We’re Living Longer, but Are We Living Better?

by Jack Lee

The lifespan of someone born in the 1960’s is going to be greater than someone born in the 1930’s and we just accept this as a payoff of modern medicine, among other factors. So we’re living longer but is it in better health? Research says no, that we’re becoming increasingly less healthy and it’s showing up in our DNA. The only reason we living longer is because of artificial means, quality of life is not improved, just quantity.

The human genome-1 is actually degrading and that’s not good for the human race. Consider, if we were somehow able to go back in time and live side by side with our ancestors in the 1600’s there’s every reason to suspect we would be checking out years before they would.

We’ve all but eliminated many childhood diseases that used to kill huge numbers of infants and toddlers (cholera, whooping cough, typhoid, small pox, etc.) People with cancer are living 20-30 longer than they did just a few decades ago. All this moves the mortality average up considerably and that gives us the impression we’re living healthier, but that impression is not supported by the scientific data.

There’s a heavy price to be paid by our supporting generations and this is growing more burdensome thanks to their shrinking population. Let’s look at some facts that could lead us to age based rationing of healthcare in the near future:

• Elder care is consuming the overwhelming bulk of our physical and financial resources, especially in the last year of life.
• Currently, about 12% of the population is 65 years or older.
• By the year 2030, that figure is expected to reach 21%.
• The fastest growing age group is the population aged 80 and over — the very segment of the population that tends to require expensive and intensive medical care.-2

Somewhere along our genetic history we’ve acquired imperfections in our DNA that have drastically affected our aging process. If we could pluck out the DNA chromosome that is causing premature failure we could live a much longer life span, as it appears we were intended, and the best part we would be more youthful appearance and in better health right up till the end. This part might relieve the burden on our up coming generations.

I know, I know, this all sounds unbelievable. Well, I think you better read on…

Living 900 Years – Scientists Say It’s Possible

In the book of Genesis, the Bible routinely records human lifespans which seem outrageously different from our experience today. Adam lived to 930 years; Noah even longer, to 950 years. These long lifespans are not haphazardly distributed; they are systematically greater before the Flood of Noah, and decline sharply afterwards. These great ages are not presented in the Bible as if they are in any way extraordinary for their times, let alone miraculous. -3

n the book of Genesis, the Bible routinely records human lifespans which seem outrageously different from our experience today. Adam lived to 930 years; Noah even longer, to 950 years. These long lifespans are not haphazardly distributed; they are systematically greater before the Flood of Noah, and decline sharply afterward.

These great ages are not presented in the Bible as if they are in any way extraordinary for their times, let alone miraculous.

The discovery of how cells age and die may be the key to proverbial the fountain of youth and it appears we have it in hand right now. Testing has not been done on humans yet, but animal studies have been very conclusive and the results remarkable. If we can allow cells to keep replicating in theory our body parts would not wear out, but this is not to say they wouldn’t fall victim to some other malady, disease, a bus accident, etc., thus immortality is most unlikely. However, life span could potentially reach that noted in Genesis and this is what the latest DNA discovery means to us.

The consequences of living just a few years more sends the government bean counters in hysteria, just imagine adding 800 more years! What does that do to our resources at every level?

Right now it’s estimated that our government spends more than $9000 per elderly person and less than $900 per child each year. The argument can be made that skewed distribution of health care resources is not only detrimental to the overall health of the society; it is also unjust, because the elderly receive a disproportionately large piece of the health care pie, while a far greater number of younger people are deprived of an equal share of the nation’s health care resources. On the flip side of this the elderly have paid into the system they now draw from and the youth have not.

The discovery of the human genome and how cells age seems to be the key to proverbial the fountain of youth and the research says we have the knowledge to extend life right now. Although testing has not been done on humans yet, animal studies have been very conclusive and the results remarkable.

If we allow our cells to replicate as is their potential then our body parts would not wear out, but this is not to say we wouldn’t fall victim to some other malady, disease, a bus accident, etc., thus immortality is most unlikely. However, life span could potentially reach that as noted in Genesis and this is what the latest cellular discovery means to us.
Let’s set aside the fantastic cell regeneration break-through for the moment, and lets look at what we have. This is an aging population, with all it’s infirmities and demands for more and more healthcare resources.

The reality of this picture is disturbing. Currently, about 12% of the population is 65 years or older. By the year 2030, that figure is expected to reach 21%. The fastest growing age group is the population aged 80 and over — the very segment of the population that tends to require expensive and intensive medical care.

It’s estimated that the government now spends more than $9000 per elderly person per year and less than $900 per child. The skewed distribution of health care resources raises the question of fairness and if this is not detrimental to the overall health of the society? True, the elderly receive a disproportionately large piece of the health care pie, but then they have contributed the disproportionate share of the financial resources. Still, a greater number of younger people are deprived of an equal share of the nation’s health care resources because of our aging population.

As you can see with longevity comes a whole new set of problems. Will the discovery of how cells regenerate be our salvation? This would allow health to be infused with longevity and that could solve a number of the problems. It’s an interesting dilemma and we’re right in the middle, caught between today’s reality and tomorrows promises.

———————–

1- The human genome comprises a sequence of approximately 3 billion component parts, called nucleotides, which are organized into DNA molecules–the double helix. The nucleotides, which serve as the alphabet for the language of life, are represented by just four letters: A, C, G, and T, corresponding to adenine, cytosine, guanine, and thymine. The nucleotide alphabet codes for the sequence of amino acids the body will use to build proteins.

Combinations of three nucleotides indicate one of twenty possible amino acids (for example, CCT codes for the amino acid glycine), so sets of nucleotide triplets form the instructions that cells use to build proteins. These proteins perform the work of the cells from development throughout life, contributing to both our physical attributes and many of our less tangible features, such as behavior, learning, and predisposition to disease. A segment of a DNA molecule that codes for one complete protein is called a gene. The human genome is carried on 23 different chromosomes–or DNA molecules.
Genomes of other species contain more or fewer nucleotides and chromosomes but follow the same basic organizational scheme as the human genome.

2- http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publications/iie/v3n3/age.html

3- http://creation.com/living-for-900-years