nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Three score and ten

marieholmfan

Psalms 90:
The days of our years are threescore years and ten

For thousands of years we have understood a human lifespan to be about 70 years. Yet now doctors can cure all sorts of diseases that give people longer and longer lifespans.

Surely there has to be an age above which we don't spend millions of euro to keep people alive.

Is that age 70?
Is that age 100?
Is that age 30 like in Logan's run?

What do you think?

Find more posts tagged with

medicine

pensions

old age

bible

palliative care

Quick Links

Comments

Feisar

Lay off the daytime drinkin'!

Graces7

You quote only one part of Psalm 90

"The Psalm is well known for its reference to human life expectancy being 70 or 80 ("threescore years and ten", or "if by reason of strength ... fourscore years" in the King James Version), although the Psalm's attributed author, Moses, lived to 120 years, according to Biblical tradition."

and

The days of our years are threescore years and ten;
and if by reason of strength they be fourscore years,
yet is their strength labor and sorrow;
for it is soon cut off, and we fly away.

as someone who is way past that first limit I will be interested in the thread.. No intention of departing just yet...

marieholmfan wrote: »

Psalms 90:
The days of our years are threescore years and ten

For thousands of years we have understood a human lifespan to be about 70 years. Yet now doctors can cure all sorts of diseases that give people longer and longer lifespans.

Surely there has to be an age above which we don't spend millions of euro to keep people alive.

Is that age 70?
Is that age 100?
Is that age 30 like in Logan's run?

What do you think?

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

It's hardly millions per person. Do you want to put a price on saving a life, curing a disease, easing suffering, improving standards of living etc?

I'm 74 and have personally cost the health service nothing in achieving this age, part from having my tonsils out when aged 7 . As a society we are trying to make things better and easier. If longer lifespans are a result then bring it on.

[Deleted User]

marieholmfan wrote: »

Psalms 90:
The days of our years are threescore years and ten

For thousands of years we have understood a human lifespan to be about 70 years. Yet now doctors can cure all sorts of diseases that give people longer and longer lifespans.

Surely there has to be an age above which we don't spend millions of euro to keep people alive.

Is that age 70?
Is that age 100?
Is that age 30 like in Logan's run?

What do you think?

Imposing a limit, that will definitely work.

seamus

As time moves on and medical science improves, the cost of keeping someone alive for ten more years, reduces. It's been said that the first person to hit 150 has already been born, but I'm skeptical.

I can't remember where I read it, but it's believed that there is a theoretical upper limit to the human lifespan of about 180-200 years. This would be someone first and foremost born with the ideal genetic makeup, but whose lifestyle consisted of everything in the right proportions, medical intervention for issues occurring at exactly the right time, and manages to dodge the cancer/alzheimers/etc bullets. The theory is that eventually one or more absolutely critical systems (like the heart or brain) will fail beyond the point of recovery after this 180/200 years.

Once we get into artificial augmentation though, all bets are off. Then it's really just a matter of how long a brain can survive; until we figure out how to replace the brain.

Allinall

The Bible needs to be updated to reflect modern medical advances.

That’s the real issue here.

McMurphy

Great.

Now I can't get this out of my head.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrnWZSkXMw8

0lddog

Very unfunny topic for a thread :mad:

(I can only imagine OP is an undertaker trying to drum up business)

Sharknose

Methuselah lived nine hundred years
Methuselah lived nine hundred years
He did some livin
But what girl would give in
To someone who's nine hundred years.........:)

RobbingBandit

Doctors can't cure ugly or stupid live to be 900 that's some amount of pension that guy got

kneemos

seamus wrote: »

As time moves on and medical science improves, the cost of keeping someone alive for ten more years, reduces. It's been said that the first person to hit 150 has already been born, but I'm skeptical.

I can't remember where I read it, but it's believed that there is a theoretical upper limit to the human lifespan of about 180-200 years. This would be someone first and foremost born with the ideal genetic makeup, but whose lifestyle consisted of everything in the right proportions, medical intervention for issues occurring at exactly the right time, and manages to dodge the cancer/alzheimers/etc bullets. The theory is that eventually one or more absolutely critical systems (like the heart or brain) will fail beyond the point of recovery after this 180/200 years.

Once we get into artificial augmentation though, all bets are off. Then it's really just a matter of how long a brain can survive; until we figure out how to replace the brain.

Who'd want to exist on a hard drive?

Wibbs

kneemos wrote: »

Who'd want to exist on a hard drive?

Maybe we already do...

wexie

Interesting movie about something like this (well, I thought the concept was interesting, the movie was terrible)

In a future where people stop aging at 25, but are engineered to live only one more year, having the means to buy your way out of the situation is a shot at immortal youth. Here, Will Salas finds himself accused of murder and on the run with a hostage - a connection that becomes an important part of the way against the system.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1637688/

Basically I'd imagine if such a system (upper limit on age) were ever implemented you'd very quickly see that it wouldn't be implemented across the board, there'd probably be some old age tax or something and the more money you have the longer you get to live.

Ipso

kneemos wrote: »

Who'd want to exist on a hard drive?

At that age there would also be a floppy drive.

Graces7

A grave in the local cemetery where I want to be buried tells of an old local lady who died aged 104

and the man who lived in this dwelling before me was almost 100 .

A slower pace of life and more basic and healthier diet etc. and less drs tablets etc.

Vic_08

Wibbs wrote: »

Maybe we already do...

If we do then it's definitely riddled with bad sectors.