Arthur C. Clarke: “When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.”
Yeah that is exactly the vibe I get from this guy. He is like, "Yeah, sure, this or that has happened or could happen, but...nah. Not gonna. And btw, here is my inevitable old man moralizing."
@@squamish4244 100% agree. There's reason for skepticism and there's reason for optimism, too early to say radical life extension is imminent but its far too soon to say it won't be possible in the coming decades
I have just tuned into your podcast, and I do not know what you will be discussing at this moment. However, I have often heard people express concerns that curing aging populations and allowing individuals to live extremely long lives would be somehow undesirable due to the resulting wealth disparities. I see it differently. As an elderly man myself, having lived a full life and "sown my wild oats," I am now quite conservative with my finances and no longer waste my money. In fact, I reinvest my money with zeal. I believe most elderly people tend to do the same. This behavior reduces the cost of capital for everyone, including the young. I can envision a future where people live very long lives, and due to reinvestment, the cost of developing new products and projects dramatically decreases-especially in light of the advances being made in robotics and AI. I don't understand why so many people gravitate toward a doomsday mindset every time you turn around. Think positively, and I believe you will reap the benefits of your thoughts.
I don’t think it’s entirely cash that elderly hold. It’s more so the physical assets, land, business etc. That’s why housing is so expensive, there isn’t enough and people are living longer. Grammy bought a 4 bed in 1980 for 40k in a good neighborhood. Now it’s worth 800k. Grandpa was the first dentist in town. Now he owns 5 practices in the county. They might now have liquid cash, but they have land and assets.
@@MrChefT Housing is also more expensive because houses and the property they sit on are much larger than in 1975. In the last 50 years, housing size has ballooned while families have shrunk, with the result that the average person in North America has twice as much squ. ft. each than 50 years ago. Our expectations have risen. It's all very complicated.
@@squamish4244 in 1975 I was making something like $2 and some change per hour. Tax rates the way I remember them, although I have to admit I was young, we're higher. Overtime was very rare.
I don't understand how people in this field aren't in a bigger hurry or more alarmist about the need for funding and resources. How are you speaking so calmly about all of this when delays come at the horrific real cost of sixty million lives a year?! This needs to be the focus of society. Imagine after this is solved how future generations people will be aghast at our society now who could have done more, but fell victim to normalization or death by aging, and just said "welp, we're early days!". FFS, stop making excuses.
For more information on solving aging completely "Ending Aging" by Aubrey De Grey and for what to do right now, practically, the "Kaufmann Protocol" by Sandra Kaufmann
I have a suggestion: Cut this interview up into segments based on topics you go through - perhaps around 20 minutes each in length. Many of us get distracted when listening to a long interview like this, so if the same material were available in shorter 'bite size' pieces, it will be better absorbed, and I bet you'll get more views too!
There's a 23-minute 'Highlights' version of each of our newer podcast episodes - you can find one for this episode here: ruclips.net/video/DIf7ehBV7m4/видео.html
It would still be genetically determined, essentially like turning wolves into poodles or basically a form of eug*nics. As far as health is involved, children would be less healthy and more prone to defects.
The decision to take risks is unique to age. A 75 year old has a higher risk of death than a 40 yo and risk of trying various anti aging treatments is way different
You lost my trust as you spoke about the pandemic and the "small number" of people that had side affects. Side effects evaluation will take dozens of years. Lets remember the thalidomide issues and how only one generation after we knew some of the side effects.
This guy might be a decorated scientist in the field of ageing but he certainly lacks the spirit, ingenuity and imagination that such a fringe topic requires.
Toward the end of the interview on his contention that old people will keep all the jobs, Venki commits the "lump of labor" fallacy. I'm surprised a Nobel winner in chemistry/biology would lack such basic understanding in economics. Regarding inequality, it's a bit silly to fixate on the extremes of the top 10% vs. the bottom 10%. There are huge confounding factors for the bottom 10% which include terrible lifestyle choices, such as substance abuse. Looking at modern medicine today, the average person in many countries has access to interventions such as cancer treatments, joint replacements, pacemakers, cataract surgery, organ transplants, statins, antihypertensives, vaccines, etc. The companies targeting the biology of aging aim to go through clinical trials, regulatory approval, and broad commercialization too.
Will you be mentioning carnosine, beta-alanine, alpha-ketoglutarate, Henrietta Lacks, the Hayflick limit, and mitochondrial dysfunction? Do you think it is possible to create an artificial cell that enhances our current cellular system-perhaps a robotic-type cell that performs certain anti-aging functions? Lastly, regarding the preservation of bodies: it seems to me that encasing a sample of your DNA in amber would be much easier. This method could preserve your DNA similarly to how insects are often found in amber, some of which are millions of years old. Your DNA would be preserved for ages!
The interviewer has an understanding of the topic and asks very intelligent questions without interrupting the interviewee. Very refreshing.
Arthur C. Clarke: “When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.”
Yeah that is exactly the vibe I get from this guy. He is like, "Yeah, sure, this or that has happened or could happen, but...nah. Not gonna. And btw, here is my inevitable old man moralizing."
@@squamish4244 100% agree. There's reason for skepticism and there's reason for optimism, too early to say radical life extension is imminent but its far too soon to say it won't be possible in the coming decades
Fascinating. Thanks for sharing!
Excellent discussion thanks
I have just tuned into your podcast, and I do not know what you will be discussing at this moment. However, I have often heard people express concerns that curing aging populations and allowing individuals to live extremely long lives would be somehow undesirable due to the resulting wealth disparities. I see it differently.
As an elderly man myself, having lived a full life and "sown my wild oats," I am now quite conservative with my finances and no longer waste my money. In fact, I reinvest my money with zeal. I believe most elderly people tend to do the same. This behavior reduces the cost of capital for everyone, including the young.
I can envision a future where people live very long lives, and due to reinvestment, the cost of developing new products and projects dramatically decreases-especially in light of the advances being made in robotics and AI. I don't understand why so many people gravitate toward a doomsday mindset every time you turn around. Think positively, and I believe you will reap the benefits of your thoughts.
I don’t think it’s entirely cash that elderly hold. It’s more so the physical assets, land, business etc.
That’s why housing is so expensive, there isn’t enough and people are living longer.
Grammy bought a 4 bed in 1980 for 40k in a good neighborhood. Now it’s worth 800k. Grandpa was the first dentist in town. Now he owns 5 practices in the county.
They might now have liquid cash, but they have land and assets.
@@MrChefT Housing is also more expensive because houses and the property they sit on are much larger than in 1975. In the last 50 years, housing size has ballooned while families have shrunk, with the result that the average person in North America has twice as much squ. ft. each than 50 years ago. Our expectations have risen. It's all very complicated.
@@squamish4244 in 1975 I was making something like $2 and some change per hour. Tax rates the way I remember them, although I have to admit I was young, we're higher. Overtime was very rare.
Please keep making your wonderful timestamps!!! ❤
this was fascinating - thanks very much!
I don't understand how people in this field aren't in a bigger hurry or more alarmist about the need for funding and resources. How are you speaking so calmly about all of this when delays come at the horrific real cost of sixty million lives a year?! This needs to be the focus of society.
Imagine after this is solved how future generations people will be aghast at our society now who could have done more, but fell victim to normalization or death by aging, and just said "welp, we're early days!". FFS, stop making excuses.
What did you do today to progress this cause?
Bang on
Fascinating. Thank you
David Sinclair should listen this interview and stop bluffing people with his business interests. Thank you for great work done.
For more information on solving aging completely "Ending Aging" by Aubrey De Grey and
for what to do right now, practically, the "Kaufmann Protocol" by Sandra Kaufmann
I have a suggestion: Cut this interview up into segments based on topics you go through - perhaps around 20 minutes each in length. Many of us get distracted when listening to a long interview like this, so if the same material were available in shorter 'bite size' pieces, it will be better absorbed, and I bet you'll get more views too!
There's a 23-minute 'Highlights' version of each of our newer podcast episodes - you can find one for this episode here: ruclips.net/video/DIf7ehBV7m4/видео.html
Having children later in life should create pressures for longevity.
It would still be genetically determined, essentially like turning wolves into poodles or basically a form of eug*nics. As far as health is involved, children would be less healthy and more prone to defects.
The decision to take risks is unique to age. A 75 year old has a higher risk of death than a 40 yo and risk of trying various anti aging treatments is way different
Small thing. Magnesium threonate has been shown, in mouse studies, to prevent brain aging, by the human equivalent, of 9 years.
❤❤❤
This fellow is fabulous!!!❤
People who take rapamycin for longevity usually take it once per week, and there isn't supposed to be many side effects that way?
You lost my trust as you spoke about the pandemic and the "small number" of people that had side affects. Side effects evaluation will take dozens of years. Lets remember the thalidomide issues and how only one generation after we knew some of the side effects.
Absolutely agree. It also seemed like something “slipped in” rather than genuine flow of the conversation.
Imagine an antivaxxer criticizing science they don’t understand.
That thumbnail is crazy 🤪
Yamanaka factors!
I think Kaeberlein's dog aging project is still ongoing.
This guy might be a decorated scientist in the field of ageing but he certainly lacks the spirit, ingenuity and imagination that such a fringe topic requires.
Must disagree here. My impression he is very sane and bright mind trying hard not to fantasize and bring as much truth as possible.
Is Venki on X (Twitter)?
❤ Uranus
Toward the end of the interview on his contention that old people will keep all the jobs, Venki commits the "lump of labor" fallacy. I'm surprised a Nobel winner in chemistry/biology would lack such basic understanding in economics. Regarding inequality, it's a bit silly to fixate on the extremes of the top 10% vs. the bottom 10%. There are huge confounding factors for the bottom 10% which include terrible lifestyle choices, such as substance abuse. Looking at modern medicine today, the average person in many countries has access to interventions such as cancer treatments, joint replacements, pacemakers, cataract surgery, organ transplants, statins, antihypertensives, vaccines, etc. The companies targeting the biology of aging aim to go through clinical trials, regulatory approval, and broad commercialization too.
Love you
I’m 150 years old; or does it just feel that way?😂
Live like there is no tomorrow and there won’t be.😂
tells us nothing needed to do as fact
Will you be mentioning carnosine, beta-alanine, alpha-ketoglutarate, Henrietta Lacks, the Hayflick limit, and mitochondrial dysfunction?
Do you think it is possible to create an artificial cell that enhances our current cellular system-perhaps a robotic-type cell that performs certain anti-aging functions?
Lastly, regarding the preservation of bodies: it seems to me that encasing a sample of your DNA in amber would be much easier. This method could preserve your DNA similarly to how insects are often found in amber, some of which are millions of years old. Your DNA would be preserved for ages!
Even in amber, dna breaks down very quickly
What's ur field of expertise.?