The possibility to live forever, a reality

Sorry for the late response, read both articles and thank you for the links. It would appear it does, based on what I read and what I understand, They did have reason to do so, based on this being brought up, Then I would agree with the article for now, unless anything else comes up to cause me to look at it again. The last article did bring up some valid points to its merit. Along with being a decent read will admit the first took me a good bit. Also I have to agree pubmed is good, although I do not use it much as I should apparently. What are your thoughts on the research though Dr.Mario yourself?

Ok since you guys are going into the details of it, What are the chances of longer lifespans with the use of nanites (experimental I know but lets say there is a breakthrough in tech). Would there be any drawbacks to the dependancy on machines the size of a cell or smaller trying to fix, and maintain cell structure so it doesn't age (I am putting it as simple as I can since I am not into the whole medical terms thing). As for retaining a specific time or lack of aging, the clone tech even though was asked to stop with the goat? sheep? If lets say blood cells can be cloned, but are cells from lets say when you were 30 and your current body is 82, you can use the cloning dna data to produce the same cells as back then. Would it be plausible by what you guys currently understand for medicine to not grow younger (redundant), but to make the body younger through such a way.

In terms of nanotech, there's no real speculation outside science fiction for usages in terms of maintaining cell structure to stop aging. The most I've really heard about it is in terms of drug delivery like for chemo. But it's really hard to say because not only is the technology still being developed in various areas, but we don't even really understand aging specifically. So it's like having a few random jumbled pieces of a puzzle that you don't have a finished image for. It's hard to speculate. I know that there's been experiments that have concluded that there are components in young blood that can re-activate stem cells in older tissues. But not all the proteins have been verified for all the various organs/tissues and there's a danger in re-activating stem cells because you don't want them to multiply uncontrollably. I feel like for many of the people working in this field, the idea of reversing the clock completely is a bit of a lofty goal. I think, based on the current research that I've seen, it's more targeted at reversing conditions that come with age, alzheimer, arthritis, and whatnot.

@ xueli I know that nanotech in its "current" tech stage would be seen as nothing more than science fiction on the aging area. I was talking regarding the possibility that the tech can reach to that point. Just like how some physics theories can not be proven until the technology catches up to the necessities to prove it right or wrong. If you think that dependancy on machines (nanites) for continuation of life would create any drawbacks that you could speculate on. (Its based on personal opinions so it does not have to be 100% accurate). as for the stem cell area, you are quite correct about the reversing conditions that come with age. But also it works with fighting against diabetes. Only one person I know as a patient (test subject?) took part in this, and most of her physical pains have lessened and has less blood pressure problems. So I am ok with stem cell research. Also I didn't know about reactivating stem cells could provoke an uncontrollable multiplication of cells. Did this ever happen during research? or is it just a possibility?

@Boundbyluck I just mean that since we don't even know what exactly causes aging, it's hard to think of a method of action that could stop it. It's not really about the state of the tech or even the future state of the tech, but more about what we know about aging. There's just so many theories that are honestly probably working in tandem with each other that I wouldn't even know how to frame the question ya know? hahaha In terms of depending on nanotech to extend life, it kinda ties into the above. But I would think that there'd be drawbacks. The human body is very dependent on balance. Like with stem cells, too little and we wouldn't be able to replenish tissues, but too much and cells can just start growing all over the place and you got cancer. It's not something that I know of happening during research, but it's something that I'd expect would happen to a percentage of the subjects. I mean, stem cells are undifferented cells so they can become all different kinds of cells and science isn't always as exact as we'd like to think it is :p

@Yu My thoughts on the research in general? It's hard to say anything about isolated research on one topic, especially since it's not one of my strongest areas. "the first took me a good bit" - honestly, I rarely read entire articles anymore. I used to, but the more articles I look at the easier it is to get what I need out of them without staring at them for an hour or more. There are a few important points I use. First, is the article reliable. Second, what is the main point of the article. Third, what is the conclusion and why is this the conclusion. I usually only read the whole article if I'm presenting it. That's when you have to know the details. It's also a good idea to read the whole thing for a school assignment. Oh, and also review articles because they often include a lot of relevant information. @boundbyluck It is really hard to speculate on nanotech. Maybe if we find a biomedical engineer with a Phd in Nanotechnology we could get some kind of actual answer on that. One thing that hasn't been mentioned yet is the use of viruses in both genetics and cancer treatment. This method will probably be useful (and actually already is useful), prior to nanotech. I can even imagine a scenario where this would be used in an attempt to combat aging.

I don't really know much about science in depth,but if you want to live forever or like the idea,donate your body and freeze it i think it takes a fee but that is a choice.

@Dr Mario, Yes indeed, I can agree with that method of reading articles in itself its quite effective, but for me its just a a habit to read each article fully as long as I don't detect any satire or any of the other common things that would push me away from said article. @Sogrump I wont cover to much into this unless needed but will simplify it, that method so far is quite risky along with the odds being stacked against it, if that is you go by the normal method that is used. The regular process is pretty much freezing you quite literally, and then in the near future hopefully their will be technology to revive you, the problem arises with the one major issue in this process though, You see ice crystals will start emerging if a person is cooled at a certain temperature, and this will cause major damage to cells and pretty much your whole body. Trying to thaw the person after that would not turn out well since moreover you would have dead tissue left over, not to say that we might just come across some form of solution for that but its a big jump, As for the other methods they may not have as obvious problems but it should be noted to look at their methods with a questioning nature, the one that the company alcor uses which is a major holder in the industry is instead of just freezing they use a method of vitrification by replacing 60% water of cells with chemicals meant to aid in preserving. Then cooling you to a point that all chemical reactions stop throughout the body, They do present evidence of single organs being revived through this process at least animal wise a rabbit to be specific, however this is neither a whole body nor a human body at that. All in all we may just be able to bring somebody back in the near future in cryonics but its definitely not something to put all your hope in by any scope its quite the jump since there are quite a few hurdles to go by as noted by a good number of scientist in said matter, which I can agree with based on the issues being brought up. Needless to say some of the skepticism does not bear any substantial findings but a good portion does. Would suggest you check some documentation on some of the previous results on cryonics as well, if you you are more curious, that is. http://www.alcor.org/Library/html/WillCryonicsWork.html Major company of cryonics

@Yu again i'm not that depth in science but i've heard of some interesting things call nanotech,wouldn't that help keep you in a alive state while frozen? i got my information from here,but it is the internet. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzJQ8OtSFk4