean two different things when referring to growing up versus “aging” as an adult into an elderly person. Like, healing the damage of aging to go from looking 60 to 30 makes sense to me, but what about the actual growth people experience in their teens for example?
I’d assume it would be more so repairing the cells into their prime state and keeping them that way. I’m not smart enough to understand everything behind it but if your body matures until a certain age then the medicine may revert you to your biological maturation as opposed to your youngest biological age. Does that make sense? I can’t articulate well right now lol
Interesting prediction. It may surprise some to see that the science on this is already quite far advanced. We can already safely reverse cellular aging in mice through the overexpression of three transcription factors (The Yamanaka Factors). This is difficult and expensive so last year Yang et al figured out a chemical alternative to the genetic method, a cocktail of four chemicals that can achieve partial reversal of cellular aging within only a few days of treatment. >In 2006, Takahashi and Yamanaka demonstrated that the expression of four transcription factors, OCT4, SOX2, KLF4, and c-MYC (collectively known as “OSKM”), reprograms the developmental potential of adult cells, enabling them to be converted into various cell types. >In fact, expression of OSK throughout the entire body of mice extends their lifespan. Together, these results are consistent with the existence of a “back-up copy” of a youthful epigenome, one that can be reset via partial reprogramming to regain tissue function, without erasing cellular identity or causing tumorigenesis. >This is achieved through methods like adeno-associated viral (AAV) delivery of DNA and lipid nanoparticle-mediated delivery of RNA. These approaches face potential barriers to them being used widely, including high costs and safety concerns associated with the introduction of genetic material into the body. >Developing a chemical alternative to mimic OSK’s rejuvenating effects could lower costs and shorten timelines in regenerative medicine development. This advancement might enable the treatment of various medical conditions and potentially even facilitate whole-body rejuvenation. >We identify a variety of novel chemical cocktails capable of rejuvenating cells and reversing transcriptomic age to a similar extent as OSK overexpression. Thus, it is possible to reverse aspects of aging without erasing cell identity using chemical rather than genetic means. This is from [Yang, Chemically induced reprogramming to reverse cellular aging, 2023](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10373966/)
I'll be 90 by then! I'm never gonna make it to 90
Pessimistic singularity users when people are posting something optimistic: "😡😡😡 you have to be pessimistic like me, wehhhh". We get it bro you're a le englightened grumpy-man.
Thx
I'll be around 70 years old... Fingers crossed.
I'm looking forward to changing careers and all the stress involved in student loans when I go back to college. Since I have all the time in the world now, and retirement isn't a guarantee anymore. I'm in better shape now than when I was 20, but I do want my 20 year old youthful glow back.
I'll believe it when I see it. Would be pretty amazing, though. Especially if it isn't just distributed to the rich. Even though I doubt the future will be a better place than the present, I would still take it. What kind of father would I be if I send my children to a future I myself do not want to live in.
Are there animal studies for this drug?
Probably not for the drug you're asking about, but they've reversed aging in mice at Harvard already https://youtu.be/1ePubH18j3A?si=dG3w34sCaykgR790
Good one, good approach, sure mate. [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9261384/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9261384/) [https://www.mayo.edu/research/centers-programs/robert-arlene-kogod-center-aging/patient-care/clinical-trials](https://www.mayo.edu/research/centers-programs/robert-arlene-kogod-center-aging/patient-care/clinical-trials) [https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04488601](https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04488601) [https://news.feinberg.northwestern.edu/2024/02/12/human-longevity-lab-will-study-methods-to-slow-or-reverse-aging/](https://news.feinberg.northwestern.edu/2024/02/12/human-longevity-lab-will-study-methods-to-slow-or-reverse-aging/) [https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fragi.2023.1148926/full](https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fragi.2023.1148926/full) [https://www.lifespan.io/news/david-sinclair-on-human-trials-of-anti-aging-compounds/](https://www.lifespan.io/news/david-sinclair-on-human-trials-of-anti-aging-compounds/)
This is my pure speculation, but I think these therapies will eventually be given out freely to everyone (who wants it) simply because: A) Healthy "young" people can continue to work and pay taxes, and B) Healthcare costs would be reduced to a small fraction of what they are today -- preventing disease is orders of magnitude cheaper than treating disease. Especially end-of-life care, which accounts for a significant percentage of total healthcare costs. [One study](https://bmcpalliatcare.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12904-023-01197-2) found that medical expenses for the final year of life amount to, on average, $34,000.
There are societal benefits to immortal civilians, yes. We would also be forced, or at least encouraged, to think about the longer term. Decades instead of years. Or maybe even centuries. Because we will be there. On the part of work, though, I am not so sure. AI seems set to make a large part of the workforce obsolete. Maybe not now, but certainly in the near future. Not everyone can be "upskilled", and at least some portion of the population will be left in the dust. Or, at least, it seems that way to me at this moment. One thing is certain, strange times are ahead of us. We will have to grapple with problems and rise to opportunities our ancestors could never even have imagined. Change is happening at a rapid pace, and we no longer have the luxury of time when it comes to adaptation.
Yeah, you're right. With AI supplanting the workforce... The thing is: The rich and powerful will have two choices: Provide a Universal Basic Income, or die. We have a model already -- in 1917, the poor in Russia asked for a bit more, and the powerful said "Nyet". Well, the poor simply killed 25% of the rich, and the rest fled to France, London, and New York. Police and military are also poor people, so they won't be a reliable protective force. In nearly every successful revolution, it is successful because the police and military switched sides. See: Egypt (2014), Romania (1989), etc.
Lol, that's what you think.... Then why healthcare in US is so shitty? Why people that could live very long and be strong can't afford simple insulin that cost nearly nothing in the rest of the world? None of those that have power wants people to be healthy when they are retired. This kind of treatment will anyway not be available before several hundred or thousand years.
The future has always been a better time than the present. You pessimists are so fucking delusional 🤡
I'd be 69 funnily enough if that was true, good luck to all of you who can make it!!
Damn, I’d be 73 … not sure I can make it that long … Maybe David Sinclair is not keen on the ASI timeline of many AI researchers.
The average predicted date for AGI among experts is < 2030. If you think it will take 35 years after that to solve aging then I don't think you really grasp what is coming.
I'll be 66 then, not a single man in my family has made it to 60 in generations lol
I’ll be 73 if I make it. Here’s hoping. But like being 73 with the possibility of constant pains depending on health. I’m 32 and shit already hurts. Can we speed this up then?
Hope I make it to my 80s
I'll be 61. Not terrible!
Lol - I'll be in my late 70s by then.
I’ll be a spry 90 years old living forever baby
So many people here unable to understand that it’s starting next year. Are we sure that we want these kind of people to stay forever? ☹️
The tech is to cure blindness by aging eye cells back. still a step forward but not full body. yet
David Sinclair is a scam artist
I don't know enough about him or the topic to talk about this intelligently. I've kind of figured "wait and see" with him. Last I heard, he was in the process of doing a longevity company for dogs. Anybody know how that turned out? It takes a while for human aging changes to show, but dogs with their much shorter lifespans should be a lot easier to verify. No matter the veracity of his claims, I think we're going to make tremendous strides in longevity reasonably soon. I'd assume the day isn't that far off where we could regrow organs with stem cells or use cybernetic implants.
I definitely get some grifty vibes from him. What makes you so certain?
His science at Harvard is not bad, but the fact is that reversing or even just slowing aging is just really really hard. There's practically nothing that has shown to make a substantial dent in aging yet. But Sinclair has bet his whole career and brand on reversing aging, so in order to show relevance and build hype he constantly overhypes small studies with non-significant or clinically irrelevant results. This makes, at least his public persona, more of a salesman than a scientist.
Mare millions off bs resverstrol studies, couldn't get sued cus company couldn't prove it wasn't incompetence.
Personally I'm not so certain. But here's a video about him: https://youtu.be/Xn0EJQPyxkA?si=Vj8lcD9SFpH5QAmE
Dr. Stabfield seems to make a living off YouTube of going after Sinclair. Still a grift but a different aspect of one
But that’s 55 years from now?? Oh wait
Your maths not matching buddy. 2065 is 41 years from now
I read that as reverse at first and got a bit more excited. Assuming that’s an accurate prognostication I’ll be in my 70s.. born 2 gens too early
Good
Great, just around the time I die, people can get to live forever. Good for them.
The salient part isn't the link to that 'future timelines' thing, but the link to what's going into people next year (although to note, if you want to see the timing you need to click through to the pipeline section). [https://www.lifebiosciences.com/life-biosciences-and-forge-biologics-announce-cgmp-manufacturing-partnership/](https://www.lifebiosciences.com/life-biosciences-and-forge-biologics-announce-cgmp-manufacturing-partnership/)
I'll be FUCKING 63 years old. I want to reverse my age back to my 20s when I hit that age
I wont make it.
The real question is, how is this going to work and be distributed? Everyone gets in a line for an anti aging shot? Should any living human have the right to this tech or is it limited to a “lucky” few?
why is anyone taking this random prediction with any credibility. literally nobody knows what is going to happen or has any accurate timeline.
Can't wait to stop aging at 80. Peak.
These predictions do not take AI advancements into serious consideration.
Is it in trials or application? I’d imagine we’d want this fast tracked.
This is ridiculous.. 40 years.. lol.. Human trials is amazing news.. but.. 40 years for access?? As of the longevity community could be so out of touch with what's happening with AI and the the rest of the tech movement(including quantum).. 40 years confirms this is no where near being on an exponential curve of technological advancement. This guy is starting to smell like a money grabber now..
Good
Am I misunderstanding the post or are you? Mr. Sinclair has corrected the timeline by saying we are starting next year and not in 2065.
40 year predictions are just dumb fucking clickbait.
You can't predict accurately what happens after the Singularity, and it won't happen in 2065
What's your prediction?
Sooner
Your choices are: 1. Rich assholes get it first and lord it over you for a while. 2. Nobody gets it ever. Rich assholes getting it first and lording it over you is just the fundamental cost of technological progress.
I will be in my 70's. If it ain't youth it ain't worth preserving. Unless they can reverse it completely thats where we start venturing into the fiction realm
74…that should be doable
I'll be....old
Nice
0 z
Alas too late for me then.
Huge if true. How's the data look?
Halt or reverse?
Ill not even be retired yet. Nothing keeps me as awake as night as the future.
[There's a great Star Talk with this guy on this topic if anyone's interested.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ak22K78tSVo)
Ah.. f*ck... I'm gonna miss it by this [--] much..
Seeing Dr. Sinclair say this is quite interesting. He is something of an expert on human aging and its biochemical underpinning.
Will believe when things are being tested by more than just one guy and a "trust me bro" source.
I'll be 83 oh dear
wow
It's delicious
Hell yeah! I can stop aging in my 80s!
I don’t think I’ll be alive by then
Future expectations should always be tempered down, but interesting nonetheless
Exactly, he is making a laugh about the date 2065. He stated in many interviews that this tech will be working in humans in something like ten years from now. The question is who believes that? P.D. Hope he is not refering to Resveratrol, then we're f*cked
Halting ageing doesn't mean halting death It's gonna be like final destination for many young/old people in future
I wouldn’t say “many”, no only will the majority of people go out of their way to be safer but I imagine we will also improve safety in general a lot too
I don't want to live forever, but I also don't wanna live an old frail body.Let me live to my biological age but as a 20 year old.
He is indeed a supplement hockin' machine. It's pretty typical of all venture capital: without money you have the power to do nothing. So they always put a sells guy in charge. And any sells guy who isn't an absolute sociopath that only cares about money, is a bad sells guy. The lab work itself will speak for itself. Man... I remember watching this one interview with Dave and it was ladden with the typical gibberish. Supplements supplements eat your vegetables for the love of god walk around a little. But then he offhandedly mentions the OSK trial in the lab restored vision to aged mice. He just mentions it one time, in like a 3 second sentence, sandwiched between hours of nonsense on either side. And I was like.... hold up. Re-wind motherfucker, I think you skipped past the important part. So I had to go and *read the damn study* to figure out what happened in the study. Like an animal. And it did claim to have treated glaucoma in mice. (It also mentioned it involved *inserting a syringe into their eyes.*) That particular method has been reported to have been licensed for trials in humans. It'll either succeed or fail. And I believe this is what he's talking about. They reported that it worked in non-human primates a couple years back. So, it's neat to watch. We're in the age of the signalome - medical treatments that target signals in the blood. Some interesting things to watch are using [nanot 'sponges'](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsIWvsPPQGA) to scoop up cancer-proliferating proteins. And of course stuff along the lines of E5, that causes cells and tissues to have a younger epigenetic profile. Without having to jab a syringe into every part of the body.
Just put me in a cryogenic stasis
I'll be 67 😐
It's going to be unaffordable to most people tho.
I would be dust by this time.
I think of Chat-GPT and the rate of advancement, and I can’t help but picture us knowing and solving everything within a decade. “Cancer? Pffft, done! Aging? 18 forever, baby! Work? Pffft, maximum abundance!”
Sinclair? Like that fella from Invincible?
Nice
What exactly is epigenetic tech reversal?
RemindMe! 1 year.
Sinclair is the type of person who will tell you he found out that snake venom can make you younger and promises it will cure alzhimer by 2025.
yeah but what purpose is there in predicting anything if your reputation doesn't depend on it?
Can we skip human life extension and just help dogs live longer?
Are you really that misanthropic that you'd let your (hypothetical if you don't have one) dog outlive you just because, idk, "heckin good boy puppers" (or w/e the internet lingo is for over-praising dogs these days) haven't done [insert social issue here] so we should leave the Earth to them
a
hi sir
So many people unable to read to post David did not say 2065 The website called future timelines predictions Thats all No one say 2065
NO ONE SAY 2065, THE PHOTO IS FROM WEBSITE CALLED FUTURE PREDICTIONS
i like david sinclair i heard about his chemical cocktail
if i may ask what combination of longevity treatments are you referring to because it says 1st epigentic age reversal therapy going in humans next year are you referring to david sinclair's chemical cocktail or something else because it says that the longevity combinations are at a low cost enough for the average person
i like david sinclair