Re:Ask HN: What should we fund at YC Research?
by reasonattlm on Saturday January 30, 2016 @09:11AM
(#11001845)
These are all arguments that apply to the house you live in, the blankets on your bed, the medicine you use. You are absolutely fine with all of those - you don't live in a cave, shun treatment for infectious disease, and wear furs. In fact I would go so far as to say that you probably think that modern technology is a good thing, and you are better off for it. Yet that already greatly manipulates your proposed optimal condition for the human species. So why does treating aging as a medical condition bring out this view? This seems like a very selective appeal to nature.
Re:Ask HN: What should we fund at YC Research?
by jashephe on Saturday January 30, 2016 @02:04PM
(#11003207)
It may not have been expressed the most clearly, but the intention was not quite as you describe. Shelter, clothing, and modern medicine all confer enhanced fitness — I was attempting to suggest that increased lifespan does not.
More importantly, "near-infinite" lifespans reduce the efficacy of natural selection — longer-living organisms evolve at a slower rate. While, perhaps, unappealing, the culling of species members well past reproductive age is necessary to allow for more resources and potential for competition and selection in their offspring. And humans are certainly still undergoing natural selection in many arenas; just look at sickle cell trait [5] or or CCR5-Δ32 [6].
Death is a feature, not a bug.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_history_theory
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R/K_selection_theory
[3] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8608934
[4] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25601460
[5] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11965279
[6] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8791590