[CanadianMaestro]

Years ago I used to do photography work for the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center.

They seemed to always have these gene study plate photographs they wanted me to copy. Being that each cell in the human body has anywhere between 25K and 35K genes, there is a lot to study. If anything it seems we will learn about all kinds of stuff before there is a cure for cancer.

I would guess that the more high profile the findings these research centers publicize, the more money they generate their way? It seems we are learning more about ourselves than just a cure for cancer.

Maybe audio ends up as a way for us to learn about ourselves. As in many hobbies, it ends up an interesting way to experience life.

Absolutely. Basic science has seemingly endless branches.
As for funding, the pot of money seems to shrink while the pool of scientists/trainees is always growing. It's the tragedy of the 21st century.

 

[Hutnicks]

 
Absolutely. Basic science has seemingly endless branches.
As for funding, the pot of money seems to shrink while the pool of scientists/trainees is always growing. It's the tragedy of the 21st century.

Sad times indeed when heroic accolades are bestowed upon the "genius" whose product concepts infused his company with enough spare cash to buy Poland outright. Only to have his end brought on by that very disease whose researchers are fiscally starved.
 
 In short as a species we spoke loud and clear. "Better a short life and horrible end with an iPhone, than a long one without"

 

[CanadianMaestro]

A long life with AD, arthritis, loss of hearing/eyesight, and atherosclerosis ain't something to look forward to, either. 

 

[Hutnicks]

  A long life with AD, arthritis, loss of hearing/eyesight, and atherosclerosis ain't something to look forward to, either. 

I am not sure if it was a TED talk or a paper, however some years ago several biologists and research doctors  spoke on the topic of longevity and postulated that in fact, in it's current form the human organism should have a lifespan of 120 years. The issue became one of the technology outstripping the pace of the biology where by our ability to poison ourselves is exponentially larger than our ability to evolve and or create countermeasures for the toxins we create.

 

[Redcarmoose]

Absolutely. Basic science has seemingly endless branches.
As for funding, the pot of money seems to shrink while the pool of scientists/trainees is always growing. It's the tragedy of the 21st century.

I have a family member who became a Dr. She started work in 2012 in research but has now switched to a crime lab. We don't live near each other but I'm looking forward to talking with her about such a change of post Ph.D. employment.

Every age has it's technology in the Industrial Age you had physicists like Max Planck. One of his questions besides Quantum Theory was why metals don't glow with a color that coincides with the actual tempeture. That would have been easy right? Measure the color glow and know the temperature. He finally answered the question, as to why they were not parallel.





https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wien%27s_displacement_law
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck%27s_law

In our current age, metal technology has seemed to fade only to be replaced with electronic social technology. In the video below we not only see a company who say they have 3D cell phone display technology, but another company who have now seemed to invent a computer which has voice recognition and is the modern version of HAL 9000 from Stanley Kubricks 2001 A Space Odyssey!

This is the age we live in.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bhPCvwHnk_Q

 

[Redcarmoose]

I am not sure if it was a TED talk or a paper, however some years ago several biologists and research doctors  spoke on the topic of longevity and postulated that in fact, in it's current form the human organism should have a lifespan of 120 years. The issue became one of the technology outstripping the pace of the biology where by our ability to poison ourselves is exponentially larger than our ability to evolve and or create countermeasures for the toxins we create.

[VIDEO]. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HvH-W8MPahw [/VIDEO]



This woman is 103 years old. She is interviewed by a team of doctors but fails to remember her husband's name or her own date of birth. Still when asked if she remembers a song, she breaks out singing the songs in a half second.

Music may be the key to life?

 

[CanadianMaestro]

 
I am not sure if it was a TED talk or a paper, however some years ago several biologists and research doctors  spoke on the topic of longevity and postulated that in fact, in it's current form the human organism should have a lifespan of 120 years. The issue became one of the technology outstripping the pace of the biology where by our ability to poison ourselves is exponentially larger than our ability to evolve and or create countermeasures for the toxins we create.

"Quality of Life" is critical. At 80+ yrs of age, there is a steep decline in QoL with current meds and pharms.
 

I have a family member who became a Dr. She started work in 2012 in research but has now switched to a crime lab. We don't live near each other but I'm looking forward to talking with her about such a change of post Ph.D. employment.

Every age has it's technology in the Industrial Age you had physicists like Max Planck. One of his questions besides Quantum Theory was why metals don't glow with a color that coincides with the actual tempeture. That would have been easy right? Measure the color glow and know the temperature. He finally answered the question, as to why they were not parallel.





https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wien%27s_displacement_law
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck%27s_law

In our current age, metal technology has seemed to fade only to be replaced with electronic social technology. In the video below we not only see a company who say they have 3D cell phone display technology, but another company who have now seemed to invent a computer which has voice recognition and is the modern version of HAL 9000 from Stanley Kubricks 2001 A Space Odyssey!

This is the age we live in.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bhPCvwHnk_Q

There is presently a glut of postdoctoral research positions, all of which are temp (not tenure-tracked). In contrast, the dwindling number of tenure-track faculty jobs continues at a fraction of the postdoc temp slots. It's bad in biology, worse in physics and math.
 
Funny, my fav sci-fi film is Terminator -- where machines have "evolved" to the point where they become prescient like humans. Can it happen? You betcha. But not in my lifetime. (Aldous Huxley was derided when he published Brave New World in 1932 -- test tube babies, hypnopedia (behav conditioning during sleep), genetic engineering, uninhibited sex, etc -- all of which are now realities).
 

This woman is 103 years old. She is interviewed by a team of doctors but fails to remember her husband's name or her own date of birth. Still when asked if she remembers a song, she breaks out singing the songs in a half second.

Music may be the key to life?

 Old, childhood memories are stored in neocortical areas whereas more recent, newer mems temporarily depend on the medial temporal lobe system (hippocampus mainly) for processing and retrieval. The older mems are more stable because neocortical areas are less susceptible to age-related degeneration such as occurs in the medial temporal lobes.
 
Read Oliver Sacks' Musicophilia. Fascinating cases of music recall and abnormalities.

 

[Sonic Defender]

  A long life with AD, arthritis, loss of hearing/eyesight, and atherosclerosis ain't something to look forward to, either. 

Yep, living longer, but sicker is what we have achieved. The real feat would be living longer, and living well/healthier and that isn't the case for most of us in industrialized western nations. I like to say that in Canada we don't have health care, we have sick care. We aren't meant to live that long, it causes over-population. We need to stop obsessing over long life at any cost (in my opinion). I think living to 84 for instance, but in general good health would work for me as opposed to 92, but sickly.

 

[Redcarmoose]

Yep, living longer, but sicker is what we have achieved. The real feat would be living longer, and living well/healthier and that isn't the case for most of us in industrialized western nations. I like to say that in Canada we don't have health care, we have sick care. We aren't meant to live that long, it causes over-population. We need to stop obsessing over long life at any cost (in my opinion). I think living to 84 for instance, but in general good health would work for me as opposed to 92, but sickly.

I live in a town very related to health. It has evolved in the last 10 years to be one of the main Yoga centers of the world. There is also a plethora of health services which currently have an alternative bend, in full contrast to our regular AMA style treatments. Still with all this you would think there would be more athletic oldies running around? What I see is hordes of over weight 50 years olds in tight yoga pants. I maybe see one or two athletic 60 year olds a year. So as far as keeping in shape, we have science and diet understanding which would seem in contrast to much of histories medical understanding. As far as the keys to life prolonging tricks, we have bags of it. In the end it's a business, a new knee here, a new hip there, 20 years of cholesterol lowering agents there.

In the end their may be more seniors with a better quality of life, remember in the 70s and 80s there was no knee replacement technology, but still I don't see health and diet understanding to show completely among seniors.

In the past people just died of old age they thought. Now our technology allows us to pinpoint a cause years in advance at times. Preventive medicines abound, still I don't see a lot of correct weight seniors walking around.

Though I do see one guy who looks to be about 75. He wears skin tight by cycle shorts, jogging shoes and running shirts. He has a smerk on this face like he has cheated death. I see him jogging on rough roads around cars and basicly view him as a hero amung humans. His single stance just shows what can be done with age, activity and a correct diet. Of course if I talked with him he may have a list of surgery stories like oldies have, or maybe no stories at all. He may have stayed as far away from Dr.s as he could?




Still if you have interviewed super old folks it makes you wonder if you would really want to live to 120. My Wife's Grandmother lived to be over one hundred and my Great Grandmother lived to be over one hundred. In the US if you live to 100 you get a letter from the President! Lol

Still talking to my Wife's Grandmother she told me stories of the 1930s and about progress. In the end though sounded like a woman out of time. She had lost her husband and all here friends. She actually questioned why she was allowed to live so long. Though her quality of life was "OK", it may have been better? With a perfect quality of life at 103, things may look bright?

 

[CanadianMaestro]

^ A big part of the missing puzzle to longer healthy lifespans here in the West is education, about diet. There are too many quacks pushing dubious pills for fat loss, etc. And at schools, pop machines are killing our kids, along with the two-parent income households, where fast meals and fast foods seem to be front and centre. Look at Japan, at least in rural Japan, where diets are simpler and leaner. Long lifers there, and they seem healthy.
 
Genetic testing to screen for "risks" of diseases is a double-edged sword, I think. For fatal conditions like Huntington's I certainly would NOT want to know my fate in advance. I will know it soon enough as symptoms appear...
 
Centenarians in Canada get a letter from the Queen. She turns 90 this month, I think. Woot.

 

[Hutnicks]

  ^ A big part of the missing puzzle to longer healthy lifespans here in the West is education, about diet. There are too many quacks pushing dubious pills for fat loss, etc. And at schools, pop machines are killing our kids, along with the two-parent income households, where fast meals and fast foods seem to be front and centre. Look at Japan, at least in rural Japan, where diets are simpler and leaner. Long lifers there, and they seem healthy.
 
Genetic testing to screen for "risks" of diseases is a double-edged sword, I think. For fatal conditions like Huntington's I certainly would NOT want to know my fate in advance. I will know it soon enough as symptoms appear...
 
Centenarians in Canada get a letter from the Queen. She turns 90 this month, I think. Woot.

As you work in neuroscience, do you have any insight into the phenomenon of having the fact that you are at risk for the disease known to you increases the chance of it becoming reality?

 

[CanadianMaestro]

 
As you work in neuroscience, do you have any insight into the phenomenon of having the fact that you are at risk for the disease known to you increases the chance of it becoming reality?

I think genetic testing is pretty reliable. If you knew that you have a higher chance of contracting HD or some other genetically-rooted, incurable brain disease, that should not alter the inevitability/accelerate the progression of the disease. Unless you then implement drastic lifestyle changes (e.g. smoking, etc.) that exacerbate the pathogenesis. There is no "placebo" effect with genetic diagnosis, as far as I know. I think that's the essence of your question.
 
With other testing, like prostate cancer, which is not 100% reliable, then it's another scenario altogether. In those cases, highly recommend more frequent testing from an experienced urologist/urol surgeon.

 

[Redcarmoose]

I have a rare genetic condition that effects 1/1000 and didn't really need to do the gene profile but did it anyway just to make sure 100%. Once tested I had this feeling it may be personal information good in the hands of your actuary? Just a guess, especially I would figure a medical insurance company would do something with the information being they obtained it in the first place. Of course your medical records are suppose to be private information? I just remember my Dr. being somehow very concerned about me getting the test, but I could not figure out why? Basicly we have always had ways of being very sure about some specific health issues, but as I understand it the genetic profile gets many things placed in a very cut and dry definite way?

Also I'm pretty sure the profile could be used in a crime database? Not worried about any crimes lol. Still I think that's another warning Drs give about getting the test done?

But I didn't ask any other questions about the profile when completed. The information is powerful stuff and it seems to hold our health future forcast more and more. Who knows what farther advances they will be able to learn from a persons genetic profile. I'm also guessing that if a person was so inclined they could go to a gene specialist and have a complete rundown of all that the medical science could pull out of your profile. But yes, it is a double edge sword as maybe for many things you would just want to live your life and find out in time. The response here about learning to create a lifestyle around the genre profile could be the key to preventative health gains, I would think. I guess you could also just have your Dr. give you a partial future prognosis and ask about what things to look out for?

 

[Hutnicks]

 
I think genetic testing is pretty reliable. If you knew that you have a higher chance of contracting HD or some other genetically-rooted, incurable brain disease, that should not alter the inevitability/accelerate the progression of the disease. Unless you then implement drastic lifestyle changes (e.g. smoking, etc.) that exacerbate the pathogenesis. There is no "placebo" effect with genetic diagnosis, as far as I know. I think that's the essence of your question.
 
With other testing, like prostate cancer, which is not 100% reliable, then it's another scenario altogether. In those cases, highly recommend more frequent testing from an experienced urologist/urol surgeon.

Yes. That covers it.
Urologist. Good luck with that . I requested that from my GP and wound up in the office of the most arrogant general surgeon I have ever encountered. Canadian health care at its best. You are either in the trade or "little people" who have no clue what they are talking about. Another story altogether
 
What I am finding interesting is that the human genome folk are now entertaining more and more the concept that at least some factors of DNA are malleable and can change throughout the lifespan of the organism. Perhaps the future lies not within the cure for the disease but a combination of testing for genetic preponderance and response via mild gene therapy to avoid the particular diseases. Our grandchildren may very well grow into a world vastly different to what we consider the norm in it's approaches to health care.

 

[Sonic Defender]

   
 
What I am finding interesting is that the human genome folk are now entertaining more and more the concept that at least some factors of DNA are malleable and can change throughout the lifespan of the organism. Perhaps the future lies not within the cure for the disease but a combination of testing for genetic preponderance and response via mild gene therapy to avoid the particular diseases. Our grandchildren may very well grow into a world vastly different to what we consider the norm in it's approaches to health care.

You mean epigenetics? It is essentially a fact. We know almost nothing about how genetics really work despite the Human Genome Project. In fact, that has humbled us in that we thought it would reveal secrets to manipulation and we now know that the levels of genetic complexity are immense. We are a long way from personalized genetic medicine. At best we can say we think this genetic marker(s) is associated with this condition, but with the realization of epigenetic factors the game changed.