UP THERE, EVERYWHERE’s Post

🔬 Science is fundamentally a belief system grounded in the consensus that reproducible experiments lead to reliable conclusions. 💡 As new data emerges, we may need to refine or adjust these conclusions to ensure they remain accurate. The quality of the data we gather from research significantly impacts the conclusions we draw and the actions we take moving forward. 🏅 Recently, Ig Nobel Prize winner Saul Justin Newman has demonstrated this through his extensive work in debunking flawed data. His insights emphasize the importance of scrutinizing the evidence we base our beliefs on. I’m eager to see how we will adapt our understanding of phenomena like the Blue Zones in light of this new perspective. For more on Newman's work and its implications, check out this article: https://lnkd.in/e9YTxzaD. #Science #DataQuality #Innovation #Research

📚 Scientists, including Paul Verschure, hypothesize in Frontiers in science that inflammatory stress is spreading among people at unprecedented rates and affecting our cognitive ability to address climate change, war, and other critical issues. Preliminary results highlight the need for interventions at multiple levels and scales, like lifestyle changes and reducing exposure to stressful online content. At the societal level, the authors suggest creating calm public spaces and providing education on the norms and institutions that keep our societies stable and functioning. 👉 https://lnkd.in/eGwpUnaF #stress #science #lifestyle

In “Why We Die,” biologist and Nobel laureate Venki Ramakrishnan explores the science of aging and life extension. The field is flush with hope and hype. Can scientists unlock the keys to a longer life?  🔽 Read the full book review.

In “Why We Die,” biologist and Nobel laureate Venki Ramakrishnan explores the science of aging and life extension. The field is flush with hope and hype. Can scientists unlock the keys to a longer life?  🔽 Read the full book review.

What do kiwi policy professionals have in common with the Kardashians? It turns out that keeping up with the Dunedin study (see what we did there?) is important for both! This article from The Spinoff caught our eye - and gave us a bit of a laugh. Since it began more than half a century ago, the University of Otago's Dunedin study has been a treasure trove of longitudinal data, shedding light on people's lives over time, including the impacts of policies. With participants now in their fifties, the Dunedin study has developed something called a 'pace of aging' score looking at body deterioration over time. In the season five series finale, the Kardashians take a test based on Dunedin study science to reveal their biological ages. Credit to the decades of commitment by Dunedin study researchers and participants. We like how Professor Moana Theodore, the study's director, put it: “What makes this so special is that it is really about the everyday New Zealanders who have given half a century to this scientific research project. It’s through their goodwill and their contributions that we’re able to do this incredible science.” But what about the most important policy issue of our time, the Kardashians' biological ages? You'll need to read the article to find out! https://lnkd.in/gPbs9uU9

Talk about setting the cat among the pigeons! This paper caused quite a stir by claiming once again that we are fast approaching the upper limit to human longevity, that there is unlikely to be radical life extension this century, and that few born after 2010 will reach the century mark. Although it is correct to say that there is only so much which can be achieved through lifestyle optimization (healthy eating, exercise, sleep, stress reduction etc), the authors spend too much time looking at recent demographic trends and next to no time at the possibility of future advances in medicine. This paper should be treated a historical record than as a prognostication. However, in an about turn, the authors then end on a positive note much closer to my thinking: "Given rapid advances now occurring in geroscience, there is reason to be optimistic that a second longevity revolution is approaching in the form of modern efforts to slow biological aging, offering humanity a second chance at altering the course of human survival." Implausibility of radical life extension in humans in the twenty-first century https://lnkd.in/efNHyy2K Life expectancy rise in rich countries slows down: why discovery took 30 years to prove https://lnkd.in/esx8TS4m

Commentary: Science is closing in on the frailties of old age https://lnkd.in/gh7SmwjK

🔍 The uncertainty of death has perplexed humanity for centuries, leading to deep philosophical inquiries and scientific investigations. In our latest article, "The Enigma of Death: Can We Really Predict It?" we delve into the fascinating intersection of science, philosophy, and technology that seeks to answer this age-old question. 💭 From ancient beliefs about the afterlife to modern scientific approaches like predictive analytics and artificial intelligence, the ways we approach the concept of death are evolving rapidly. As we explore these perspectives, we also consider ethical implications and how advancements in healthcare are reshaping our understanding of mortality. 📊 Join us as we uncover: - Historical views on death and dying, - The role of technology in predicting health outcomes, - Insights from experts in gerontology and palliative care, - How societal attitudes towards aging and mortality are changing. 🌱 Let's engage in a thought-provoking discussion about what it means to live—and die—in today's world. Explore these profound insights and more by reading our full article here: [30 days free automation](https://lnkd.in/db3i8DQ3) #EnigmaOfDeath #PredictiveAnalytics #HealthcareInnovation #ArtificialIntelligence #PhilosophyOfLife #Mortality #AgingPopulation #EthicsInScience

There's lots to admire in the new book "Why We Die: The New Science of Aging and the Quest for Immortality" by distinguished scientist Venki Ramakrishnan (Nobel prize winner and former President of the Royal Society). But it falls short in some key aspects too. First, the good points. It is clearly written, and easy to follow. It provides an excellent survey of ideas about the science of aging, including lots of recent research. It filled in parts of my understanding which were rusty or incomplete. The science is interspersed with potted biographies of some of the people within the longevity research community. They're entertaining but not always directly relevant. They're also questionable in places (like getting the biblical age of Methuselah wrong by over 100 years). Unfortunately, he fails to properly engage with the damage repair approach of Aubrey de Grey, and uncritically repeats some rather old objections to it. That approach points out that much of the huge complexity of biological metabolism can be side-lined. Ramakrishnan is sure-footed with his explanations of biology and chemistry, but is miles out of his depth in his comments about transhumanism. The description he provides of transhumanism is far too narrow. The reason that's important is because the transhumanist literature contains extensive discussion of topics that he says no-one has thought hard about, namely the broader societal implications of people around the world living longer healthier lives. For example, around one third of my own 2016 book "The Abolition of Aging" addresses these questions, and I'm far from being the only person to have written about these topics at such length. Another person with important insights (and data!) about the implications of longer lives is Andrew Scott, whose book "The Longevity Imperative" appeared just a few days before the one by Ramakrishnan. It contains extensive economic analysis. I'll end with another positive comment. Ramakrishnan points to various problematic aspects of the broader community that is sometimes uncritically over-enthusiastic about biorejuvenation treatments. Alas, that "longevity shadow" (my term) is pushing potential allies away. https://lnkd.in/ezqP9RHq

"You have to tolerate frustration to be able to work in a lab," says Nobel Prize Laureate Drew Weissman, MD, PhD. "But when you do make a finding, even if it’s a little finding, because of all the frustration and all the difficulty getting it, it makes it that much more important. It’s really kind of an inner joy." Dr. Weissman joined The Nobel Prize Conversations podcast to discuss his Prize, how he was captivated by science at an early age, and why scientists need to think about global health. Check out the full interview: http://spr.ly/60445C8fu