Biological Immortality

My current life goal is to work for, and at least help achieve, Biological Immortality. Whether this be by internal mechanisms implanted to repair internal bodily functions, or by every few years swapping out parts and refurbishing that which can not be swapped, I am concerned, that with people only dying due to excessive injury or illness, that there will be obvious population control issues. My favorite solution is to have anyone who opts to become Biologically Immortal is also sterilized by the procedure. What solutions and/or objections to Biological Immortality do you have?

Note - I am assuming that the treatment(s) will be available for anyone and not just the excessively wealthy.

I don't wanna live for too long, I'll get tired of this shit eventually.
But on topic, changing body organs to some kind of mechanical device would be a good idea, but immortality cannot be achieved unless you find a way for our conscious to be alive while our brain is replaced with a mechanical device, but that means we will live like a robot. No, we're technically a robot already if that actually happens.

No, it's Biological Immortality. All it means is that aging is removed from the equation. You could still be shot and killed or die of disease. Read this for a better explanation.

So, you're saying that one wouldn't die from deterioration. Then, why not slow down the growth of our cells?

I'm still a student, so I admit I don't understand all the methods that could be implemented, but I don't think it's as simple as slowing down the growth of cells. Cellular replication is what keeps us from deteriorating where we stand, and the issue there is that as cells replicate the Telomeres (protective "caps" which protects chromosomes from deterioration) gradually get shorter and shorter. This is believed to play a key role in aging because after the Telomere is worn down after years of replication damages to the chromosomes become more and more frequent until the cell no longer replicates properly. Many cancers often employ some method of maintaining Telomeres, which allows the cell to replicate uncontrollably while minimizing damages to the cell itself.

Physically slowing down the cell, however, is really no different from placing a Human in a hibernative state, which merely slows down aging. And what good does it do if the body and mind are slowed while the rest of the world continues on?

Hmmm, I would agree with you on the fact that achieving immortality would be an extraoridnary feat for the human race.

But then imagine the consequences: we would have on our hands an ever aging population, with limited space to house it, feed it and care for it.

It would mean the end of population growth, people who would like children would be castaways or severly punished, because it would become impossible to cope with.

Though there would be a probability that with the achievement of biological immortality, the human race would have an epiphany, stop all wars, unite under a common government, haul over a whole new kind of constitution, laws and regulations, all justified and rightfull, and that their united strenght would permit them to surpass the technological barriers that stop this from being viable, this scenario is simply improbable.

The most likely thing to happen in my opinion is that fighting will intensify all over the world to secure ressources for the now "immortal" countries. Which will lead to a rapid death of many countries, as no population growth can keep up with all out wars.

But it is an admirable objective, and on the topic, they found a supposedly immotal being under the form of a jellyfish down at the bottom of Marianne's Trench not to long ago.

Personnally, I think that virtualization of the consciousness would be an even greater feat, and one that could, just like bio immortality, lead us to being unkillable. Well, that is if we perfect cloning to a point where we can make a clone in less than a week or a month. Which is quite another subject.

The concept of biological immortality is truly frightening. Our world is already dreadfully overpopulated, and if people stop dying it will become even more so. Regardless of your idea about sterilization, having children is a biological imperative, and even if the immortal ones are sterile the rest of the world's population will continue to grow. Furthermore, where will the food, to feed all those extra mouths, come from.

Also, your vision that such a process would be available to every person, regardless of economic standing, is impossible given the profit driven medical industry. Cures are no longer being developed, not because the technology is lacking, but because of the greed of both the doctors and the pharmaceutical industry. If there is no profit in finding a cure, then there is even less reason to promote research into immortality.

On a more personal note, I find the idea of living forever rather distasteful. Unless you can increase the quality of life, as well as the lifespan, what happens to a human's drive to achieve something great. With unlimited time to do something, most people will become lazy and unproductive. It is the fear of death that drives us to accomplish things, and try to make a our short lives worthwhile.

Immortality , a concept driven by fear ... the fear of dying . Instead of researshing it , why not study philosophy and try to accept life how it is ? After all , the only reason why life is so precious is because we are mortal , take that away and you take away everything that make life so great .

We're already kinda going on that way with transplants, cures for most diseases and stem cells researches, but even if we were able to switch your entire body for a new, shiny one right now, your brain would still be dying, so unless you can find a way to stop it from dying or to make it recover lost cells, you'd still end dying or being with serious problems in your brain sooner or later.

If this was achieved, I don't think being sterilized by force/in trade of it would be a good idea. As long as people have some good sense (and they will have a lot more by the time they are old than when young), they won't be wanting a lot of kids. One of my favorite games had a race that lives a lot say something about humans which I sort of agree: Their lifes are so short, that they don't bother thinking about the long term result of their actions, because they won't see it anyways. I kind of agree with that, if people got biological immortality, they would grow very old and be much more knowledgeable and experienced as the time went by, and less bond to make stupid mistakes, they would think more about their future, and that includes having kids. They would think better about it and the weight of that decision, and perhaps want to get sterilized by choice, or only have one or two kids.

The only "bad" thing I can see happening with it is people getting bored after some time and wanting to end their lives. And I put bad in quote marks because it was their choice to live longer, their choice to end it, so its not necessarily a bad thing.



I'm sorry, but where did you get that idea from? Does the increase in curable diseases over the decades say anything to you? Or all the tests and experiments being made out there? You're also disconsidering those who contribute or research by pure interest and not by money interest. And even if they were only driven by money, if they find the cure of something, then they can sell it and profit.



My view on it is different than that: Life is precious because I only have one, not because I will lose it. And I want to enjoy everything I can out of it. By achieving immortality that would just give more time to enjoy it, but I would still have just one.

Lets say you got a cake, and there is only one of it, you can't have another. It would be good to enjoy it as much as possible, because you only have one, not because it will end after you eat it. And if you can get a bigger cake, then better! More to enjoy.

From my personal understanding of Humanity, the sudden loss of death via old age, organ failure, degeneration, whatever natural causes of death, will cause an immediate trend where people will disregard most rules regarding health and put everything off for "later". Why limit your alcohol intake when you can go get a new kidney and liver? But I foresee that after a generation people will become better people. If everyone above the age of 18 finds themselves in their prime then they will find themselves prime candidates for draft soldiers during times of war, and if the survivors never die of old age then I believe that they would strongly oppose war. Many mistakes may loose some of their consequences, but that's no reason not to learn from them. The issue with age today is that the years of acquired knowledge and wisdom loose to the younger generations fluid intelligence, physically able and more attractive bodies to those of the same fertile age group. Once you remove that you gain a significantly larger pool from which to take knowledgeable and experienced leaders. It is the combined effects of declining physical condition and loss of fluid intelligence that lead to the next generation taking over while the experienced are disposed of because they can no longer perform.

I'm not opposed to the idea, but I think this should be a private operation instead.

Why limit alcohol intake? Because you need the money to afford one, and you still have to go through with the surgeries!

Forcing sterilization on a population is not really a good thing because it only leads to a net-loss in population.

Contrary to the UN, I actually believe we have a HUGE earth capable of handling billions of more people. The real issue is concentration of population, as we continuously concentrate humans into small areas of the country, such as cities.

Food, resources, and such are not issues, especially as we advance more and more in science. The real issue are those who shut down the coal industry for example, and monopolize energy, or other products to give the illusion of losing resources.

MMmmm , in that statement i was speaking abouth real immortality , you're then passign from one cake to an infinite amount of cakes ...

But even though , biological immortality wouldn't be that great as you think , you would still have the same size cake , you would just eat it slower . What i mean is that 80-100 years is more than enough for humans to do everything they want in life or at least to be happy with what they had time to do . I think that the fact that you're here right now , is a proof of that , you're wasting time right now on internet because you have too much of it .

Do you often hear old people say ; (to be read in a really old voice) "i wish i had more time , there's so much i would like to do ..." . Nan , not really , old people usualy accept death with ease . We are young , we don't understand yet , 20-30-40 years have past ? Time passed so fast , we think that what is left is short , but maybe you should judge the relativity of time once you're there ...

Biological immortality???

Would be great .... in sci-fi movies.

I don't really think immortality is the best idea nor shall it ever exist on this planet .... it would cause a great deal of conflict and would probably be the main cause of war if this subject truly became the real thing and gets word on the public.

Just think ... almost everybody is afraid to die, everybody wants a few more years so they can have fun and do whatever they can to die happy ... or live long enough to forget their past and start anew and die with a smile on their face.

Being afraid to die is normal, one thinks they cease to exist .. however personally .. the thought of living over a 1000 years ( example ) is truly frightening because new generations keep popping up and all your loved ones pass away, which in time people with the capability of being biologically immortal would become lonely and they commit suicide just like that .... they can't handle that kind of psychological pressure and I can understand that.


Thank God I believe in the immortal life after death.

1 - Explain what you mean by private operation

2 - In terms of concentration of the population, I believe that further concentrating the Human population could assist with current issues regarding food distribution. As we currently stand we have more than enough food to feed everyone on the planet, its just that in wealthy countries like America food is dumped down sinks and left to rot on store shelves. I personally wish to employ the vertical farm concept into every major city to allow for more food to be relocated to areas of need, lowering transport costs of food from production areas to areas of consumption.

3 - I like the option of sterilization because it prevents those who live forever from creating children who go on to have more children who live forever an so on. I see no reason as to why artificial impregnation or some other method wouldn't be an option. But if not sterilization, then how would you prevent the easily foreseeable exponential explosion of the human population?

4 - As for resource consumption, my favorite reference to quote from is my personal copy of Limits To Growth: the 30 Year Update. So I won't waste time talking about it other then stating that I believe we, as a global society, have already passed the limit of sustainability.

Personally i would love to have a chance at immortality. Death scares me man.

But if such a process became possible, i think we would need to seriously look into somehow terraforming on other plants, especially if people who go through the immortality process(whatever hat is) can still have children.

We as human beings are the same as everything else on this universe ... we reproduce and it is natural that we do it, regardless if we are immortal or not, there comes a time when it is time to find a suited partner for the sole purpose of reproduction ... sure we humans can select our partner based on love and such .. however the desire to reproduce is still there .... so by forcing sterilization onto people who become biologically enhanced meaning they cannot reproduce because the DNA structure of the " Immortal " parent would pass on to the next generation causing a huge mess under the population category?

So you mean the ones who live a short life would have the right to reproduce BECAUSE they would die later on and the biologically immortal ones would not?

That would also cause a great conflict between the immortals and the people who wish to hinder their reproductive ability.

This biological immortal thing would cause nothing more than complications and dangerous conflicts between the people ..... however I don't disagree with Lishy1 about this being a private operation.

Imagine this operation being a success ... something like this would never get out in the public and would be EXTREMELY expensive only to the selected few who have connections to certain powers with certain wealth. ( *cough* World leaders and private wealthy corporation owners )

I saw something similar like this ... like a woman who hasn't aged physically but is still mature in her brain ... looks like a 12 year old I believe but is 23 or 24 ... and they are currently taking some samples of her and testing it out to see of her DNA structure is the key to longevity.

Humans are amazing creatures, and I'm tired of people telling us we're trash because of some stupid propaganda about the polar bears!

If we achieve immortality, so be it. But with eugenics and DNA modification, we abolish the individuality.

One of the worst things any human can do is hate and despise their own race.

For terraforming I think Venus would be best. Seed the atmosphere with microbes designed to consume carbon dioxide and output oxygen, a few ice based comets/asteroids to introduce more water into the atmosphere and you have a nice tropical planet ready for construction.

Mars poses a bit of an issue because it's a dead planet. If we could jump-start the planetary dynamo and get the magnetosphere running then I would feel pretty good about mars as a second option.

What abouth the heat on venus ?

What propaganda are you talking about?