Trick_Hawk5491 t1_j3lc9tc wrote
Reply to comment by a4mula in Arguments against calling aging a disease make no sense relative to other natural processes we attempt to fix. by Desperate_Food7354
You sound a lot like people who were adamant about humans never achieving flight.
GayHitIer t1_j3lct4z wrote
What we know right now doesn't apply to what happens tomorrow or the next decade, making statements about what is possible and impossible has always been stupid, nobody 100% understands what we will achieve after we hit singularity.
a4mula t1_j3ld0qi wrote
Lord Kelvin. And that's not what I'm proposing even in the least. I've been a firm proponent of life extension. Since at least the 90s. But somehow this sub seems to think it's a new idea that just came up.
It's not. And from the very beginning the people that have been serious about it have understood a fundamental truth. It has nothing to do with aging and everything to do with biological processes that tend to be initiated with age.
There's an ocean of difference between those things.
Ortus14 t1_j3lifcd wrote
So there's two definitions for aging currently. There's chronological aging, and biological aging.
https://www.britannica.com/science/aging-life-process
The op was referring to biological aging.
a4mula t1_j3liqo3 wrote
And I'm stating something that is true, regardless of your definition.
Aging isn't a disease. There are biological processes that we associate with aging that lead to the degradation of the human body.
Just fucking words right?
Mental Gymastics.
Except it's not, because read through this shit show of a thread.
There's so much confusion it makes me dizzy.
It's not the words. it's the ideas and thoughts behind them.
The understandings.
And you might say, meh... who gives a fuck.
To which I'd point you directly to billions of dollars wasted by experts, doctors, scientists, politicians, researchers, and mostly those suffering from disease.
Because they didn't understand this simple difference.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments