men living beyond 200 years, fiction? or bad interpretation?

[iholdit]

man didnt live to the ages reported in the bible
there was no world wide flood
mam was not created in 1 day
woman was not created from a rib
there was no ark with all the animals
man spoke many languages before the tower of babel
adam and eve were not the first two people
there are no talking snakes

these are all stone cold facts


and with all of our modern medicine and technology, no man has ever lived to or past 200 years

SO its fiction or interpretation error and I have showed both sides of the story. your fantasy is not up for debate

Yup, you seriously believe you were there from the beginning of the earth, mr. fantasy land president. I do think it is funny that there is no proof of bigfoot yet you have no problem believing that bigfoot exists based on what people say. Yet you deny that actual science that shows animals and man have many of the same effects when both are placed on longevity diets or given supplements, could possibly have the same type of increase in lifespan above the normal limitation in humans.

With modern knowledge of what cigarettes do to ones health or what crappy foods do etc. people still smoke and eat crappy foods.

Caloric restriction doesnt require modern technology all it would have took was someone to witness a person who didnt eat alot of food throughout their life and they lived a long time to figure it out.

Maybe a whole group of people didnt eat alot of food or fasted every other day etc. for most of their life and thats all it would have took to potentially put one of them at or above the 130 year old mark.

Or being that we know there are rare genetic disorders that occur in a very small amount of people over very long periods of time. Maybe it was a genetic disorder that could have made someone live to or longer than the 130 year mark.

You have put a limitation of around 120 years on human life. This same limitation existed in the bible long before modern medicine, so i dont see how you would believe modern medicine makes your claim valid. Unless you believe the writers of the bible had advanced knowledge of about how old man would live to?

 

[outhouse]

You have put a limitation of around 120 years on human life.

no i havent, it is just the statistics involved.

my statement stands as facts

like a typical creationist, you attack me and do not offer one bit of evidence for your dribble

 

[outhouse]

at 100 years old people are old and brittle, a few can get around in limited amounts.

not one man at 100 years of age is half way through his life, he would be at the very end of his life. refute that.

 

[iholdit]

no i havent, it is just the statistics involved.

my statement stands as facts

like a typical creationist, you attack me and do not offer one bit of evidence for your dribble

You have stated several times that around 120 years old is mans lifespan limit. Go back and read your posts, its not my fault you cant keep track of your own statements.

I offered evidence that the same diets etc. that increase lifespan in animals show the same types of effects in humans. Im getting tired of repeating myself. I posted the study and all you have done so far is pretend i didnt post it and accuse me of not posting it, just like a typical person who doesnt want to be wrong.

What statements of yours are facts, your statement about bigfoot existing?

 

[iholdit]

at 100 years old people are old and brittle, a few can get around in limited amounts.

not one man at 100 years of age is half way through his life, he would be at the very end of his life. refute that.

The animal studies on longevity show otherwise. There are animals that live 10 times longer than normal in these studies. You are talking about 800 in human years. Those animals are not old and brittle at the equivalent of 100 in human years, they are just as vital as someone much younger.

Your arguments are ridiculous because you know very little about longevity research. You have mice on caloric restricted diets who would be the equivalent of 100 human years who are as vital as normal mice who would be the equivalent of 40 human years or younger.

Humans adults who are 30-60 on caloric restricted diets have the blood pressure of children for example. Along with a bunch of other benefits which are similar to the mice etc. who live well past the normal lifespan limits on the same diet. Read the study i posted and stop pretending and saying i didnt post any studies. I am really getting bored of proving you wrong with studies only for you to pretend i didnt post any studies.

 

[ninerbuff]

The animal studies on longevity show otherwise. There are animals that live 10 times longer than normal in these studies. You are talking about 800 in human years. Those animals are not old and brittle at the equivalent of 100 in human years, they are just as vital as someone much younger.

Your arguments are ridiculous because you know very little about longevity research. You have mice on caloric restricted diets who would be the equivalent of 100 human years who are as vital as normal mice who would be the equivalent of 40 human years or younger.

Humans adults who are 30-60 on caloric restricted diets have the blood pressure of children for example. Along with a bunch of other benefits which are similar to the mice etc. who live well past the normal lifespan limits on the same diet. Read the study i posted and stop pretending and saying i didnt post any studies. I am really getting bored of proving you wrong with studies only for you to pretend i didnt post any studies.

While there is some scientific proof for longevity studies, it's still not probable that a human could live functionally, even with medical assistance, to even 120-150 years. So the stories in the bible of living beyond 200 years doesn't seem at all possible. It's a great story though.

 

[outhouse]

Read the study i posted and stop pretending and saying i didnt post any studies.

you posted your personal opinion that has no credibility at ALL!

you have hot air and no facts to back your imagination.

no human has ever lived to 200 years

 

[outhouse]

There are animals that live 10 times longer than normal in these studies

animals are not human

you have no credibility

 

[iholdit]

While there is some scientific proof for longevity studies, it's still not probable that a human could live functionally, even with medical assistance, to even 120-150 years. So the stories in the bible of living beyond 200 years doesn't seem at all possible. It's a great story though.

Humans have already lived passed 120 and they were relatively functional, although they were not as functional as the average 20 year old. So you would have to define functional.

As i said in the mice studies on just caloric restriction many of the mice were functional at the equivalent of 120-150 humans years. This was just caloric restriction and didnt include the various supplements etc. that have been shown to increase lifespan.

For worms for example who lived to be the equivalent of 800 in human years there were function until almost the end of their lives.

Most of the longevity diets etc. not only increase lifespan but also increase various aspects of health. This would make things like muscle damage lessened making the animals in the studies functional at older ages as well.

If you are truly interested in longevity i will find you videos of these animals to show you they are still functional at the equivalent of 120-150 years in humans.

 

[iholdit]

Lmao!!! You obviously havent looked at the studies. In some of the studies the conditions are so dangerous to the animals that most of them dont survive, but the ones that do survive can live up to 10 times as long as the normal animals. Some of the studies that work involve things like eliminating the animals sense of smell or exposing them to poisons etc. Most humans arent going to risk dying or even losing some of their senses to live longer and also scientists wouldnt be able to ethically do this to humans.

The other options are things like caloric restriction or intermittent fasting. Most humans have a difficult time reducing calories when they are told by their doctor to do so for health reasons, forget about convincing them to caloric restrict to extend their life. Plenty of people smoke even though there is plenty of evidence of health risks, so its not as easy to convince people to do this as you would believe.

The part that is a multi billion industry is supplements. Some supplements have been shown in studies to extend the lifespan of various animals. Many humans use these supplements to try to extend their life as well and it is a multi million-billion dollar industry. The problem is it is difficult to do studies for a 100 years or more to show a supplement worked in humans, but that doesnt mean it is a fantasy to believe it can work in humans.

There is evidence that various biomarkers for aging which are similar to those in the animals occur in humans on caloric restricted with optimal nutrition, intermittent fasting and taking supplements. In 100 years perhaps we will have the proof of whether or not this extended life in humans, but we do have evidence right now, that the same types of effects that occured in the animals who lived longer than normal are occuring in humans following the same types of diets or supplements etc. Here is a study showing these type of effects in humans on caloric restriction and there are many other short term studies on the subject.
Caloric Restriction in Humans

Sorry but you are the one in fantasy land being that you are stating things as you know they are a fact, when you dont have proof. I havent said i know it is a fact i have said it is possible or probable depending on what we have talked about. If you want to actually discuss things without claiming you know everything let me know.

This was my post it was not my opinion it has a study done on humans that you are pretending i didnt post. Lmao!!! You pretending you never saw it doesnt mean it never happened. Pretending things didnt happen may work in fantasy land but in the real world you cant just pretend you didnt see something and say it never happened.

 

[iholdit]

animals are not human

you have no credibility

So what you saying is no research on animals has ever applied to humans.

Lmao!!! You seriously have no idea what you are talking about.

I would have ended this conversation a long time ago but you keep saying these ridiculously hilarious things that its worth responding just to get some more laughs.

 

[ninerbuff]

Humans have already lived passed 120 and they were relatively functional, although they were not as functional as the average 20 year old. So you would have to define functional.

As i said in the mice studies on just caloric restriction many of the mice were functional at the equivalent of 120-150 humans years. This was just caloric restriction and didnt include the various supplements etc. that have been shown to increase lifespan.

For worms for example who lived to be the equivalent of 800 in human years there were function until almost the end of their lives.

Most of the longevity diets etc. not only increase lifespan but also increase various aspects of health. This would make things like muscle damage lessened making the animals in the studies functional at older ages as well.

If you are truly interested in longevity i will find you videos of these animals to show you they are still functional at the equivalent of 120-150 years in humans.

Use history here for a minute. As humans we ate less in the previous 100 years than we do now, yet lifespan was shorter. We eat much worse and have much heavier people with less activity now, yet live longer because of medical and technological advances. Again, while great for study and applying to theory, unless it can be proven that humans can live that long, and I'm more than sure there are some nutbags trying to do longevity diets, it's speculation.
Jack LaLanne was one of the foremost pioneers of continual conscious eating and health. And he died just recently at less than 105 years old. Also genetics have a huge determination on your lifespan. You just can't say that longevity diets will ensure a lifespan of up to 120 years or more.
But to argue the 200 year old man.......meh there's NO proof that it's happened.

 

[iholdit]

Use history here for a minute. As humans we ate less in the previous 100 years than we do now, yet lifespan was shorter. We eat much worse and have much heavier people with less activity now, yet live longer because of medical and technological advances. Again, while great for study and applying to theory, unless it can be proven that humans can live that long, and I'm more than sure there are some nutbags trying to do longevity diets, it's speculation.
Jack LaLanne was one of the foremost pioneers of continual conscious eating and health. And he died just recently at less than 105 years old. Also genetics have a huge determination on your lifespan. You just can't say that longevity diets will ensure a lifespan of up to 120 years or more.
But to argue the 200 year old man.......meh there's NO proof that it's happened.

Its not just eating less, it is eating less while getting optimal nutrtion. Most of our knowledge of nutrition has come within the last 100 years. So people in the the recent past although ate less, they were primarily eating agricultural foods which are lacking certain nutrients. This is why various diseases caused by nutrient deficits were common just 100 years ago.

Yet if we look at many cultures that existed pre-agriculture or who still fished or hunted and gathered along with agriculture, we do not see as much of these diseases caused by nutrient deficits.

We have also gotten some of our medicines and understanding of nutrition from various tribes of hunter gatherers etc. and we have even learned about certain medicines and aspects of nutrition from observing what animals eat when they are sick etc. This would lead someone to believe that if these people had good idea of nutrition(which we believe many of them did) they would have ate certain foods regularly or could have caloric restricted while still getting all of their nutrients and some of them could have lived to 130+.

Many cultures throughout the world have stories
of people who have lived 130+ years, not just the bible. We could argue that all of those cultures are lying but consider for a moment this. The bible long before modern medicine said there was a limtation on human lifespan of about 120 years. How could the bible have known this unless there were people living this long previous to modern science?

My argument is not that numerous people lived this long but i have given ways which some people on these diets or some people with a certain gene(s) or gene expression(s) could have lived this long.

Jack lalanne ate healthy and exercised but he was not on a caloric restricted diet and that makes a huge difference in lifespan in the animals studied. No amount of exercise and healthy eating has matched caloric restriction with optimal nutrition for increasing lifespan in the lab animals. The studies that show significant lifespan increase through exercise had mice exercising 20 hours a day on treadmills and they still didnt reach the age of caloric restricted mice on average.

 

[outhouse]

it doesnt matter what you post iholdit

you have no facts and only your own personal study that doesnt prove JACK

you have nothing but a bad unprovable idea that doesnt conform to REALITY.

and a bunch of bad exuses.

 

[ninerbuff]

Its not just eating less, it is eating less while getting optimal nutrtion. Most of our knowledge of nutrition has come within the last 100 years. So people in the the recent past although ate less, they were primarily eating agricultural foods which are lacking certain nutrients. This is why various diseases caused by nutrient deficits were common just 100 years ago.

Yet if we look at many cultures that existed pre-agriculture or who still fished or hunted and gathered along with agriculture, we do not see as much of these diseases caused by nutrient deficits.

We have also gotten some of our medicines and understanding of nutrition from various tribes of hunter gatherers etc. and we have even learned about certain medicines and aspects of nutrition from observing what animals eat when they are sick etc. This would lead someone to believe that if these people had good idea of nutrition(which we believe many of them did) they would have ate certain foods regularly or could have caloric restricted while still getting all of their nutrients and some of them could have lived to 130+.

Many cultures throughout the world have stories
of people who have lived 130+ years, not just the bible. We could argue that all of those cultures are lying but consider for a moment this. The bible long before modern medicine said there was a limtation on human lifespan of about 120 years. How could the bible have known this unless there were people living this long previous to modern science?

My argument is not that numerous people lived this long but i have given ways which some people on these diets or some people with a certain gene(s) or gene expression(s) could have lived this long.

Jack lalanne ate healthy and exercised but he was not on a caloric restricted diet and that makes a huge difference in lifespan in the animals studied. No amount of exercise and healthy eating has matched caloric restriction with optimal nutrition for increasing lifespan in the lab animals. The studies that show significant lifespan increase through exercise had mice exercising 20 hours a day on treadmills and they still didnt reach the age of caloric restricted mice on average.

Again I will disagree. A lot of "ancient writing" is exaggerated so the stories of people living to 120 years old or older could be just that.
And caloric restriction may work on mice and other animals but the effects are minimal in humans.

"Humans, in contrast, will not have rodent-like results from dramatically restricting calories," he said. "Caloric restriction is not a panacea. While caloric restriction is likely to be almost universal in its beneficial effects on longevity, the benefit to humans is going to be small, even if humans restrict their caloric intake substantially and over long periods of time."
Phelan developed the first mathematical model demonstrating the relationship between caloric intake and longevity, using representative data from controlled experiments with rodents, as well as published studies on humans, diet and longevity. He and Michael Rose, professor of ecology and evolutionary biology at the University of California, Irvine, published their findings in a journal article titled, "Why dietary restriction substantially increases longevity in animal models but won't in humans," published in the August issue of the peer-reviewed journal Ageing Research Reviews.
Caloric Restriction Won't Dramatically Extend Life Span In Humans: UCLA Research

 

[iholdit]

it doesnt matter what you post iholdit

you have no facts and only your own personal study that doesnt prove JACK

you have nothing but a bad unprovable idea that doesnt conform to REALITY.

and a bunch of bad exuses.

Thanks for the credit for the study but it isnt my own personal study, i was not involved with that study in any way.

 

[outhouse]

then its unverifiable trash

it smelled of aig garbage

 

[ninerbuff]

It's been refuted by above study.

 

[outhouse]

thanks ninerbuff but his ability to reason is completely blocked by religion alone.

he has refused facts already posted, hopefully repetition breaks down resistance

 

[iholdit]

Again I will disagree. A lot of "ancient writing" is exaggerated so the stories of people living to 120 years old or older could be just that.
And caloric restriction may work on mice and other animals but the effects are minimal in humans.

That study shows a mathematical model that was based on data from the japanese people. It was once believed that the japanese had the highest amount of centenarians in the world. It has since been shown much of that data was faked and it is no longer believed japan has more centenarians than most other countries. This would make the data used to make the mathematical model in that study false, making the study irrelavent.
BBC News - More than 230,000 Japanese centenarians 'missing'

There have been many other more recent studies done in humans which suggest that many(but not all) humans would have similar effects as mice. I am not at home and am on my phone at the moment but i will find links to more recent studies showing this for you later on today.