At first glance, this idea appears counterintuitive. Were our mothers wrong to advise us to eat our greens and wash our hands before dinner? Probably not. But perhaps we are now benefiting from the fact that our distant ancestors did otherwise. The key point Finch makes is that because of behavioral changes that took place during our early evolution switching from a plant-based diet to one rich in meat and beginning to live in settlements, in close proximity to one another in large groups , gene variants that protect against infections or against the deleterious effects of high fat intake may have prospered.
Finch speculates that these same gene variants may promote long life under the conditions we find ourselves living in today. He illustrates the point with examples of genes that have been linked to certain age-related diseases and are absent from the genome of even our close relative the chimpanzee, a species that is mainly vegetarian.
The past two centuries have marked a second major stage in the extension of human longevity. Life expectancy has doubled in developed countries since the Industrial Revolution, largely because of improvements in hygiene and nutrition, with an assist from inoculation programs.
The book ends with a provocative discussion of the prospects for increasing human longevity still more in the future. Finch points out that when considering exposure to potential pathogenic agents, we are all in this together:. The Biology of Human Longevity is a major scholarly achievement. Considering the breadth of the topics covered and the detail in which they are discussed, it is remarkable that the whole thing was written by one person.
The work is certainly a tour de force. However, at times Finch has a tendency to get sidetracked into discussions not directly related to the topic at hand. But, that quibble aside, this volume provides a great example of how a curious mind can bring together previously separated disciplines. Nonscientists may find the dense text tough going, but I hope the book will be widely read, especially by biomedical researchers studying the diseases of aging.
Although it is well recognized that advanced age is the greatest risk factor for most chronic diseases, those studying the disease mechanisms often neglect the underlying aging process as a causal factor in disease progression.
Finch argues passionately that "major shared mechanisms in aging and disease may be found to stem from roots in the common soil of aging.
With time this approach will surely change, and this extraordinary book may be cited as a catalyst that helped bridge the gap between those of us studying the basic biology of aging and our friends and colleagues studying the diseases of aging.
If not immortality, then certainly a longer and healthier future may be closer than we think. Skip to main content. We are a voice to you; you have been a support to us. Together we build journalism that is independent, credible and fearless.
You can further help us by making a donation. This will mean a lot for our ability to bring you news, perspectives and analysis from the ground so that we can make change together. Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name. The argument for immortality Scientists have wondered why nature has not selected any life form to be immortal, if it was a possibility.
Subscribe to Weekly Newsletter :. Donate Now. We've been wrong about the origins of life for 90 years DNA at play. Read 3 Comments Post a Comment. Please Sign In to post a comment.
If you beat him at chess — so the legend goes — he has to let you go. You, as the agent, can try to stay in control. This is because desiring immortality might not simply be about having a desire to live forever. It might instead be a desire to control when we ourselves will die , choosing to end it all only when — and not before — we ourselves are ready. Bhishma cannot die until he wills it — but that does not preclude him from later falling in battle at the hands of Arjuna, finding himself incapacitated on a bed of arrows.
Still, even when so incapacitated, Bhishma is not yet ready to die. He elects first to lie on the field of battle and pass on his wisdom to Yudhishthira, until he has decided that the time has come for him to depart.
Bhishma prepares himself for death, and when he is ready, draws his life to a close. And the contrast with immortality as being somehow unable to die is clear. Had Bhishma been impaled on the bed of arrows while being unable to die — and hence presumably having to stay there forever — he would certainly have laboured under a curse. As it is, things were different.
Too early, if we are not yet ready to go. Indeed, we hardly need philosophers to convince us that, for many people, there are fates worse than death: assisted dying clinics in countries such as Switzerland demonstrate that many people will choose to die rather than carry on in gross physical pain or continued indignity, especially when there is no prospect of recovery.
It is a striking feature, however, of most societies that they deny people the choice to die at the very point when they most rationally desire it.
Immortality is, obviously enough, an impossible fantasy — hence it cannot be a genuine solution to the unfortunate yet elemental facts of the human condition, nor an answer to the fraught complexities surrounding euthanasia as regards both social policy and moral judgment.
Nonetheless, the reason such a fantasy endures in popular imagination — as well as being a target for philosophical reflection — is that it taps into something important about our attitudes towards death.
We are not simply afraid of death, we also resent it, because it is experienced as an assault on our personal agency. We can fully control our own deaths in only one direction — and that, of course, is usually no comfort at all.
As with so many things in life, death turns out to be more complicated than it first appears. Modern biomedicine sees the body as a closed mechanistic system. But illness shows us to be permeable, ecological beings. Nitin K Ahuja. Thinkers and theories. Some see Plato as a pure rationalist, others as a fantastical mythmaker. His deft use of stories tells a more complex tale.
Tae-Yeoun Keum. All the stories we have are flawed. What makes something worth believing? Animals and humans. If humans were to disappear from the face of the Earth, what might dogs become?
And would they be better off without us?
0コメント