Talk:Maximum life span
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Purpose of this article
Damn, people, stop the ignorance!
This page was intended to be an encyclopaedic definition of "maximum life span," NOT "mean life span," NOT anti-aging quackery. Re-defining the word to make it fit non-results is B.S.
The FACTS remain: the maximum life span of the mouse has not yet been extended...the record currently stands at 4.98 years. Until this is passed significantly, claims that the maximum life spans in mammals have been extended is FICTION. 70.89.83.190 06:43, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
- 1. This article WAS originally founded as "life span," defined by gerontologists as the maximum observed life span of a species. Someone first changed it to "maximum life span." Now someone wants to hijack this to "mean life span=maximum life span." That's like saying 1+1=3 because we've 'redefined" what "1" means. Sorry, that doesn't make sense.
- The FACT remains: the Methuselah Mouse prize remains UNCLAIMED. Caloric restriction has NOT increased the life span of the mouse. The only potential life span increases have been shown in invertebrates, such as worms and fruit flies. → R Young {yakłtalk} 06:50, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
-
- The extension of rodent maximum lifespan by calorie restriction has been demonstrated in thousands of studies, beginning with McCay in 1935. Walford and Weidruch created a benchmark in the field by many years of investigation into the quantitative relationships associated with calorie restriction and maximum lifespan extension in mice as well as quantifying the physiological changes associated with the extension of maximum lifespan by calorie restriction. Their results were summarized in The Retardation of Aging and Disease by Dietary Restriction (1988). In correcting your deletions in the main Wikipedia article I added a reference to a recent review of extended maximum lifespan in rodent studies in Genes & Development, which I suggest that you read. One of the few things that gerontologists can agree upon is the fact that calorie restriction in laboratory rodents extends maximum lifespan. Also, many transgenic species of mice with extended maximum life span have been created. You also misunderstand The Methuselah Mouse Prize. The prize is awarded to anyone who increases the current world record for maximum lifespan of rodents. The amount of the award is based on a calculation of proportional extension of maximum lifespan above the current record, and a proportion of the prize is distributed on that basis. So the total amount of the prize would never be given. An award ([Reference http://technovelgy.com/ct/Science-Fiction-News.asp?NewsNum=275]) has already been made and awards will continue to be made with each new world record for mouse longevity maximum lifespan.--Ben Best 22:34, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
- Benbest, it is not that I 'misunderstand' maximum life span...it's that people see what they want to see. Roy Walford lived to 79. Claims that caloric restriction have increased 'maximum life span' have been based on disengenuously re-defining maximum life span to fit the results. In reality, we have NOT seen any actual increase in maximum life span for mammals due to caloric restriction, as opposed to animals kept in cages/captivity and not given a calorie-restricted diet. Increases in life expectancy do not equate to increases in maximum life span. Rather, the rectangularization of the mortality curve shows that the benefits so far have been logarithmic, with most of the increases at the lower ends of the curve (i.e. preventing premature, obesity-related deaths), not extending the lives of the already-healthy individuals. I regret that a lot of people purporting to be scientists, but actually proponents of science-fiction, continue to make claims no different than the quacks of the past. Actual science must be backed up by proven results, not hype. Last I checked, the Methuselah Mouse project has not been able to produce even a 5-year-old mouse. So, claims to have 'extended' the maximum life span are incorrect. Further, I believe that you can have your say on another page, such as 'life extension,' so there's no need to co-opt what was intended as an encyclopaedic definition and description that recognizes maximum life span as defined by the longest-lived member of an individual species. Until caloric restriction has produced a 123-year-old person, claims that it extends the human life span are fallacious and inaccurate. → R Young {yakłtalk} 01:47, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
-
- Concerning the transgenic results, the Research data concerning maximum life span section of this article contains the citations for two of those studies, the catalase enzyme extension of maximum lifespan by 20% and the 18% maximum life span increase in FIRKO mice. There are many others. --Ben Best 22:42, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- I know this isn't the topic of the article, but shouldn't the age at which half the species has died be the _median_ life span? If it actually is called "mean," then the scientists of this field are silly. :) -- Ned
-
-
- What you say is absolutely true, Ned! It looks like some revisions are in order, but I want to give the matter some thought. --Ben Best 06:45, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
-
- Actually, the matter did not really require much thought. There is already a Wikipedia entry for "mean life span" = "life expectancy", and that is a better definition than the incorrect one given. I deleted erroneous explanation which was actually a definition of median lifespan. --Ben Best 08:03, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- I concur! Mindman1 04:58, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
I cannot believe that some people still refuse to accept that maximum lifespan can be increased AND that at least 3 antioxidants have proven to increase it, your very Wikipedia states so: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2-Mercaptoethanol#Biological_effects Please change the statements about antioxidants not being able to increase maximum lifespan! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.157.153.206 (talk) 03:47, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Removal of Clean-up Tag
User:Sin-man tagged this article for clean-up on April 3, 2006 without any comment on this page or any indication of what was regarded as a problem. Since that time I have updated the referencing method, which certainly counts as a clean-up. If Sin-man wants more cleaning he will have to come clean about his view of the problem. --Ben Best 21:30, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Medieval
Why isn't anything for the Middle Ages state? For instance, Stephen Nemanya from the High Medieval Ages (12th century) lived for nine decades. --PaxEquilibrium 18:20, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Goldfish Maximum Lifespan
What goldfish has ever lived 49 years?!? If it was 49 months, I think I would still have a hard time believing it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.179.219.56 (talk) 01:20, 11 January 2007 (UTC).
Try one of those aquariums at the local Chinese restaurant. Goldfish survival rates actually go up once they reach a certain size.→ R Young {yakłtalk} 01:46, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- I have heard the same thing for sturgeon: once they reach a given size, they are too large for their natural predators to eat, & are practically immortal. Boy, that's one way to live forever -- but you'd have to be an ugly fish that living your life as a bottom-feeder. -- llywrch 00:58, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] POV Statment?
I was reading and I noticed this line "A Great Basin Bristlecone Pine is almost 5000 years (4844 years), as old as human civilization," ehh under what basis did human civilization start 5000 years ago? It seems that this statment was based off a religious view instead of a scientific view. Human fossil records date to 200,000 years ago, 10,000 years ago agriculture was started, and 6,000 years ago states were developed in Mesopotamia, Egypt and the Indus Valley. So I dont understand what this line basis it self off, so I am removing it.--Azslande 08:56, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
FYI, historians consider 'civilization' to begin with writing, about 4000BC or so.R Young {yakłtalk} 08:17, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Races
Shouldn't there be a maximum age for each human race? The Symbolic Icon 20:56, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Balanced Sourcing
Why is there only articles for Leonid Gavrilov listed? Please balance or delete them.R Young {yakłtalk} 08:15, 25 May 2007 (UTC)