Yep, that doctored climate science that was doctored by Fox News and other climate change deniers is really bad stuff when the ignorant believe it.

hey have become like politicians: presumed liars, thieves, and moral whores...until proven otherwise Too bad, used to be to trust scientists...not so much now.

Huh? Not too big on history, are ya feller? Remember Tesla? Edison? That whole AC vs DC dispute? Maybe this will stir your memory:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bowA1xUZpmA

it's not the scientists,it's the media,so hungary for a story,any story,that rush to print before the facts are in.

Who gives a rat's @$$ if mice age?

[sigh] ... Yet another post that is based on falsehoods.

If you really look into the climate study you are referring to and the ensuing revalation that the results may have been "spun" AND you look at the FACTS of what happened - not the rumors or unsubstantiated statements made by those with an agenda, you will find that absolutely no data was "doctored" whatsoever.

This is the fact, but there are many people, who don't believe that manmade climate change is real, who simply started spouting that the data, itself, was manipulated.

What is true is that, in email correspondence, some scientists overstated what the study's results were, and yes that was and is not something to condone, but the actual study and the data produced from it is not now, nor was it ever in question by the scientific community. The study's results still stand and the results do show that manmade climate change is real.

Again: nothing about the actual study or its resulting data have ever been called into question. The controversy surrounds email correspondence relating to how much of a "spin" should be put on the results, but the data was not ever manipulated.

The single best thing that anyone who is truly objective can do, would be to not perpetutate the lies of the spin-machine by being uninformed.

If it does prove to be true, what then? We're overpopulated and the earth is strained from "our needs." While I think it's fascinating, it's an area where we shouldn't dabble.

Very interested to know if multiple injections would retain a full life.

I willing to be the Guinea pig...hit me up big time right now...double dose...yes please.

Not sure how climate change got into the conversation, but here is something to chew on. I'm going to say that about 99.999% of us are not global weather climatologists. That means that even though we might see some data presented that we actually do understand, most of the data and it's implications is beyond our knowledge. So in turn we have to turn to other sources to trust. For most, that has always been scientists. The majority of scientists do believe in climate change and the man-made impact, but there are some doubters. That is good actually, as it leads to further study and analysis of the effects in question.

If you just trust blindly, you are no better than a sheep. I, like most people, feel that some of the crap we are dumping on the earth is probably hurting the climate, but I have no idea of the actual degree of damage. We are in about the 20th year of studying climate change on a real global scale. We have a lot more decades of study before we have really solid answers. Until then, you have to choose to believe current scientists, or other sources such as Rush and gang. I have zero faith in any person that is a politician or one that analyzes politicians, so for me, I have to trust the scientists.

@ Scott M-536256

Well said. I think that the deniers of climate change are just too scared to accept that humans actually have control over their own destiny, and that we need to take responsibility for the way we pollute the only habitat we are capable of living in. For others, there's too much money to be made, and as long as they don't have to live too close to or down wind/river from their power plants, refineries, mines, etc., then it really isn't much of their concern.

In any sense, if this type of stemcell research pans out, I want every one of those Evangelicals who voted for Bush and cheered for ending government funding of stemcell research and have been fighting bitterly to prevent unused eggs/stemcells (usually used for IVF) from being utilized; that they should abstain from making use of any of the resulting medical treatments.

I can't wait until I see a Social Conservative Congressman/Senator utilize one of these procedures and show how much of a hypocrite they all are.

The obvious next step is to take stem cells from normal mice when they're young and then inject them into the mice when they get old to observe the effects.

I wonder if stem cells from older people can be regenerated, or if stem cells from younger closely related people would work on older people.

At any rate, this is a very interesting step in the 'war on aging'.

Of course, if we really did find a 'fountain of youth', the government would probably have to ban it because it would bankrupt our social security system, which is going bankrupt faster than ever because of the recent decrease in social security contributions by politicians looking for votes..

I say we farm young people for their cells while they sleep..

WMG-21 " Remember Tesla? Edison? That whole AC vs DC dispute?"

The electrocution of the elephant was by Edison in his fight against Tesla's Alternating Current (AC) development for transmission of electricity (Edison claimed AC was more dangerous).

The ironic thing is that Edison lost his argument of promoting Direct Current (DC) over AC, but Edison's name is typically associated with power companies (SC Edison, etc.) use of AC for delivering power to customers. Tesla was a genius on the same par with Edison, but Edison was much more vindictive and greedy. Tesla's inventions have had a far greater impact on our lives ( AC, electric motors, invented the radio, etc., etc., etc.) than anything Edison did, yet few people know much about him.

The continual change of data and the position of the scientists who release it naturally leads the public to become skeptical at best or downright cynical at the worst. Regardless of politics, the truth is that the data, studies and computer models are inconclusive. Without a hard answer, it is foolish to re-direct the economies of the world to spend trillions of dollars to meet a challenge that cannot be altered by man.

PROOF: The National Geographic Society has aired conflicting documentaries regarding climate change. The most telling was on the Sahara Desert which they showed by evidence changes like clockwork every 20,000 years from desert to rain forest. Furthermore, they concluded the change comes quickly at a "tipping point."

Columbia University released a recent study showing Africa's climate changes drastically and rapidly every 1500 years. Note the discrepancy between 20,000 and 1,500 years.

The NASA climate investigation has revealed the same kind of flip-flop of position within its scientists corp as revealed in this research release:

A Nobel Prize winning physicist resigned from a professional organization after it stated officially that climate change is man-made.

Harper-Collins who publishes "The Times Atlas" recently apologized for its latest map release that shows ice-retreat in Greenland from climate-change scientists that is not supported by satellite images (from NASA).

The simple thing to do is follow the money trail and look at who is pushing the agenda and how they are profiting off of it. Al Gore is a great example. It has been revealed in recent documents that he is an investor in the electric car company that got millions in US government loans and has now moved their operation to Finland.

Can you spell "conflict of interest?" Oh, I forgot, he purchased "carbon credits" with the $ we the tax payer gave him.

One thing is sure. Science is certainly helping "lab Mice". Been hearing about beneficial test results from human researchers on lab mice for 50 years now. The rat family, at least, should have high hopes.

The headline and the article itself are a little misleading. This article is just another example of the generally poor quality reporting that seems to be pervading MSNBC lately. What these scientists have done is use stem cells to mitigate the effects of a disease that causes premature aging. It sounds like they were even able to reverse some of the effects of the disease. What they have not demonstrated is any ability to slow the normal aging process. Until they are able to demonstrate that this method is able to do that, all they have really discovered is a potential treatment for a very rare disease. At that, I will wait to see if any other scientists are able to independently duplicate the results of their experiments before I will even buy that they have a potential treatment. As others have pointed out, too many times lately scientists have come forward with incredible claims only to have those claims refuted when no one else was able to duplicate the results.

ROY WILSON-336103

Of course, if we really did find a 'fountain of youth', the government would probably have to ban it because it would bankrupt our social security system, which is going bankrupt faster than ever because of the recent decrease in social security contributions by politicians looking for votes..

Nah. I don't think it would require a government ban. So far, these types of treatments seem to do more to prolong the quality of life many-fold and prolong actual life by marginal amounts.

Additionally, it wouldn't bankrupt social security, it would just require that we re-think it. People would be capable of working harder jobs later in life. Rather than people reaching their most economically-productive prime in the 20-30 years between their mid 20's and 30's into their 50's and 60's, people could (theoretically) work just as productively into their 80's. This would have profound effects on financial planning and investment.

From a factory floor perspective, this would be like finding out that you didn't have to replace your fixed-capital as quickly as you first thought!

This is also beneficial to the employee, now it is not such a difficult decision whether to take the extra few years to get additional schooling vs. jumping into the labor pool and trying to work your way up through promotion.

Furthermore, these types of treatments will actually do wonders to reduce medical costs. After all, most of the costs for medical treatments occur for the average person in their last 3-months of life and increase steadily up to that point.

With these types of treatments, people could live life up through their 80's and 90's much like they did when they were 30 and 40, and then just drop dead after all of their telomerase is used up and they can no longer reproduce their own DNA effectively.

In the short-run, stemcell treatment may end the need to do organ donation, transplants and maybe even blood transfusion and banking. In the mid-run we will probably figure out how to prevent/eradicate all sorts of genetic disabilities and cancers like leukemia and certain types of mental retardation, dementia and Alzheimers. In the long-run we may figure out how to rebuild/preserve telomeres and actually freeze a person's age at a given point.

Overall, I think we will have more to worry about over-population, but considering that people who are more educated and would have access to such medical treatments also don't tend to have as many children, this issue may be a non-starter.

Lets set something straight about th e climate change data and put it to rest since it has absolutely nothing to do with this article...The climate change data they are referring too has not been manipulated in any way...however, the statistics were used in a manner that made it appear that our climate was in worse shape than it was. Recent NASA studies from space have already proven this. "Manmade"climate change is a myth based on weather studies that only date back to when weather data collection began approximately 150 years ago. This is an inaccurate way to determine the effects of man on weather as we do not have data in a long enough periosd to be sure. What most people do not seem to realize is that weather patterns happen in cycles...ie, the 5 year storm event, 25 year storm event, 100 year storm event and so on. Do we not remember from school that this planet once went through an ice age? it is known and proven by much research that the earth goes through natural cycles of warming and cooling. What we are experiencing now is just a normal cycle in the weather, it is a warming after the last ice age, that will eventually be followed by a cooling cycle. This is completely normal. Call it mother natures way of cleansing the earth if you must, but the hype that was generated about global warming was just information put out there to scare people into trying to be more environmentally friendly before man does make an impact on this weather cycle and we finally do destroy the earth. You can do the reasearch yourselves and find the truth, stop believing what the media outlets are putting out there to increase their ratings. Stop belieiving what politicians such as Al Gore put out there to get people to buy proudcts from the environmental companies he is invested in. How anyone could have ever believed a man claiming to have invented the internet is beyond me.

@ jeremy-2034209

National Geographic has an article that you should read:

Why Tornadoes Take the Weekends Off in Summer

Humans have an effect on the climate and weather, even on a regional level

I was just joking with my wife a couple of months ago that I am going to live to be at least two hundred years old. I'm a quarter of the way there now and get around better than a teenager. When my parents were my age you woulda sworn that they were 50 going on 90, hell, me I'm 50(chronologically) going on 15(physically) . Damn, maybe it might turn not to be a joke after all,LOL.

To Seriously? No...Really?!

Get your facts straight before you start criticizing Republican opposition to stem cell research. It isn't stem cell research they oppose, but embryonic stem cell research. This research, on the other hand, is non-embryonic. They're using stem cells from young mice, sure, but not that young!

For the record, embryonic stem cell research, while still having a lot of theoretical potential, has yet to produce any real therapeutic results. It is proving to cause far more problems than solutions. Non-embryonic stem cell research like this, on the other hand, has already progressed to the point of approved and currently in-use therapies in several fields, along with dozens of promising studies like this that are a year to a decade away from actual use.

Republicans, by and large, support non-embryonic stem cell research. It works, it's safer, and there are no moral quandaries around it. While the Dems haven't been very vocal on this, I imagine they support it as well. They just support the more troublesome (in all manners) embryonic stem cell research as well.

Jeremy, while I agree with you, I feel the need to correct you on one point: the 5 year, 25 year, and 100 year events (storms, floods, earthquakes, whatever) do not reference cyclical events, but rather statistical probability. You have good odds of getting a single 100 year storm every 100 years. You may get two in the same year, or one a year for three years in a row, but these are extreme statistical flukes.

As for the NASA study you mentioned, it was a 10-year long survey of the amount of infrared radiation (IR) lost by Earth. IR is how the Earth looses heat, and global warming (GW) theory says that greenhouse gasses trap in IR, thereby trapping in heat. This part isn't debated at all by anyone. But anthropomorphic global warming (AGW) theory, which blames humans for it, would require that the IR loss of Earth drop, since more IR is being trapped by greenhouse gasses. The NASA study in question found that the IR loss levels of Earth today are orders of magnitude higher than what AGW theory would require. The Earth may be warming, but greenhouse gasses aren't to blame. Maybe we're getting more heat in (from the Sun), thus both having more heat now and losing more heat at the same time. Maybe we're producing more heat in/on the Earth (industry, animals, forest fires, volcanoes, nuclear decay, whatever). Maybe we aren't really warming up that much (our measurements of it are awfully sparse, meaning we're guessing a lot). But it isn't greenhouse gasses.

@ C. Smith

Bush fought to stop the donation of unused tissue from IVF for stemcell research, he also removed government funding from all stemcell research save for a few existing strains that the US already had cultured.

You would rather have this stuff thrown in the garbage than used for research? How wasteful.

I don't care if you think that embryonic stemcell research hasn't delivered results you deem necessary for an avenue of research.

It is an avenue of medical research that was purposely not explored based on misplaced religious ideology and not actually grounded in any real ethics concerns.

The tissue for ESC was from that used in IVF treatments (e.g. the extra left over, unused/damaged eggs from fertility treatments). These were never going to be brought to term, they were going to be either kept in indefinite deep freeze at their donor's expense, or they were going to be disposed of as medical waste.

If Bush was serious about his religious convictions regarding ESC-research, he should have banned IVF as that is the source for all of ESC's materials and the generator of all of these eggs otherwise destined for the hospital incinerator.

Yo, what about us folks with already aged stem cells!! We need a universal young donor!!! And for the science fuzzy person: The magick word here is "telomeres" although looking up Hayflick limit might help also. As cells divide, the ends of the chromosomes shorten with each cycle till they reach a certain length and division irrevocably (so far) stops. Progeria is being born with already short telomeres. There are multiple processes in aging which also include free radical damage from things like x-rays, cross linking from sugar/aldehydes, et cetera. If these stem cells refurbish muscle only (striated and smooth?), the reported effects may be as observed. But other effects might make such partial extended vitality, with everything else old as crap, more of a curse than a boon. Would improved cerebral circulation reverse Alzheimer's? Or would the empty husk just breathe and crap twice as long and be stronger and more difficult to control? Has natural selection capped the individual lifespan for the fitness of the group? Do we want the same people hanging around twice as long without the perceptual resetting that occurs with generational turnover and enhances group diversity of response to changing conditions? The question of 'Social Security' is just lack of adequate mental processing and is dumb. The issues to be overcome here go well beyond the cosmetic albeit not so much for Americans, I suppose. There is a reason we age as we do and this reason is not yet clear to us. But, despite the increased survival of humans to a greater age due to our compulsive risk reduction, the potential 'lifespan' of the Humanzee has probably not changed in the last several hundred generations. And, guaranteed, if a REAL breakthrough occurs in this area, WE will not be hearing about it because it will be immediately sequestered by the elite for their own exclusive use. Still, an interesting finding. A second round of stem cells in the same animals will be even more interesting providing the stem cell lines used maintain the same characteristics. Also, some insight into how the other tissues fare would be welcome. Then, of course, how do normally aged mice respond to this regimen. And, lastly, DO YOU NEED VOLUNTEERS FOR HUMAN TRIALS???? [BOTH HANDS WAVING FRANTICALLY]

As one of my colleagues so aptly put it this afternoon: "There's a lot of things that cure cancer in mice."

This kind of stuff doesn't stay secret, even if people wanted it to.

If only the wealthy had access to the 'secret sauce', we would know very quickly that something was up because they would look young and virile and live well past 100. Those kinds of things are really hard to keep secret.

They'd have to go into hiding

Perhaps in a city under the sea, where the elite would be able to conduct themselves unfettered by the trappings of the mundane and subjected to the same restrictions imposed on the mindless.

I think there's a game about this wonderful land!

I agree with grandfather-20... re politicians. Like former president gw bush, I am against using stem cells to advance medical science. The nerve of these people.

Skeeter-

Just so you know, when you call something "proof" it needs to actually be "proof". Comparing a national geographic study Vs. a Columbia University study, or saying that someone quit there job, can in no way be considered "Proof" that climate change isn't real. In this case, climate change "proof" will typically be studies, numbers, data, and other hard facts... It's really sad that most deniers are like you, and point out random trivia and flash it around as your "proof" that it doesn't exist. Also, why do every one of you think Al Gore is the climate Darth Vadar? He didn't invent the theory of global warming (nor did he invent the internet). I know it's easier (and more fun) to have some dark, shadowy bad guy to pin this on, but it's the entire scientific community (as a whole) that have developed this theory, through decades of study and data.... Please stop being so ignorant, I'm sure you guys can do better than this.

Skeeter McClusky

PROOF: The National Geographic Society has aired conflicting documentaries regarding climate change

I don’t mean to be impolite but you’ve accidently given us a great example of everything that is wrong with the public reaction to science. It would seem that you haven’t read any actual peer reviewed scientific papers in the field of climatology.

No, you’re basing your argument on SOMETHING YOU SAW ON TELEVISION.

I don’t mean this to be an insult but I highly doubt that you would understand a real scientific paper even if you did read it. Most journal articles are extremely technical – so much so that it takes years of training to even understand them. If you haven’t read – and understood – at least 50 to 100 peer reviewed climatology papers then you don’t know enough to say anything about how good the science is. I’m sure you’re a smart person but without the proper training you’re like an accountant walking into a meeting of neurosurgeons telling them how to do brain surgery.

Oh, well!! Will Dr Jekyl or Mr Hyde decide at what age/gender/health status/wealth status/looks/race/ ad naseum, one will be "allowed" to have these injections? If you don't think such a "treatment" would cost you "your first born child", then you all are from some other planet. Get real!

Betboop... I think we need to "work" on our "proper" use of quotation marks.

How most of this conversation turned to climate change I've no idea.

Regarding the transplant of these stem cells into a mouse with Progeria and it actually having an affect on it, well, that's pretty interesting. If they go about this in more of a medical way - say to use it for human kids with the same disease, that's what good it will do. These poor kids who don't get to grow up because they literally grow too old and die, that is exactly what they should be planning for the future right now. They need it more than some woman who wants to extend her age - men too for that matter.

Personally, I don't want to live to a long happy healthy age. I'm already doomed with that as it is - I'm a disabled veteran and live with pain every day, and I hope my end comes quicker than most. Even turning 70 makes me feel ill if I get that far. But that's just me and I know I'm of the very few who feel this way. But, we should not be looking at this as the cure for old age. We should see it rather as a way to help sick people first and foremost. Just my opinion.

Nobody I believe is denying that climate change is occurring. After all, it has occurred throughout history LONG before man even came along, let alone the first man-made carbon burning fires were burned. Greenland for example used to be green. The question is WHAT is causing it and how much, IF any of it, is due to mankind.

All these scientists have to go on is simulated data and computer modeling. Since these computer models also are used to forecast our hurricanes and local weather, I'll wait until we get that "science" down to 99% accuracy before relying on something so massively complex as global climate change with similar methods. Just in the last 6 years post-Katrina, each successive hurricane season had to be downgraded in activity forecasts. Katrina of course was used as an example by the AGW crowd to prove that man-made global warming was real if you will recall because it was such a massive hurricane (they obviously must have forgotten about other big ones like Andrew in 1992, Camille in 1969, the Labor Day Hurricane in 1935, and the Galveston TX one right on the year 1900.

Finally, you will note that anyone who drinks the Al Gore AGW Kool Aid (ie: liberals) will start name calling and froth at the mouth and throw in the ubiquitous Fox News and Rush slam. It speaks volumes about their mentality and quite frankly, mental state. And as you can see with liberals' so-called War On Poverty that has been ongoing for a half century now with no progress - and a record number of people now being in poverty and on food stamps under the Obama regime - they are very rarely right on anything.

SANDY ... it was liberals like Al Gore who lied about climate change ... which they use to call climate warming > then it stopped warming .... i suggest you stop the idiotic obama trend of blame everyone else ... check your facts next time

Good luck getting any progress with the far-right anti-intellectualism movement in this country -- In regard to any science, but especially the religious radicals and anything to do with stem cells. With skyrocketing diabetes, asthma, etc., it's bad enough these dimwits are trying to block health care reform of any kind. But blocking scientific research -- that's going too far.

These conservatives believe conspiracy theories from unknown chain Emails, and would rather not have the FDA or any other regulatory agency working for our safety. They want to go backward to the days of buyer beware and snake oil salesmen. Move to a third-world country you ignorant right-wingers. Stop trying to ruin the future for the rest of us.

Breaking news, the Earth has experienced climate change throughout history from "snowball Earth" to "greenhouse Earth." Currently ice is melting and sea levels are rising. These are FACTS.

@grandfather

Climate change is undisputed in the scientific community.

When implications of science don't sit well with those who may have to comply with new regulations (Exxon) or challenge one's existing belief structure (creationists), that's when people "challenge" science. Generally you will see widespread opposition to science (on behalf of the public, not the scientific community) when there is a conflict of interest. Germ theory, particle physics, genetics, and quantum mechanics were never "challenged" by the public. It would be easy to make a layperson doubt these vetted theories (in science, a theory means something very different than just an idea) because the experiments are so technical and abstruse.

I'm somewhat confused by what you mean by "too much junk science." Pseudo-science (homeopathic medicine, for example) isn't embraced by the scientific community. Period. The premature paper claiming to have created cold fusion (from 1989) is indeed a valid example of how science isn't perfect, but if that's the only example you can come up with then it's a weak argument. There really aren't many examples of bad science (doctored data) making it into respected scientific journals- they measure by the dozens. Compare this to millions of scientific papers out today

Skeeter-

Travis and Junicon nailed it. You quote a couple documentaries, a few poorly put together coincidences and then hinge the whole thing on Al Gore (as if he were the leading climatologist in the world). To non-scientists your arguments sound great, but to anyone who knows an inkling about how science works with public perception you just spouted the equivalent of referencing "Loose Change" for scientific facts about building collapses.

Jeremy -

I would say you've been drinking the kool-aid as well. First, stating we only began data collection 150 years ago would be like saying that we can't determine what species have gone extinct until a couple hundred years ago (therefore claiming that we can't prove dinosaurs existed). Your discounting lifetimes of work with things like ice core samples. Second, yes the earth is in a warming cycle, yes the climate cycles, but no it doesn't happen this fast. Thats the problem here, the speed we are changing at is picking up quite a bit of steam, much faster than what the earth has done before. Third, your assuming these scientists are actually getting money to state this stuff, I have yet to see any proof beyond al gore (which is light) that any SCIENTIST is making cash off this. If a scientist gets money and prestige for publishing results in favor of global warming, by the same process of scientific progress, they get money for publishing results NOT in favor of global warming.

IF your banking on the fact that scientists get grants to research this stuff, then after the initial article warning about global warming even DISPROVING research would get grants. GRANTS don't come in stating "we want you to research this and find THIS conclusion" they come in stating "research this, and give me YOUR best conclusion".

If your banking on "because the world cycles in some areas" congratulations, you know things change.

In the end, a lot of you guys are banking on the fact that you don't think your side is lying to you, and you therefore personally believe every scientist in the world is working in some giant money making scheme. Your 100% sure that everytime a scientist gets a degree, they get marching orders, and not a single one has spoken out against this or told anyone about it. That they are all banking their money on companies that will only succeed if every single one of them in the world work together to make money off of (a plan so mind-blowly stupid any economist would say "yea, thats not true" even if they firmly believe global warming is BS). And before anyone posts it, that list by the Republican senator of global warming deniers is filled with nothing but BS names for retired people, economists (a Phd in economics or other studies does not let you comment on science) and peopel who do not qualify.

lol yea, gravity is more disputed than climate change and you don't see them attacking that science

@Jhawke

All these scientists have to go on is simulated data and computer modeling. Since these computer models also are used to forecast our hurricanes and local weather, I'll wait until we get that "science" down to 99% accuracy before relying on something so massively complex as global climate change with similar methods

Climate warming research does not rely on modeling. Gathering data for climate warming research is not so different than that done for particle physics- you gather a bunch of data on the system you are trying to measure and you tease out the underlying patterns of a seemingly random process. In fact, the last climate research study that I heard of specifically recruited a particle physicist for that reason. No science is based solely on simulated data and computer modeling.

The weather is what you would call a chaotic, or stochastic process. When we use modeling to predict the weather, that's all it is- a prediction. 20% chance of rain, etc. With something like the weather we will never be able to fully know with 99% certainty whether it will rain one week from now or what the wind conditions will be. By the nature of a stochastic process, we can be more certain of the system's behavior the more imminent it becomes, but the weather isn't exactly what you might call deterministic.

As for climate change, take this to heart- Venus is way hotter than it should be. About 750 degrees F hotter. Physicists call it the runaway greenhouse effect. Venus's atmosphere of carbon dioxide, water vapor, and sulphur dioxide make it possible. The Earth and the sun have the same energy flux. If the Earth's temperature is to change, it'll have to be because of more (or less) radiation trapped in our atmosphere (presumably by our atmosphere). While I can't comment on how much warmer the Earth has become, I can tell you that releasing CO2 isn't going to make things colder.

Texas A & I-

actually it was originally stated to be global climate change but the media shortened it to global warning which is not in fact the same thing- better check your facts next time.

Getting back on topic (again!)

The article states, "researchers injected muscle stem cells from healthy young mice into the bellies of the quickly aging mice."

For those opining the possible outcome that this procedure will only be available to the "rich", couldn't the poor just eat their young?

Some of you people just kill me. I mean, they could write an article about somebody having fungus between their toes and most of some of you psychos always try to make it political. Get over the politics already, you sound like you have OCD or some kind of mental ILLNESS!!! Just leave the politics to when the article is about politics!!! Damn it, not everything in life is about politics.

If that is A-L-L you think about you R-E-A-L-L-Y need to get a life.

redplanet-2690269

...some of you psychos always try to make it political.

Stemcell research is a politically charged area of research after our previous President decided that politics and misplaced religious ideology should get in the way of science and the pursuit of improved medical treatments.

Perhaps you were under a rock the last 10 years?

I understand the annoyance, the same thing irks me on the vines about space exploration and some nut-job chimes in to rant about Obama or Bush.

But space is a politically charged arena as well.

This is both symptomatic of the fact that politics are on everyone's mind, but also that our government has woven itself either positively or detrimentally so into our continuously weaving fabric of progress.

Stem cells for climate change! Stem cells with chloroplasts transplanted into every Humanzee when it's excreted by its carrier. Kewl. Suck up all that CO₂, add a cup of photons, and transsubstantiate it into human fat which we harvest and use for bus fuel and get high off the extra O₂. Short of that, an increase in atmospheric CO₂ will increase absorbed insolation. This additional heat could cause increased H₂O evaporation increasing the panet's albedo and decreasing insolation in a kind of feedback effect. Or not. A steady increase in the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide WILL change the equilibrium of a possibly delicately balanced complex system. This is not the argument. The concern is that we do not really know how. If we go beyond some invisible point, the system could start 'hunting' for a new equilibrium. Or, it could even go chaotic for a time. If it becomes warm enough that the clathrates are released, game over. But it might also oscillate into an ice age. The point is not HOW it will change but that we are perturbing it at all since even a 'small' change in the atmospheric equilibrium will mean a BIG change for the tiny little ant-like organisms that have grown adapted to things as they are now. To ignore any perturbation simply to keep enriching rapacious psychopaths amongst those tiny little ant-like organisms makes the term Homo sapiens even more of an oxymoron. Again, there IS an effect of our infestation of this small fishbowl. What further effects that may generate is what we are trying to understand. Like the butterfly whispers to you with its wings, there is no way at this time with our as yet primitive tools for us to predict with confidence the resultant of ANY perturbation of a complex system as large and multivatiate as the global weather system. But, we already know many of the effects of deranged greed and will learn even more in the near future, and believing self-serving lies and arguing for the benefit of deranged greed that would happily kill all of us for a gram of gold seems insane. Or willfully stoopid, and there is no denser stupidity than willful stupidity.

Seriously? No...Really?!

I know I over reacted a bit and I really do agree that the subject does have some political ramifications. But I'm sure you understand how annoying some of these people can get by going waaaaay overboard with the politics thing. It just gets a little old and tiresome when they try to turn Everything into a political debate. I guess I should get a life too, huh, LOL.

Pragmatic-3918582

As one of my colleagues so aptly put it this afternoon: "There's a lot of things that cure cancer in mice."

Listen, if you know of someone who has cured cancer in mice, please tell us where we can read about it. That would be news.

@ redplanet-2690269

+1 for you, I agree that it can get annoying, but this is not a subject that has an awkward segue into political discussions. When people bring up politics in discussions that have nothing to do with a political issue, that's an entirely different thing and derails other conversations.

This would help me extend my career, learning time, technical experience and knowledge so that I can continue to contribute instead of warming a rocking chair and I can also hand off my experience to others. Some people may be able to enter a second or third career.

Please volunteer the cat in your avatar for experiments. That thing looks like it could use some help :).

I think its a monkey?

..... well fudge ....... if your completely healthy, you shouldnt die then .... right ?

yeah because being hit by a car is natural

That's not a cat but one of the experimental mice. Would anyone like to look like that?

The avatar is a Tube Nosed Fruit bat.

@ FudgeFactor

...your fruit bat is showing

(my dog wears a tie to work, your argument is invalid)

It's not even a cat!? LMFAO!!!!!! That's fking halarious!!!! Man, don't mess with somebody when they smoked a couple joints and had a few beers,LMFAO, waaaaaaaay too funny especially when you're stoned!!!! I thought it was a fkd up cat too just like everybody else and then you say it's some kind of bat.

(my dog wears a tie to work, your argument is invalid)

What?

red planet - hope I didn't burst your high.

Hey Fudge, his dog wears a tie to work is a joke because he doesn't have thumbs.

Fellow posters,

The article states, "researchers injected muscle stem cells from healthy young mice into the bellies of the quickly aging mice."

For those whining that this procedure will only be available to the "rich", couldn't the poor just eat their young?

And, my avatar is modeled after "Blank Man!"

Naw FudgeFactor, I think that would be pretty difficult but thanks anyhow. I like bats, I think (I'm not sure of the name) either Fox or fruitbats are cool. They have ahead like a fox or a dog so I don't remember the name. They are kinda big. I never seen that kind before(your avatar).

His dog could be wearing a clip-on tie.

And the avatar does look like an effed up cat.

Agreed-- the strains on the world's food and water supply would be compounded greatly. We need to examine those sorts of impacts before this technology is used widely. On the other hand, enhanced life expectancy makes space travel somewhat more feasible given the long distance between star systems and lack of faster-than-light travel.

We need to control our population levels as part of the overall program. We are *mostly* intelligent beings and should carry out rational family planning rather than breeding like retarded lemmings. Yes, Duggars. I'm talking about mouth breathers like you.

I think as long as the treatment makes you sterile it shouldn't be a problem. I wouldn't want to live forever.

I think as long as the treatment makes you sterile it shouldn't be a problem. I wouldn't want to live forever.

Sterile? Sure who cares? Yes please. I want to live forever...well, at least as long as Dick Cheney.

Careful there guys. If you start talking about intelligent family planning the conspiracy theorists will start calling you names. Eugenics will rear it evil head.

It never ceases to amaze me that those who complain the most vociferously about "the poor" having too many children are the very first ones to applaud cuts to planned parenthood, the most fervent right to lifers are the ones who applaud state executions.

I think the idea of stem cell rejuvenation has very promising applications for the human race. How wonderful would it be if those of us who benefit from longer lives due to modern medicine could also age without all of the maladies that old age brings us. Those things that we would not suffer were we not living so long. I wish the very best of luck to those who are studying this line of research.

Now if they could only come up with something that will cure hypocrisy.

A cure for aging would reduce health care expenses and save the retirement system. Instead of retiring and slowly declining physically and mentally, you could return to work after a five or ten year break. This may also have applications for healing resulting in lower disability expenses. Of course, we will need to change our lifestyles. Perhaps we should subsidize solar panels and local farms instead of oil, gas, nuclear power, and corn agriculture.

Yeah, that's what happened to Social Security. When it was enacted the average man died at 62, 3 years before he was allowed to collect SS. Now, the average working person (now male and female) dies at 78, 15 years after the age of eligibility. Hence: B-A-N-K-R-U-P-T-C-Y is in our future is SS-MC and Mcaid are not "fixed!"

Imagine if you are eligible at 70 but live to be 125!!!!!

Don't touch my SS!!!!! I earned it and I want it!!!! What?!?! Most Americans pay in only a small percentage of what they draw out???? Oh, sorry...too much truth for one comment....

Fossil, you would still eventually age. Delaying the problem isn't really the answer.

The period of declining health should become a smaller percentage of each life and people could have children more slowly and have more years to do full child care before having another.

Plus, as this technology becomes ubiquitous, economies could grow similar to the way the US's has thanks to the Baby Boom without having the downsides of lopsided birth and death rates to play havoc with the draw on public services and influx of tax revenue.

Having 4 or 5 generations of people able to work productively rather than typically just 3 (ex. Gen X, Y, Boomers) would greatly improve productivity and reduce the strain on supporting an aging generation against a smaller younger one.

Skeeter - I'm glad that someone sees the oxymoronic nature of Social Security. Where for the most part, most people draw out in the first 2 to 3 years what they paid into it over the course of their careers.

Yes, I also wonder what applications this could have for Alzheimer's, since the stem cells seemed to rejuvenate the mice brains as well. I think we are in a tricky situation with not wanting to extend peoples lives beyond what they naturally should for a multitude of reasons, but the other applications definitely deserve exploring.

Jeff, good question. The BILDERBERG GROUP plan is to extend life past 150 up to 200 years or more. Whilst doing this, they also plan this only for themselves and not the rest of us. They play to soft kill billions via sterilization vaccines over a few generations to get their species down to less than 1 billion in harmony with nature. Look it up....

@ Mr. Johnny Punish

ఈ సందేశాన్ని మీ రక్షణ కోసం ఎన్కోడ్ ఉంది

మీ తలపై అల్యూమినియం రేకు మెరిసే వైపు గోస్ అప్

The donkeys have control of your SSA funds, and they are ripping it apart like sharks in a feeding frenzy. By the time you are an 'old goat' the only check you will ever see is one that is stamped in red, huge letters .... IOU. Of course, by then the donkeys will pass an increase in the age to retire ... how does 80 years sound to you? You will get double benefits! .... Meanwhile, the congress, pass laws/riders on laws to increase their own salaries, lower their own retirement age or requirements to do so, increase their health plans .... and god forgive if they commit a crime! They will not be allowed to speak in congress. Time to tar&feather this federal government, but first we must start with our own state governments. ........ I have read Thomas Jefferson .... When the federal government has failed to represent you it is time for a revolution by the people. ..... I thought, at the time, it was a joke, never happen. Now, I realize that I might actually see a revolt. All branches of our federal government need to be put in their place. They want us to 'eat cake', and be glad while we do. .... I got a wooden pole. All I need is some tar&feathers. Afterall, we can't execute them, put them in prison, but we sure as hell run them out of DC!!!!

I don't think this just keeps you living, I think it stops you from aging. So you wouldn't need to give them any of your SSA funds.

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/journal/v3/n1/full/ncomms1611.html

The wordy version of MSN's article...

LOL...seriously.

Will the Goverment be able to take care of you?

Who cares? I'll just whore myself out to the 300 year olds.

If you could live to 200 and be active and healthy up until about 190, why would you retire at 75?

Mandatory retirement age. The Government never keeps up with the times! culheath they said nothing about being able too be happy ;-} just live longer// All drugs have side affects.

culheath they said nothing about being able too be happy ;-} just live longer// All drugs have side affects.

True, in fact, when I think about it, the side effects were usually what I was after...back in the day, I mean.