this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2023
40 points (97.6% liked)

Futurology

0 readers
1 users here now

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
all 19 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Thatuserguy@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Awesome, so does this mean all the rich old dudes ruining everything for everyone else get to continue to do so for longer? You just know something like this would be prohibitively expensive to the general populace. Really exciting.

[–] wahming@monyet.cc 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Move out of the states and it'll be affordable

[–] vind@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] wahming@monyet.cc 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Universal healthcare is a thing. The US is possibly the only first world exception. I live in Norway, and pay a maximum of $250 a year on medical expenses. Everything else gets covered by the govt.

[–] vind@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I'm aware. However, things like this feel like it would be considered beauty care which generally is not considered to be applicable for universal healthcare.

[–] wahming@monyet.cc 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Age-related symptoms and diseases are the biggest burden on healthcare infrastructure. Anything that reduces said impact would definitely fall under healthcare.

[–] vind@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yes, but history this doesn't support that belief. Unfortunately

[–] RatherBeMTB@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago

Not if you'll die. Age reversal will be a must for 80 yo people.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Given the history of medical research, we certainly owe Norway rats one.

[–] scratchee@feddit.uk 3 points 1 year ago

As long my as they’re rats, yes

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

We were supposed to wait until after the boomers were gone. Who didn't get the memo?

[–] SchizoDenji@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

By the time it gets cleared and feasible in humans, we'd be the age in which boomers are.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

The same age, yes. But not boomers.

[–] RatherBeMTB@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well, the ones doing it are the boomers. So if we wait until all of them are gone then we will never have age reversal.

[–] TQuid@beehaw.org 7 points 1 year ago

This is great! Rats’ short lifespans have discouraged me from having them as pets

[–] dingleberry@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 year ago

The march to immortalize our lords continues.

[–] SchizoDenji@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Like flies to Wanton boys...