Category Archives: Human Longevity

Does strength training deserve a bit more credit for its role in long-term health? Evidence continues to point to the benefits of muscle-building exercise, and a new meta-analysis has concluded that people who do strength-training are less likely to die prematurely than those who dont even when they dont do any aerobic workouts.

Past research has similarly pointed to the long-term health benefits of strength training, but the new analysis, published February 28 in the British Journal of Sports Medicine, considered more recent data, up to June 2021.

The data suggests that 30 minutes to a full hour of weekly strength training was the amount linked with the most benefit in terms of longevity before the advantage plateaued (and with longer amounts of weekly strength training, it did actually start to decrease).

This provides a potential optimal dose of muscle-strengthening activities, says the lead study author,Haruki Momma, PhD, a lecturer in the department of medicine and science in sports and exercise at the Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine in Japan.

Current U.S. exercise guidelines recommend muscle-strengthening workouts twice a week but dont specify how long these workouts should be. Dr. Momma and others say the new data doesnt warrant a time-based recommendation for strength training to update to current physical activity guidelines, but its a step toward doing so.

For the study, Momma and colleagues examined data pooled from 16 earlier studies to get a clearer picture of how muscle-strengthening and aerobic exercise might influence longevity and the risk of death from several common health problems, including heart disease, diabetes, and cancer. Many of these smaller studies followed participants for several decades to see how physical activity influenced their life span. The studies ranged in size from about 3,800 to 478,000 participants ages 18 to 98.

Participants who did any type or amount of muscle-strengthening exercise had a 15 percent lower risk of premature death from all causes, the study found. Weight training was linked to a 10 to 17 percent lower chance of early death from diabetes, cancer, and cardiovascular disease.

But more weight training didnt necessarily lead to the biggest benefit. Researchers found that the most benefit a 10 to 20 percent reduction in the risk of early death from all causes and from cancer and heart disease specifically occurred when people did approximately 30 to 60 minutes of muscle-building workouts per week. After that first hour, there was a slight benefit for roughly one more hour per week. But beyond two hours, more weight training each week was actually associated with an increased chance of dying young.

Unsurprisingly, adding aerobic exercise to weekly strength training yielded the biggest longevity benefit. Compared with being inactive, doing both aerobic exercise and strength training on a weekly basis was associated with 40 percent lower odds of premature death from all causes, the study found. This combination of workouts was also linked to a 46 percent lower risk of death from cardiovascular disease and a 28 percent lower risk of cancer death.

There are some caveats to these findings. The study shows a link between these different types of exercise and mortality, but doesnt prove that one necessarily causes the other. Factors that werent controlled for in the studies could be at play. And, the analysis was based on self-reported exercise habits, rather than workouts objectively measured by fitness trackers or other gadgets, making it possible people misrepresented their physical activity levels.

The results from this new review largely align with other data on the question of how much strength training is linked with long-term health benefits. A study published in 2020 in the journal Preventing Chronic Disease, for example, examined longevity and exercise data for more than 72,000 adults. That study found a 10 to 12 percent lower risk of premature death from all causes with weight training up to two hours per week; no benefit was seen with more time.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Physical Activity Guidelines for Adults recommend muscle-strengthening exercises for all the major muscle groups at least twice per week (which could include lifting weights, using resistance bands, doing exercises like push-ups or sit-ups, or practicing some types of yoga). The guidelines also call for adults to get 150 minutes of moderate-intensity aerobic exercise (like walking or biking) or 75 minutes of vigorous-intensity activity (like running or lap swimming) each week.

The new study adds to the evidence from earlier research suggesting there may be an optimal amount of weight training to do regardless of how much aerobic exercise people get.

But it would be premature to change the guidelines, says I-Min Lee, MD, ScD, a professor of epidemiology at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston who studies exercise and disease prevention.

I think it is too early to have time-based guidelines; we need more research, says Dr. Lee, who wasnt involved in the new analysis. But she adds that two 30-minute strength workouts per week would align with the current guidelines if youre targeting all the major muscle groups in those workouts.

Muscle-strengthening exercises lead to increased muscle mass and muscle strength, which help improve physical functioning, Lee says. Such exercises also improve glucose metabolism, enhance maintenance of healthy body weight, and help improve cardiovascular risk factors such as blood pressure. ... All these factors lead to lower risks of cardiovascular disease, cancer, and diabetes, which lowers mortality risk.

Read the original:
Strength Training Supports Longer Life, Maybe More Than Cardio - Everyday Health

life-style, life, wellness, Lymph & Longevity, the Untapped Secret to Health, Dr Gerald Lemole, lymphatic system

I never cease to be amazed at the rich inner life of the human body. Me too. I'm still freaked out that trillions of microorganisms inhabit my intestines. I'm wondering if I should RSVP for my entire microbiome next time I attend a party. True, but today the gut can step aside. We're talking about another internal system that's revealing itself to be just as crucial to our wellbeing. Sheesh. How many systems can one body hold? It's feeling crowded in here. Prepare to discover the lymphatic system - your "secret river" and star of a new book, Lymph & Longevity, the Untapped Secret to Health, by cardiothoracic surgeon Dr Gerald Lemole. He believes the lymphatic system is as important as your blood circulatory system, and we need to take much better care of it. What does this "secret river" do? It's a network of vessels carrying colourless lymphatic fluid throughout your body, delivering important messages to your brain and organs, and connecting to your lymph nodes, which trap and destroy all kinds of health-harming nasties. Lymph fluid also transports waste and toxins to your liver and kidneys, which in turn act as the body's bouncers, ejecting many undesirables. Wow. I'm home to an industrial canal network. Indeed. And if it's sluggish, the nasties can build up and cause inflammation and joint pain. Plus, your lymph system carries the immune cells that battle big baddies like cancer. You don't want to slow down those little battleships. So how do we free up our flow? Loving your lymph is fun! Relaxing in a sauna or hot bath improves circulation and widens vessels to promote good lymphatic flow. Monthly massages are a lymphatic lifeline. Delicious spices such as cayenne, cinnamon, oregano, basil and turmeric deliver compounds that relax your lymph vessels and improve overall flow. Bouncing on a trampoline also keeps that current strong, as does lots of water and sleep. And here's my favourite: singing or humming. What? The lymph system loves music? Dr Lemole says that when you hum, sing or chant, your lymph vessels dilate, allowing increased flow. He recommends that we hum throughout the day. Wow. Karaoke just became medicine. It's sing-along-a lymph time! Take me to the river and watch me flow.

/images/transform/v1/crop/frm/jess.wallace/31691088-6080-4224-9d69-67dcd53151e0.jpg/r3_153_2999_1846_w1200_h678_fmax.jpg

WELLNESS

March 12 2022 - 10:00AM

I never cease to be amazed at the rich inner life of the human body.

Me too. I'm still freaked out that trillions of microorganisms inhabit my intestines. I'm wondering if I should RSVP for my entire microbiome next time I attend a party.

True, but today the gut can step aside. We're talking about another internal system that's revealing itself to be just as crucial to our wellbeing.

Sheesh. How many systems can one body hold? It's feeling crowded in here.

Prepare to discover the lymphatic system - your "secret river" and star of a new book,Lymph & Longevity, the Untapped Secret to Health, by cardiothoracic surgeon Dr Gerald Lemole. He believes the lymphatic system is as important as your blood circulatory system, and we need to take much better care of it.

What does this "secret river" do?

It's a network of vessels carrying colourless lymphatic fluid throughout your body, delivering important messages to your brain and organs, and connecting to your lymph nodes, which trap and destroy all kinds of health-harming nasties.

Lymph fluid also transports waste and toxins to your liver and kidneys, which in turn act as the body's bouncers, ejecting many undesirables.

Wow. I'm home to an industrial canal network.

Indeed. And if it's sluggish, the nasties can build up and cause inflammation and joint pain. Plus, your lymph system carries the immune cells that battle big baddies like cancer. You don't want to slow down those little battleships.

So how do we free up our flow?

Loving your lymph is fun! Relaxing in a sauna or hot bath improves circulation and widens vessels to promote good lymphatic flow. Monthly massages are a lymphatic lifeline.

Delicious spices such as cayenne, cinnamon, oregano, basil and turmeric deliver compounds that relax your lymph vessels and improve overall flow. Bouncing on a trampoline also keeps that current strong, as does lots of water and sleep.

And here's my favourite: singing or humming.

What? The lymph system loves music?

Dr Lemole says that when you hum, sing or chant, your lymph vessels dilate, allowing increased flow. He recommends that we hum throughout the day.

Wow. Karaoke just became medicine. It's sing-along-a lymph time!

Take me to the river and watch me flow.

See the rest here:
How the lymphatic system is our 'secret river' of longevity - The Canberra Times

This is a full transcript of the seventh episode of the Quartz Obsession podcast season two on prosthetics. Heres a lightly edited transcript if you prefer.

Listen on:Apple Podcasts|Spotify|Google|Stitcher

Kira Bindrim: Every morning, before I start work, before I make my coffee, before I even get out of bed, I put on my prosthesis. Its not a metal leg, or robotic hand, but it is a device that restores the normal function of an underperforming body part.

My prosthetics are my glasses. And with these eyes, I cannot function without them.

When most people think of prosthetics, they think about artificial arms or feet, or maybe the carbon fiber legs used by Olympic runner Oscar Pistorius. But if we factor in any mechanical enhancement of human ability, prosthetics actually have a much richer history, and a much broader future. One of the earliest known examples was a big toe made out of wood and leather, dating back to 1,000 BC. One of the most recent examples, from 2016, is a brain implant that made it possible for a paralyzed man to move a robotic arm with his mind.

Already, there are hints of a future in which prosthetics enhance human abilities, rather than struggling to match them. But that future also invites a lot of questions, like: What does it mean to be a natural human? And when no one is one anymore, who gets left behind?

This is the Quartz Obsession, a podcast that explores the fascinating backstories behind everyday ideas, and what they tell us about the global economy. Im your host, Kira Bindrim. Today: prosthetics, the human upgrade.

I am joined now by Samanth Subramanian, who is based in London. Samanth is a senior reporter with Quartz who is focused on the future of capitalism, so I would argue he is very familiar with questions about how to upgrade humanity. But first, Samanth, I have to go back to something important that I just mentioned, because I know the listener is just dying to know more and I cannot leave them in suspense. What is the story with this prosthetic toe?

Samanth Subramanian: Well, I mean, one of the earliest things that have been described as a prosthetic was actually a fake eye. It was made of bitumen paste, so its kind of like tar, and covered in gold. And it was found in a tomb in ancient Iran, from around 3000 BC. But that isnt really a prosthetic, Id argue, because theres no functionality to it, you cant really see out of it. So the earliest true prosthetic we know was this wooden big toe that you spoke about. It dates to around 1000 BC, it was found attached to the right foot of a mummified Egyptian woman whod lost that big toe. And we dont know why she had it. One theory is that she had gangrene and it had to be amputated. But the big toe is so crucial to how we walk and maintain balance, that there was a need for a prosthetic and this must have been remarkably effective. So was essentially just tied on to the remainder of the foot. And she would have sort of walked on that until the day she died.

Kira Bindrim: I feel like Im just gonna look at my big toe differently every day for the rest of my life. But what I really take away from this is that there is evidence of humans using some form of prosthetic for at least 3000 years. This is going back millennia.

Samanth Subramanian: Yeah, I mean, its interesting to think about this continuity of human need, that our bodies are essentially frail, liable to break down, and that physical malfunctions happen and theyve been with us forever. But around the time of this big toe, around 1000 BC, we see the start, the rudiments of the human effort to overcome these malfunctions with things we can makewith prosthetics.

Kira Bindrim: Are there any other examples of, lets call them prosthetics of historical significance? Like prosthetics in history that we know of?

Samanth Subramanian: Yeah, I mean, from these older periods, artificial limbs are usually the most common. Herodotus, the Greek historian, had a story of a soldier who cut off his foot to escape his captors and who replaced it with a wooden foot. The Roman general Marcus Sergius had his right hand cut off in battle, so he had an iron prosthetic attached to his body in a way that it could hold a shield. I mean, its not just limbs, rightaround the 17th century, people started using ear trumpets to hear better if they were hard of hearing. You know, in the 13th century, you have eyeglasses, you know of the kind you wear every morning, of the kind of wearing now. But mostly, prosthetics were replacement for limbs. They were made to look like limbs, like a leg or an arm. And they had some kind of rough functionality. Think of Long John Silvers peg leg or Captain Hooks, well, hooktheyre kind of useful when theres no arm or leg there at all, but theyre very basic in the physicality of how they function.

Kira Bindrim:When did we start to see less basic prosthetics and prosthetics more like we see today? What started the next era of prosthetics?

Samanth Subramanian: Well, with the caveat that maybe any so-called start to an era is probably going to be entirely arbitrary, Im going to be bold and Im going to say that the age of prosthetic enhancement started on a lake in Arizona in the summer of 1976. And so that day, there was a guy named Van Phillips, he was a 21-year-old student at the University of Arizona at the time. And he was waterskiing when a really terrible accident happened: A passing motorboat cut off his left leg six inches below the knee. And he had to wear a clumsy prosthetic, which he described as a pink foot attached to an aluminum tube. But Phillips was so sort of discontent and dissatisfied with this, that he became a biomechanical engineer himself, and he started trying to design a better leg. And that was really the pivot, or the start of a new era. A couple of things happen in the 1980s, when Van Phillips and a few others are working in this field. So one is that materials start to get a lot more sophisticated. You know, the aerospace industry in particular had these refined carbon fiber composites. And they were making lighter and stronger materials out of carbon fiber. And Van Phillips came up with this idea that a prosthetic foot didnt have to look like a human foot. So instead, he looked to the shape of a cheetahs hind leg, to that curved sort of L-shape that you can see on the back of a cheetah. And so when the animal lands on the ground at 50 miles an hour, Phillips in one interview, that long tendon is being stretched like a catapult. Its the long tendinous fibers that propelled the animal forward. So this was really his big insight. The foot he designed, which he called the Flex-Foot, that was really the precursor to the kinds of prosthetics we see now, for example, in the Paralympics. Its the kind that Oscar Pistorius, the Blade Runner, wore. And the reason we can start to talk about it as enhancement rather than just replacement is because of how advanced these prosthetics have become. So theres a company called ssur in Iceland, which is also incidentally founded by a guy who lost part of his leg when he was young, theyve been around for 50 years now, they make so many of these prosthetics that you see at the Paralympicsthese running blades that are made out of really thin layers of carbon all sandwiched and compressed together. And they test it so thoroughly. I mean, the one statistic that I have for this podcast is that every running blade goes through 2 million cycles of tests, and each test is with a 300 kilogram weight on top of the blade. So its the equivalent of running a marathon a week for a year. Thats the kind of stringency and testing that you see now in the prosthetic field.

Kira Bindrim: I want to pause in the present for a second because I kind of want to bring in another idea, which is: Weve talked about the mechanical enhancement of human faculties, and weve talked about that getting to a place where were going into an enhancement versus just substituting. But then at the same time over the last, lets say, 50 years, we have technology encroaching on our lives in a certain way. And so Im thinking about my smartphone, Im thinking about my VR headset, or even my headphones that Im wearing right now. These are things that are also enhancing our ability to sort of exist in the world, or our human faculties in a way. Would you consider those, in our loose definitions here, prosthetics of a type?

Samanth Subramanian: I think so. I mean, you know, the notion of the prosthetic is that its with you all the time. And its enhancing your abilities, which is why actually, I would argue that our smartphones are prosthetics as well, in a way: Theyre with us every waking second, theyre basically extensions of our hands that are augmenting our mental capacities. There was a point back in 1998, when a couple of philosophers argue just this, the technologies that extend our minds become a part of us, in no different way than the old Egyptian wooden toe.

Kira Bindrim: Thinking about my smartphone as a prosthetic for my memory is so fascinating. Because Im thinking about, like, our ability to document everything in photos, our ability to look up anything at any time, like it is very much that.

Samanth Subramanian: Were sort of downloading our brains into the computer, so to speak, right? I mean, we dont remember phone numbers anymore, or birthdays. And these are things that people used to remember back in the day. And so whether you want to think of the mind as the storage drive of a computer, and you want to think about the mind freeing up space to do other things, thats really a kind of enhancement and augmentation as well. Now, scientists of the mind will tell you that the mind doesnt really work that way. You dont really free up space, you just kind of have different parts of the brain allocated for different things. But its definitely sort of a relief sometimes to not have to remember some of these other trivial details. The other kind of obvious related enhancement that we sort of flirted with as a species for a while was Google Glass, which is really the phone, but sort of up close and personal in your spectacles for people who dont need spectacles. And the idea was, again, a sort of visual and mental augmentation enhancement. It was a way to bring this kind of computerized enhancement to the everyday experience of seeing, but also to the everyday experience of recalling and remembering. And while in its time Google Glass was sort of derided, it really seems to be the obvious transition point for a computer to then sort of get even closer to us than it already is.

Kira Bindrim: After the break the future of prosthetics.

[ad break]

Kira Bindrim: Okay, so weve talked about historical prosthetics that were really focused on substitution for a body part or an ability. And weve talked about what we are loosely categorizing as enhancements. And weve talked a little bit about the simultaneous normalization of everyday improvements, like glasses, and hearing aids, and now our smartphones. So all of this stuff has come together. Now, what is the future of the prosthetic?

Samanth Subramanian: Well, the future of the prosthetic is really neural, I think. Its a way in which we can hook up our brains and nerves with our prosthetics to be able to control them with our thoughts, with our minds, the way we control our own limbs. And, of course, the most outlandish example of this right now thats imaginable, which is a computer inside the brain, is also the kind that Elon Musk is pursuing. Naturally, I mean, thats just what he does. So he set up a company called Neuralink, and he put $100 million into it. And just a few days ago, Kira, before you and I are speaking, he said that the Neuralink implant technology is very close to human trials. And obviously, scientists are really worried about this, about what it means for health and privacy, about what it means for this sort of technology becoming yet another consumer product. But there also seems to be a consensus right now from scientists that a full-fledged computer sitting in your brain, putting the equivalent of the internet at your mental command, at your mental fingertips, is a long way away.

Kira Bindrim: Paint me a picture of the the utopia Elon Musk is envisioning. Like, its very easy to imagine this not going well, right? Putting computers in our brains. So Im curious, if Im not thinking about the dystopian sci-fi that Im writing in my head, what is the good version of this? What would people be doing with their Neuralinks all day?

Samanth Subramanian: Well, what good Elon Musk wants to do in general is open to, you know, fair question and argument.

Kira Bindrim:Fair enough.

Samanth Subramanian: But with this one, I imagine he is so wedded to the culture of the computer. And he thinks that the internet and the computer and digital enhancements in general are so much of a good thing that it seems to him to be an automatic step to try to integrate that with the human brain itself. I think he sees the human brain as fallible, I think he sees it as frail, and I think he sees it at the same time as infinitely more creative if only it could process more, or if only it could have more information at its disposal. And so I would imagine the good that he wants to do is he wants to unlock some of this capacity that he sees in the human brain, and he wants to do it with the computer sitting in the brain. Whether that is actually feasible or realistic is another question altogether. And I think a lot of scientists have very severe doubts about this.

Kira Bindrim: How inevitable do you think some version of that future is? Like you just said, its pretty far off, it seems not anytime soon. But if we are moving towards a world where enhancement is more common, certainly how we interact with computers is more ubiquitous than ever, is it inevitable that in some way, we will all be more enhanced in the future?

Samanth Subramanian: Well, I mean, the Neuralink, as I said, is sort of fantasy at the moment. I think much closer are the kinds of enhancements that we call exoskeletons right now. These are sort of prosthetic frames that fit onto our limbs or our bodies that we can control with neural commands, possibly, and that gives us enhanced physical abilities. The two immediate uses that people are talking about for war and consumerism, which says a lot about our society, I guess. So soldiers are supposed to be able to use exoskeletons to become super soldiers and warehouse workers might end up using exoskeletons to lift heavier pallets and shipments. Then theres things like artificial organs, which we might be able to swap into our bodies when it feels like our kidneys or heart are failing, or even if they arent failing. I mean, these would be prosthetic enhancements as well. You know, so outside of the Neuralink sphere, theres a number of dominant players in this right. I mean, theres a company called Ekso Bionics, which is based in California, which does exoskeletons, and thats listed on NASDAQ. Theres a big company like Lockheed that is also experimenting with exoskeletons. There are small companies, startups like Jarvik Heart and Bivacor that talk about building artificial hearts. And surely, I mean, theres stuff going on in the Department of Defense that we dont know about. Theres a couple of companies in China, theres a couple of companies in Japan. Its worth saying at the moment that a lot of these companies, Musk aside, are still talking about using prosthetics to help the differently-abled or the infirm or the elderly. But there is a parallel future thats easy to envision here in the adoption of prosthetics by the able-bodied human.

Kira Bindrim: Do you think theres a risk that at some point, that second future overtakes the interests of the first? Like if the market for prosthetics is changing, will the types of prosthetics being developed change also? Could we see an ironic future where there isnt enough development of prosthetics for people who actually need them, versus could use them to enhance themselves?

Samanth Subramanian: Yeah, I mean, I think the problem is exemplified by Neuralink. I think one of the problems that people are talking about with this is they worry that the kind of funding and research attention that a Neuralink gets is actually distracting from a lot of other things that our differently-abled need. And some of that stuff can be really basicit can be city infrastructure for people who find it difficult to get around the city. But it can also be finding ways to just get basic prosthetics or even advanced prosthetics to people who need them. When I was talking to somebody at ssur, they made this point that was extremely insightful, which is that what they really want is to be able to give regular people who are differently abled a way to have an everyday leg and then a way to also have a sprinting or a running leg, the kind that athletes use. And they cant do that right now because insurance companies will not cover, you know, an athletic prosthetic, so to speak. But its important, its important for people to be able to want to run and to be able to exercise and, you know, these are the kinds of problems that are there in the here and now. And the drive to create prosthetic enhancements for able-bodied humans, Id argue, is actually sort of distracting from some of these other present problems that people already have.

Kira Bindrim: You know, often when we do these episodes, the big picture question can be kind of elusive, or thats the point, that were talking about something quite small, andsurprise!its about something much bigger. Here, it feels like the big-picture questions are right there. You know, were really talking about the future of humanity and theres a lot of potential inequity I could see here. If were moving towards a world where in some way everyone is enhanced, or considering the possibility of being enhanced, whatever that looks like, what do you see as the big-picture implications? What conversations do you think we will, in 50 years, be thinking, Oh, we should have had that conversation 50 years ago, we didnt anticipate that outcome?

Samanth Subramanian: Well, I think, you know, as is always the case with human society, I think we will wish that we had thought a little bit more about regulation and ethics, Im guessing. I mean, its the same with genetic engineering, in a way. These scientific changes may overtake us before we are ready for them from a systemic point of view. And at that point, well be forced to play catch up and to frame rules and codes for them, and well be presented with the prospect that the wealthy, who are already advantaged, will augment their privilege by buying these enhancements. And whether its some Neuralink or genetic improvement, you can imagine what that does to the inequities in society that already exist.

Kira Bindrim: Are there any other ethical considerations that youre starting to see, or could see emerging in the future?

Samanth Subramanian: I think the question of accesses is incredibly useful. I think, you know, what weve established here in this sort of long 3,000-year narrative of prosthetics is that its already gone, or is in the process of going from being something that helps people who are missing a human ability, to helping people who have all their faculties with them, but want to perform at some kind of super level, whether its for a competitive sport, or whether its for, you know, labor and society, or whether its for war. And I think the the danger here is that this will become yet another kind of consumer technology that you can just sort of buy off the shelf. And the minute that happens, theres all sorts of problems that creep in in terms of whos going to be designing prosthetics for the people who genuinely need them.

Kira Bindrim: So this is gonna come out as a sort of cynical question. When we first started talking, I really thought that what it means to be a natural human was sort of the central thrust, or like the most important question. And now Im wondering if its almost a red herring, that theres all these quite practical inequities or things that could go wrong that are easier to think about before our natural humanity. Do you think well care the same way, you know, we dont necessarily care that were attached to our smartphones all the time now? I dont know, just throwing that thought out.

Samanth Subramanian: Yeah. I mean, its a good question, because, I think in one sense, the idea of a natural human is not a useful one. I mean, we stopped being natural humans when we discovered agriculture, you could argue, when we started being able to control nature. And suddenly, we are not natural humans now, given how we can correct our vision, cure our diseases, ward of cancer for a while, extend our longevity. But certainly we arent integrated physically into machines yet, into computers, that is. I think maybe that might be a watershed moment, when computers move from outside the human body to some kind of integration with the body, whether its through electrodes or microprocessors in our brain that can control bionic limbs, or whether its through a Neuralink implant. You know, when that happens, that will really put a gulf between the humans who came before and the humans who came after.

Kira Bindrim: Okay, weve been talking about a lot of heavy potential applications. So I want to give you a final question that is a lighter one, which is I just want to hear a fun fact of a prosthetics. Something that youve discovered in the course of your research that is just so fascinating, other than the toe, that you cannot stop thinking about it.

Samanth Subramanian: Oh, my favorite example is not strictly a prosthetic because it isnt functional, but its so intriguing I have to mention it. So there was a really famous 16th century Danish astronomer called Tycho Brahe. And when he was young and drunk, he lost a part of his nose in a duel. And so he had a false nose made of brass, which he painted in flesh tones and he attached to his face, to the nasal cavity, with putty. And he had to sort of carry this putty around in a little pot with him everywhere because it was liable to come unstuck and then you have to sort of paste it back on. And when he died, the nose was supposedly buried with him. Recently, they found his grave and they kind of looked in his coffin, and there was no nose. No trace of Tycho Brahes famous nose. And so the question of what happened to it and where it went is, is its the ultimate missing prosthetic mystery.

Kira Bindrim: Yeah, the curious case of the missing brass nose. Its on someones desk somewhere as a paperweight, I guarantee you.

Samanth Subramanian: Or its on somebodys face, you know, painted in flesh tones and attached with putty. You never know.

Kira Bindrim: I really want to believe I would be able to identify a brass nose. But

Samanth Subramanian: Its so great. I mean, theres paintings of Tycho Brahe, obviously, from his time, and theyve been carefully painted to make it seem as if his nose is real. And so, you know, theres the question of sort of why he cared so much about the fact that he was missing a part of his nose is you know, its a really sort of nice insight into this towering 16th century intellectual.

Kira Bindrim: At the time youre getting all these paintings made of yourself, you really just want to look your best. Thank you, Samanth, this was fascinating.

Samanth Subramanian: Thank you so much. So glad to be here.

Kira Bindrim: Thats our Obsession for the week. This episode was produced by Katie Jane Fernelius. Our sound engineer is George Drake and our executive producer is Alex Ossola. The theme music is by Taka Yasuzawa and Alex Suguira. Special thanks to Samanth Subramanian in London.

If you liked what you heard, please leave a review on Apple Podcasts or wherever youre listening. Tell your friends about us! Use that smartphone you cant put down to send them the link. Then head to qz.com/obsession to sign up for Quartzs Weekly Obsession email and browse hundreds of interesting backstories.

See the article here:
Prosthetics of the future are focused on boosting the able-bodied - Quartz

Many women are born with or grow facial hair. Most will agree, when facial hair goes rogue, its unnerving and often unappealing. So why do women grow rogue facial hair, and what can be done about this? Renewal Institute director Dr. Maureen Allem answers Longevitys Q&A.

Rogue facial hair is a condition called hirsutism. This means excessive hair appears in a male pattern on womens bodies. Some medical conditions can cause moderate or severe hirsutism, the most likely being polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). PCOS causes irregular periods and hormone imbalancesthat result in abnormal hair growth, as well as hair loss at the front of the head.

There are other causes too, such as idiopathic hyperandrogenemia, a condition where women have excessive levels of male hormones. These hormones, called androgens, are made in the hair follicles or are sent out from the ovaries or adrenal glands.

Further causes are congenital adrenal hyperplasia, an inherited condition that is triggered when the adrenal glands make abnormal amounts of steroid hormones, such as androgen and cortisol, as well as hypo- or hyperthyroidism.

However, many women who dont have hirsutism, or any medical condition whatsoever, consider their hair growth excessive. And, as we age, the quality, thickness and density of our hair growth deteriorate, especially as our hormone levels fluctuate and lessen over time.

Photo by nappy from Pexels

While there arent different types of hair, there are different categories of hair that may appear on a human body in various areas and at different stages of life.

Youll find tiny, thin, and translucent hair on your cheeks, your forehead, your nose, and even your earlobes. This is called vellus hair. Itll begin developing during childhood and, as you get older, itll mature and can be replaced by thick, dark hair.

Notice random course hairs on areas such as your chin? These little irritants are down to genetics and, no, plucking them out with tweezers wont make them grow back thicker or in multiples.

Its certainly something to pay attention to. It could be a warning sign that something is wrong.

Botanicals such as saw palmetto, beta-sitosterol, and nettle help to reduce DHT, the hormone that causes abnormal hair growth and acne. Some of the compounds in cruciferous vegetables are beneficial, so upping your cruciferous vegetable intake, from a food-based perspective, is helpful.

What is the best long-term method of treating facial hair?

Facial hair is traditionally very difficult to treat, as its hormone-dependent. Some laser hair-removal systems use infrared light to target the germ cell in the hair follicle. Data has shown that about 30-90% of the hair doesnt grow back after the end of the treatment cycle. The success of these laser treatments depends on the initial heat of the laser treatment. No pain, no gain.

We cant guarantee 100% permanent hair removal. Occasional maintenance or touch-up treatments will be required. Laser treatment requires the hair to have a colour, as its the colour (or chromophore) that the laser targets in order to destroy the hair follicle. Therefore, white and light hairs are the most difficult to remove. Light hairs may require more treatments and more maintenance, and more modest results should be expected. Grey hair cant be treated with laser.

When done correctly, plucking removes the entire hair from the follicle, keeping it from growing back for up to six weeks.

No hair-removal treatment can get rid of hair permanently. There are a variety of ways to get rid of hair for weeks, months, or longer periods of time. The best remedy for unwanted facial hair would be to address the critical systems mentioned below.

There are five critical systems that you need to focus on to ensure optimum hormone production and balance:

Insulin resistance affects hormones in several ways. Insulin surges can up-regulate an enzyme called 17,20-lyase, which increases the production of testosterone and leads to PCOS. However, not only do testosterone levels go up with insulin resistance in women but estrogen levels can too, because 17,20-lyase converts DHEA, which is an adrenal hormone, into the estrogen-testosterone pathway. Taking steps to address blood sugar dysregulation, such as eating healthy food, avoiding flour, sugar, and industrial seed oils, and adjusting your carbohydrate intake based on your blood-sugar response, can help.

Hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis This is also referred to as adrenal fatigue syndrome. You need to manage stress, make sure youre getting enough sleep, engage in regular stress management, and address any gut issues or any other chronic health issues that may cause a stress response in the body.

Gut Inflammation caused by dysbiosis or leaky gut suppresses the function of the hypothalamus and the pituitary in the brain, which produce the stimulating hormones, and also suppresses the function of the adrenals and the ovaries that produce the actual hormones.Dysbiosis also increases the production of certain downstream estrogen metabolites such as 4-OH and 16-OH, which are proliferative, meaning they can contribute to breast and prostate cancer, and decreases the production of 2-OH, which is protective against those conditions.

SizeSquares/Shutterstock

Detoxification eating a healthy diet, following an estrogen detox diet, and adding supplements such as a good probiotic and glutathione will be beneficial.

If you dont have enough omega-3, and you have too much omega-6, it can drive the production of prostaglandins and lead to an inflammatory environment. However, sufficient amounts of omega-3 from cold-water fatty fish or taking fish oil, EPA, and DHA, promote the conversion of the prostaglandins into less inflammatory substances or pathways.

Self-acceptance is perhaps the best gift you can give yourself.

Self-acceptance without condition means that you accept yourself as you are, flaws and all. Look after yourself, eat well, exercise, sleep well and meditate. Focus on being happy.

Main photo credit: Photo by Icons8 Team on Unsplash

Dr. Maureen Allem, the founder and Medical Director of the Renewal Institute, consults at the Parkhurst, Morningside, Fourways, and Waterfall branches in Gauteng and the Cape Quarter, Constantia, and Claremont branches in the Western Cape. She is a general practitioner with a special interest in aesthetic and integrative/anti-aging medicine and procedures. She also trains all the new doctors and oversees each branch by rotationally traveling between them. Her full biography is listed below.

Read more:
Why Women Grow Rogue Facial Hair and What To Do - Longevity LIVE - Longevity LIVE

From our long lives to our social skills and even language, zoologist Antone Martinho-Truswell argues that we are more like birds than we think

By Simon Ings

EVOLUTION has created a living world of jaw-dropping diversity. It has also generated what seem like astonishing coincidences. The pangolins of Africa and armadillos of South America, for instance, look like close cousins. In fact, each is more closely related to humans than to each other. Their similarity arises because they independently evolved near-identical strategies to cope with the same kind of environmental challenges.

This is just one example of what is known as convergent evolution, but there are many others, and not all of them are so easy to spot. Take humans and birds: few readers will be immediately won over by Sydney-based zoologist Antone Martinho-Truswells claims that we are like a strangely featherless bird, and that we have more in common with birds than with our mammalian cousins.

By the time I finished The Parrot in the Mirror, though, I found that idea both compelling and reasonable. Martinho-Truswell explores the traits shared by humans and birds, from our unusual longevity to our advanced social skills, from our parenting styles to our intelligence and even the use of language. These, he argues, are all examples of convergent evolution.

Briefly, his argument goes like this: once birds could fly, they could elude almost all predators. Since they were now less likely to be eaten in any given year, they could live longer and produce more offspring. With longevity came the opportunity and the need to develop increased intelligence. It is an advantage for long-living animals to be smart because it helps them to survive long enough to raise their young to adulthood. Whats more, because longer development requires a bigger egg and a bigger yolk sac, and because an egg can only get so big if its mother is to fly, most birds hatch out very immature, helpless young. Chicks require enormous amounts of care, often provided by pair-bonded parents, and sometimes supplemented by a larger community. This favours the evolution of complex social behaviour and communication.

Martinho-Truswell argues that the human evolutionary story is a warped mirror image of this. Our story begins, not with flight, but with communal behaviour among primates, which promoted the evolution of intelligence and social behaviour. This reduced the likelihood of predation, and longevity followed, boosting intelligence to the point where big-brained human young have to be born immature and helpless so as not to endanger their mothers lives during childbirth.

So, the argument goes, humans and birds evolved measurable intelligence in response to similar challenges. But how do we compare our abilities?

In this regard, Martinho-Truswell does well to strike a balance between precision and imagination. On the one hand, a ducklings ability to identify its mother shortly after the moment of its birth puts it well ahead of chimpanzees, parrots, pigeons, crows and even human children. But this one hardwired ability doesnt necessarily make the duckling more intelligent.

Humans and birds evolved intelligence in response to similar challenges. But how do we compare abilities?

On the other hand, it would be a dull observer indeed that didnt see quite staggering evidence of advanced cognition in Irene Pepperbergs 30-year study of language use in Alex, an African grey parrot. The bird not only answered questions, he asked them, too. And he got annoyed if people gave him silly answers.

Containing the complexities of convergent evolution in a straightforward narrative isnt easy. Evolutionary causes and effects dont follow each other in neat, storybook fashion, and there is always the temptation, reading this book, to take Martinho-Truswells acts of narrative shorthand at face value and suppose that humans, 50 million years behind parrots in the evolution of intelligence, somehow became more human by actually mimicking their distant avian cousins.

Clearly that isnt the case. But perhaps it is better to be slightly misled by a gripping story than to be bludgeoned by a dull one. Martinho-Truswell has written a superb introduction to a surprisingly complex field of study. Having read it, you wont look at yourself in the mirror in quite the same way.

More on these topics:

See the original post:
The Parrot in the Mirror review: Why humans evolved to be like birds - New Scientist

The later episodes of The Umbrella Academy Season 2 made an unsettling revelation about Reginald Hargreeves - already one of the most enigmatic characters in the show. The mysterious old man was always very quirky, and his cold, ruthless treatment of his children suggested that something wasn't quite right - but it took almost 2 seasons for viewers to find out he is not entirely human. So, is Reginald Hargreeves really an alien?

Reginald Hargreeves is the emotionally abusive adoptive father of the seven main characters in The Umbrella Academy. The eccentric billionaire, entrepreneur, and researcher, soon establishes himself as the last person one would expect to adopt seven children; he never acts fatherly towards them and his cold treatment is largely responsible for the main characters' stunted emotional growth and toxic traits.

Reginald Hargreeves dies very early in the first season, and he's only seen through flashbacks until his children get trapped in the 60s and meet him again. Despite that, he is one of the most significant characters plot-wise and the events of Season 1 would never have kicked off if he had not died mysteriously.

It can be argued that Reginald Hargrees very much pulls the strings of the plot through his absence, as the Umbrella Academy members are forced to reunite and co-exist after a very long time to investigate his demise. And this is not even where it all started. As the story goes on, we find out that the reason behind his adoption of seven magically gifted children was his wish to save the world.

At this point, it's still unclear what exactly he wanted to save the world from - especially given that one of these children, Vanya, almost brought the apocalypse twice, and Reginald's neglect and abuse played a major part in that. So, could the threat Reginald trained his children for be out of this world?

Related: Is The Umbrella Academy Season 3 Coming to Netflix on March 2022?

As Season 2 and the comic confirms, Reginald Hargreeves is, in fact, an alien who masquerades as a human. Quirky as he may be, he didn't give any major clues of not being human until later in Season 2, where he removes his mask to get rid of some of his enemies.

His status as an alien expresses his extreme longevity, given that he hasn't aged at all since the early 20th century, and, when seen in the 60s, he's still identical to the father the Umbrella Academy members knew. So, why is an alien posing as a human, and why is he trying so hard to save the world he doesn't seem to care about much? Hopefully, The Umbrella Academy Season 3 will provide some answers!

See the rest here:
Is Reginald Hargreeves an Alien in The Umbrella Academy? - EpicStream

Roy Parker, distinguished professor ofbiochemistry and director of theBioFrontiers Institute, will deliver an in-person lectureAdventures with RNA in health and disease at 4 p.m. on April 5 in the Chancellors Hall and Auditorium.

If you go

Register Now

Parker was selected to receive the 2021-22Distinguished Research Lectureship, which is among the most esteemed honors bestowed by the faculty upon a faculty member at the University of Colorado Boulder.

Rebecca Maloy, a professor of musicology and director of the Center for Medieval and Early Modern Studies, was also selected to receive a2021-22 Distinguished Research Lectureship. Maloys lectureConstructing Sanctity Through Sound in Early Medieval Iberiatook place on March 8.

Roy Parker is a distinguished professor ofbiochemistry and Cech-Leinwand chair of biochemistry, Howard Hughes Medical Institute investigator and director of theBioFrontiers Institute.

Parker is a global leader in the study of ribonucleic acid (RNA) molecules, which are both molecular machines and the messenger of genetic information. His pioneering work has revealed new aspects of the life of RNA molecules and how abnormalities in RNA regulation can lead to bone marrow failure diseasesandcontribute to neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimers Disease.

He is an elected Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and a Member of the National Academy of Sciences. Dr. Parkers excellence in mentorship is demonstrated by the success of his past trainees in many economic sectors and fields of study. His outstanding dedication to university service is particularly evident in his critical scientific leadership throughout the COVID-19 pandemic and the CU Boulder response.

Ribonucleic acid (RNA) molecules and their regulation are central tonormal human cellular function. RNA misregulation can lead to bone marrow failuredisorders andcontribute to neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimers Disease.Disease-causing disruptions are diverse and include altered RNA longevity, storage and cellular trafficking. Our goals are to understand the lives of human RNAs from birth to death, determine how abnormalities in the normalRNAlife cycle can lead to human diseases, and use that insight to suggest new therapeutic approaches.

Each year, theResearch & Innovation Office (RIO)requests nominations from faculty for theDistinguished Research Lectureshipand a faculty review panel recommends one or more faculty members as recipients.

The lectureship honors a tenured faculty member, research professor (associate or full) or adjoint professor who has been with CU Boulder for at least five years and is widely recognized for a distinguished body of academic or creative achievement and prominence, as well as contributions to the educational and service missions of CUBoulder. Each recipient typically presentsa lecture in the fall or spring following selection and receives a $2,000 honorarium.

The rest is here:
Professor Roy Parker to deliver April 5 Distinguished Research Lecture on Adventures with RNA - CU Boulder Today

Chronic joint pain can happen at any age, although it is more common as you get older possibly made worse by arthritis. The complex joints connecting the discs of the spine comprise the most common complaints lower back pain followed by knee pain.

Charles M. Lawrie, M.D., a board-certified, fellowship-trained orthopedic surgeon atMiami Orthopedics & Sports Medicine Institute.

Joints are really the foundation for motion, and there are layers and layers of tissue on top of the joints, like muscles and tendons, that actually provide the movement, explains Charles M. Lawrie, M.D., a board-certified, fellowship-trained orthopedic surgeon atMiami Orthopedics & Sports Medicine Institute.

Dr. Lawrie, who specializes in adult hip and knee joint replacement surgery, discussed joint pain in the latest episode of Baptist HealthTalk. The podcast is hosted by Jonathan Fialkow, M.D., chief population health officer for Baptist Health and chief of cardiology at Miami Cardiac & Vascular Institute.

There are more than 200 joints in the human body, but chances are we take them for granted until we experience swelling, stiffness or pain, said Dr. Fialkow as he introduces Dr. Lawrie. So, is it inevitable, and what can we do to keep our joints as healthy as possible for as long as possible?

An individual cannot control genetics, which is a risk factor for issues with joints and surrounding tendons and muscles, including different levels of arthritis. But there are lifestyle factors that can be modified, including weight management and staying physical fit by taking part in a range of activities or regular exercise.

One major factor that we do have control over, I would say, is weight, said Dr. Lawrie. And we all know that we have an obesity epidemic in the U.S. The knee, for example, takes every pound of body weight that people are carrying around in simple daily activities, like walking or going up and downstairs. Our body weight actually will go through the knees.

Here are question-and-answer excerpts from the Baptist Healthtalk podcast. You can hear the full podcast here:

Dr. Fialkow: What are the joints that people complain about more commonly than others?

Dr. Lawrie:The most common area that people complain about or have problems with during their life is the lower back. Just about anyone you know, any age beyond teenagers, has had an episode of back pain that usually is laid them up from work or from school. And the back is actually more complex. And its comprised of many, many joints. Different bones at different levels of the back connect together through the discs. So, the back I would say is No. 1.

Beyond the back, the knee is actually the second most common joint of the body that typically gets affected. Were all very active. Were on our feet all day. We like to run, we like to jump, play sports, and the knees tend to get a lot of the force going through them, and get beat up quite a bit over the course of our life. Other things we commonly see would be the shoulder joints, the hip joints, and then less commonly you get into the smaller joints, like ankles, wrists, hands, toes.

Dr. Fialkow: What kind of lifestyle or what kind of situations might increase the risk joint pain? And what can one do to decrease the chances of significant degenerative joint disease, if anything?

Dr. Lawrie:Unfortunately, a lot of the degenerative joint disease causes are kind of unknown or multifactorial. So, theres a variety of different factors that go into the actual finished product, which is arthritis. Things that are controllable are injuries and activity level. When were younger, avoiding really extreme activity, extreme heavy weights in the gym, and avoiding injury when playing sports. This can all help increase the longevity of our joints as we get older. Also, doing varied levels of activity. We all tend to find one thing we enjoy and then we only do that one thing. So, some people, run, run, run, run, run, and then they show up with some joint pain because they havent varied their activities.

But unfortunately, like I said, a lot of this is just bad luck. To be honest, things that are out of our control, like the genetic makeup of our cartilage surfaces, the joint surface, the way that our bones and joints developed, so the different angles that our bones developed as they were forming against each other can affect the risk for arthritis.

Dr. Fialkow: Is there any recommendations you would have as an orthopedic specialist as to how to decreasing the chances of injuries?

Dr. Lawrie:People in their 20s, 30s, 40s, who typically show up with injuries, or what we dub the weekend warriors, really arent very active during the week and then they go out on the weekends. And all of a sudden, they expect to go from zero to a 100 and their muscles just really arent ready to accommodate the types of activities theyre trying to get into.

So, the strategy for injury prevention for the majority of us in our 30s, 40s, 50s who still like to get out there and play sports or be active is to really focus on a variety of activities, a variety of exercise total body strengthening. And make sure there arent any particular deficiencies in any one area, and really making sure that you appropriately ramp up your activity level before you try to jump into something.

Tags: back pain, joint pain, joint replacement surgery, knee pain, Miami Orthopedics & Sports Medicine Institute

Follow this link:
Factors Affecting Joint Pain at Any Age: Body Weight, Injury, Levels of Activity and Genetics - Baptist Health South Florida

The globalPrecision Medicine Software market. The 2022-2027 Research Report is a valuable source of interesting data for business strategists. Provides an overview of the industry with growth analysis and historical and future cost, revenue, demand and supply data (as applicable). Research analysts provide a detailed description of the value chain and analysis of your distributor. This market study provides comprehensive data that enhances the understanding, scope, and application of this report.

The global Precision Medicine Software Market is forecast to expand at 11.2% CAGR throughout the forecast period between 2021 and 2027.

Click the link for a sample copy of the report: (Upto 40%)https://www.theresearchinsights.com/request_sample.php?id=10125&mode=812

Top Companiesin the global market for small wind energy:2bprecise, LLC, Fabric Genomics, Inc., Foundation Medicine, Inc., Gene42, Inc., Human Longevity, Inc., Lifeomic Health, LLC andOther

This report segments thePrecision Medicine SoftwareMarket based on byTypeThey are:

Type 1, Type 2, Type 3

Based on ByRequest, hePrecision Medicine SoftwareThe market is segmented into:

Application 1, Application 2, Application 3

Regional analysis for the small wind energy market:

For a comprehensive understanding of market dynamics, the Precision Medicine Software market is analyzed across key geographies, namely:United States, China, Europe, Japan, Southeast Asia, India and others. Each of these regions is analyzed based on market performance in the top countries in these regions for a macro level market understanding.

Get up to 40% discount athttps://www.theresearchinsights.com/ask_for_discount.php?id=10125&mode=812

Influence of the Precision Medicine Software Market Report:

-Comprehensive evaluation of all opportunities and risks in thePrecision Medicine SoftwareMarket.

Precision Medicine SoftwareMarket recent innovations and major events.

-A detailed study of commercial strategies for the growth of thePrecision Medicine SoftwareLeading players in the market.

-Conclusive study on the growth plot ofPrecision Medicine SoftwareMarket for the next few years.

-Deep understanding ofPrecision Medicine SoftwareMarket: particular drivers, constraints and important micro markets.

-Favourable printing within the latest technology and vital market trends affectingPrecision Medicine SoftwareMarket.

Do You Have Any Query or Specific Requirement? Ask to Our Industry Expert https://www.theresearchinsights.com/enquiry_before_buying.php?id=10125&mode=812

What are the market drivers explained in the report?

-Key Strategic Developments: The study also includes the key strategic developments of the market, comprising R&D, new product launches, mergers and acquisitions, agreements, collaborations, partnerships, joint ventures and regional growth of the main competitors operating in the market globally and regionally.

-Key Market Characteristics: The report assessed the key characteristics of the market, including revenue, price, capacity, capacity utilization rate, gross, production, production rate, consumption, import / export, supply / demand, cost, share market, CAGR and gross margin. In addition, the study offers a comprehensive study of key market dynamics and its latest trends, along with relevant market segments and sub-segments.

Analytical Tools:The Global Precision Medicine Software Market report includes the precisely studied and evaluated data of the key industry players and their scope in the market by means of a number of analytical tools. Analytical tools such as Porters Five Forces Analysis, SWOT Analysis, Feasibility Study, and ROI Analysis have been used to analyze the growth of key players operating in the market.

Report customization:This report can be customized to your additional data needs up to 3 companies or countries or 40 analyst hours.

Note:All of the reports that we list have been tracking the impact of COVID-19 on the market. In doing this, both the upstream and downstream flow of the entire supply chain have been taken into account. In addition, where possible we will provide an additional COVID-19 update report / supplement to the report in Q3, please check with the sales team.

About us:

The Research Insights A world leader in analysis, research and consulting that can help you renew your business and change your approach. With us you will learn to make decisions with fearlessness. We make sense of inconveniences, opportunities, circumstances, estimates and information using our experienced skills and verified methodologies. Our research reports will provide you with an exceptional experience of innovative solutions and results. We have effectively led companies around the world with our market research reports and are in an excellent position to lead digital transformations. Therefore, we create greater value for clients by presenting advanced opportunities in the global market.

Contact Us:

Robin

Sales Manager

Contact number: + 91-996-067-0000

[emailprotected]

https://www.theresearchinsights.com

Read the original:
Deep research on Precision Medicine Software Market Industry Analysis as well as projection 2020-2026 | 2bprecise, LLC The Bollywood Ticket - The...

If someone managed to, hypothetically, avoid pollution, never be involved in an accident and followed all health advice to the letter, how long would they live for? Jane Shaw

Please send new questions to nq@theguardian.com.

Beyond the factors mentioned I think it could also depend to a large extent on circumstances and willpower. Say, for example, that (to take a random imaginary instance) you were extremely rich and determined to thwart your hopeless sons aspiration to become king, the answer might even be indefinitely. ThereisnoOwl

One thing Ive noticed about very long-lived people is that they remain part of a tightly knit community, and they also remain interested in life. The solutions to a long life, apart from the luck of the genetic draw, may well have more to do with the emotional bonds of community than with pollution. The other point to note is long life and what? Theres no point living to 120 if youre all crumbly when you get there. So then its long life, and good health, and mental alertness, and physical fitness that were looking for which is quite an ask. Lastly, of course, the saddest part of living a long life is everyone you know and love dying. Ive seen people just give up when a spouse or sibling has died. And to offset that, of course a closely knit community. But in the end, how long would you want to live anyway, by yourself, with no one to giggle at your stupid 90s memes? Mollybee

The question assumes that the ageing process is environmentally regulated. While things such as smoking and driving like a loon have obvious disadvantages, ageing is a biological process. The rate at which your telomeres fray, the accumulation of random errors in individual cells DNA, and the depletion of stem cells to replace old cell lines play a part in determining your lifespan. Longevity often runs in families, which suggests that inherited factors are involved. I doubt that living the life of a nun is worth the extra few years it may bring anyway. letsbeclearaboutthis

The theoretical maximum lifespan for humans is about 150 years. This is related to an evaluation of human resilience the ability to withstand and recover from disease to maintain a normal physiological equilibrium. A useful parameter for quantifying resilience is the dynamic organism state indicator.

Apropos of nothing, it is comical to see the interest in longevity from billionaires. Their detachment from the rest of us seems to inevitably lead to a ludicrous messiah complex. It reveals how completely out of touch these people are and how little they offer.

This is not to say scientific interest in ageing is without merit. It is an integral part in many approaches to preventing the onset of age-related diseases such as cancer, cardiovascular disease and neuro-degenerative disease. But to achieve an immortal Zuckerberg would hardly be the end goal.

Quality, not quantity, is a maxim that can be broadly applied. My view is that it includes the time we spend on Earth. We grow, we age, and we die to make room for the new. Thats it. Self-betterment, close relationships and community are what makes it worthwhile. All the rest is vanity. In my view. Hak_a_dalan

Dont forget the genes (longevity is affected by inheritance) or gender (oldest are generally female). Recorded maximum age seems to be 110-120 years or so, but according to Google, the record is Jeanne Calment (18751997) of France, who lived to the age of 122 years and 164 days. I would not bet on much over 110 myself even with good luck and a healthy lifestyle. Hilary Gee

Much depends on genetic predisposition to disease, perhaps even more so than environmental factors. Live your life in the present, dont worry about when youre going to die, life is to be lived, enjoy every moment, try not to abuse your body too much while doing it. WTobiasJr

Im not questioning your sentiment in the matter, and your advice seems sound enough, but what is your epidemiological evidence? Some individuals inherit biological problems which may affect their lifespan, but that doesnt apply to whole populations. Sickle cell anaemia in west Africa is a well-known exception.

Research in Britain dating from the 1970/80s made it quite clear that death rates were related to social class. Recent ONS figures, here reported by the Kings Fund show, that people living in more affluent areas live significantly longer than people living in deprived areas. In 201719, males in the least-deprived 10% of areas in England could expect to live to 83.5 years, almost a decade longer than males in the 10% most-deprived areas (74.1 years). Its important that these numbers are pre-pandemic as that has had an effect, but not in terms of making things more equal. The grim reaper has your postcode. Fallowfield

If you live like that, avoiding all inflammatory markers such as, well, basically all the fun things in life, you wont live to be 100, but youll feel as if you have. PaulVanSalle

My grandmother lived to 107, marbles intact and physically OK until the last year or so. She took up line dancing in her 90s, was usually out if I called in to her care home and was a member of every group in her village for decades. Stay connected, keep learning, be active. Those things. BusyLizzie2

My grandmother on my dads side lived to 103. She was antisocial, even towards her own family at times, lived in a care home for the last few years of her life, didnt mix with the residents, had no interests and no friends. She did have all her marbles, was just about mobile but had a stroke about a week before she died where she was bedridden and totally lost the power of speech. Its always been a mystery as to how she kept going for so long when she really didnt appear to enjoy life that much. solentview

Bloody-mindedness. Same as with my German gran. nina1414

I have the ambition to reach the age of 131, rather less than 50 years from now. Simple statistics show that very few, if any, people die after that age. It will probably take me until then to achieve all things I ever wanted to do. Something to look forward to. Sounds good to me. After that, I wouldnt mind dying in bed, not necessarily shot by a jealous husband. Raimoh105

People tend to forget that living to a great age just means theyre likely to be old and decrepit for longer. betweencloudshadows

The recent research (published on Science) showed that a small reduction of food intake (14%) could significantly improve immune response and reduce chances of inflammation as well as losing weight. This was based on a two-year random study of healthy adults. The implication seems it could prolong healthy span of life in humans (as well as in mice already proven). Hillside

Millions long for immortality who dont know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon. Susan Ertz. Having an uncle who lived to be 100 and a mother who just celebrated her 95th, having a close family who live with you or nearby really helps living to an old age. And being generally healthy. JohnInAthlone

Communities in Chernobyl were forced to evacuate in 1986 but some refused to leave. It turned out that those who were removed suffered terribly and couldnt settle down, and in many, if not most cases, were outlived by those who insisted on staying put in their communities in the Chernobyl area. Having a sense of meaning and a sense of belonging seems to be the important factor in this. wetsuitboots

Troy: Who wants to live to be 89?Barnaby: Someone whos 88. Inoubliable

Jeanne Calment lived to 122 and we can assume thats about the natural limit, give or take a year, without some kind of external therapy to halt or reverse senescence which may not be far off. Modern medicine probably wont extend that extreme but just bring the rest of us closer to it, and in better health to the very end rather than in an extended decrepitude.

Its hard to know the ideal recipe for longevity though; its probably person-specific and it may be the degree of exposure of one factor (eg alcohol, pollutants, virii) to one person is negative, but to another their body pushes against and makes them more robust in the long run. HaveYouFedTheFish

Thus far the answer is 120-something, and only a tiny fraction of a percentage of people will achieve that. Theres little or no evolutionary selection for extreme old age. People who live a really long time past the age of reproduction are effectively rolling the dice and getting double six again and again. As the question implies you can load the dice in your favour by following medical advice, but some time before your 125th birthday some irreplaceable part of your body will stop working, and then so will you.

In the future things may be different, because we will probably become much better at maintaining and repairing our bodies and brains. This will increase the percentage of people who make it past 120, and perhaps allow some to live decades longer. Those who do so will have to work at it a lifelong regimen of diet, exercise and medication. I dont know if I want to work that hard. There is reasonable evidence that calorie restriction extends mammalian lifespans. One hundred and forty years, all of it quite hungry? That sounds like a really long time. SemiFunctional

Sardinia has plenty of centenarians and they drink a drop of wine each day, just a drop. By the way, if we ultimately aim at eternal life, we should remember that Tithonus, in Greek mythology, was sentenced to this as a punishment. Bloreheath

How long would anybody live? On average, not a lot longer than they do now. What shortens life significantly is low income. To which we can add a few particularly hazardous habits, such as smoking, or hazardous occupations. If youre living in a developed country with a better than average income, not smoking, and a few potentially fatal diseases can be controlled, your life expectancy is not far off the hypothetical maximum as far as current medical practice sees it. Most of the aims of current health policy are about addressing premature deaths, essentially treating identifiable causes that shorten life. Its not about extending life for all, that is not seen as a practical aim.

The question in the headline is about possible lifespan (which doesnt appear to be what was asked), thats luck. There are combinations of genes, lifestyle, environment, but mostly chance, that allow some individuals to live to near 120 years. The trick is the combination is so rare its not obvious what makes those factors any different from conditions that are merely good. The extremely long lived are outliers; any normal distribution will throw up a few individuals at the extremes of the curve. The shortest lived are lost among the accidents and a disease toll that takes a percentage at all ages.

The longest lived, however, and whatever circumstances those few need, are clearly becoming seen more frequently. At time of writing, the third- and fourth-longest lived individuals ever are still alive. Perhaps more remarkable is that of the 100 authenticated longest lived women, and the 100 longest lived men ever, only one died before 1985 and more than 80% of them were still living into the year 2000 and beyond. leadballoon

Read more:
Readers reply: how long could a person possibly live? - The Guardian