Cloning age

That is deep.

I assume the clone would need to go through the same ageing process as we do, if DNA does not change during ageing. It is just an instruction set on how to build you, not maintain you.

They would clone your DNA, it would start by forming a blastocyst or an embryo, become a fetus and then grow up just like the DNA donor.

I assume that even with the exact same DNA the clones could and would become COMPLETELY different depending on the environment in which they are raised. Food, exercise, climate etc, you are a product of your genetics and environment.

By tweaking the DNA and many other biological elements I'm sure, (and probably has been done in secret underground laboratories for decades), they can and have achieved anything. I remember Dolly the Sheep. Cloning plants is easy too.

It's just not ethical or moral enough for us to know about how deep the rabbit hole goes.

Perhaps similar to Genetic Memory but on a cellular scale. It's definitely a can of worms.

Maybe your actual DNA doesn't change, but it has maybe additional "save files" somehow. Like a vanilla computer program the code stays the same but there are discrete additions that then integrate with the orignal code which then outputs. It adds extra instructions so when the cells replicate they remember they only have so many times left to divide or they degrade each division. Or MUTATE.

I think you can represent practitioners of modern medicine as experts in car mechanics. We can diagnose and repair most things on the vehicle, but we are a long way off being the actual vehicle designer or manufacturer. We still need to order parts and read workshop manuals but we are getting better every day.

Telomeres shrink as cells reproduce themselves. So adult DNA is shorter than baby DNA.
On the other hand, I heard something the other day about NADH, which is a B group vitamin, acting to restore telomere length.

I could almost believe the Buffalo theory. It might be in the wrong thread but anyway it makes terrible drunken sense.

"A herd of buffalo can only move as fast as the slowest buffalo. And, when the herd is hunted, it is the slowest and weakest ones at the back that are killed first. This natural selection is good for the herd as a whole, because the general speed and health of the whole group keeps improving by the regular killing of the weakest members.

In much the same way, the human brain can only operate as fast as the slowest brain cells. Excessive intake of alcohol, as we all know, kills brain cells, but naturally it attacks the slowest and weakest brain cells first. In this way, regular consumption of alocohol eliminates the weaker brain cells, making the brain a faster and more efficient machine!"

So just muck yourself up?

Evolution, let the weaker cells die and the stronger reproduce/replicate. Haha

Maybe Jupiter is onto something. (including the Buffalo theory, that's why it's a theory and not fact)

Copying and using a compression codec over and over cripples the actual source, as inherit in JPG images and video compression, for example

2 weeks after 18 hrs on is usually alright

yep, talk about deep.
Genetic theory on SB, and not even in heavy weather. :)

Actually it's a bit timely on a personal level, I'm still spinning out.
I gave bloods late last year to help reaserch into an offshoot of Epilepsy.
Its pretty rare, published at 1.5 people per 9,000,000, yet it took my mother (43yo),brother (38) and is in the process of my sister (42).

So I found out that my DNA has been in the US since September, being compared to the rest of my family's, looking at 4 genes specifically on the basis I don't (?) have it. Once this difference is identified, who know what happens.

We did genetic testing 25 odd years ago when at Uni, and I looked up the Medline info as google wasn't born yet, but what you can test now via simple blood tests, you used to have to do with brain tissue, and I passed on that.

We do indeed live in interesting times.

No point getting a new body while your brain begins to suffer dementia. I wonder when will they be able to transfer your consciousness and memories to a new brain. Or even better, transfer it to a computer chip.

I figure if you transplant a brain into another body, the identity remains that of the brain donor. But what if the memories were placed into a computer chip that was then placed into a donor body, and there was no genetic or biological input from the 'memory donor' - who or what is the identity of the being? Is it a human if it doesn't have a biological brain? Do the feelings and emotions have any less real meaning if they reside in a computer chip that is able to replicate the complexity of human brain, especially if the memories and personality were originally from an actual human?

If you or a family member was suffering dementia but otherwise healthy, and the doctor said they could place the personality and memories into an implanted computer chip with a neural network identical to a human brain, and that you would not be able to discern the difference, would you do it?

regarding the apparent scheduled head transplant - if this is even remotely achievable, I wonder why we haven't already heard any great advancement in spinal injury surgery?

btw i haven't read anything about the transplant. the thought is a bit too gruesome if real