T
Ta555
Enlightened
- Aug 31, 2021
- 1,317
I feel we have this strange idea in our modern society that it is absolutely normal and should be everyone's goal to live to the oldest age they possibly can. I've read about this before but to be honest, the human body was not made to live into the sixties and beyond. I think one of the reasons CTB seems so unnatural especially if you're under sixty is this belief that you SHOULD be living till a much older age, that this is natural. But actually it's not. I've been reading about this lately and like this interview with Rolf Zinkenagel (Nobel Prize winning physiologist). He said "I would argue that we are basically built to reach 25 years of age. All the rest is luxury." Here's an excerpt from the interview:
HIV, SARS, multiple Drug-resistant tuberculosis, Ebola – the list is endless. We never had them until a few years ago. Why do we continue to grapple with all of these diseases despite our scientific prowess?
This is simply because the life span of human beings has far exceeded what it was intended for. The main function of human beings in evolution is procreation, which is usually completed by the 25th year of age. With our scientific prowess, we have prolonged our age, thus inviting a host of new diseases. I would add autoimmune diseases to the ones that you have mentioned. However, from an evolutionary point of view, this is perfectly fine. Most of the diseases affect man after the age of 25, by which he has procreated in any case. So it doesn't really matter if you die after then; your contribution to evolution is complete! The irrational behavior of human beings has also significantly contributed to the above-mentioned predicaments.
So, in a way, nature is trying to shift the mean age group back by a couple of decades through these diseases?
Yes. Biology has always been and still remains the driving and limiting force for human survival. In vitro fertilization may postpone the age limit for procreation, but this is not for general application. Therefore, I argue that the biological function of humans is basically over with at 20–25 years, and that is what nature is used to as well. Through the various balancing forces, it will always try to maintain the mean age around this.
HIV, SARS, multiple Drug-resistant tuberculosis, Ebola – the list is endless. We never had them until a few years ago. Why do we continue to grapple with all of these diseases despite our scientific prowess?
This is simply because the life span of human beings has far exceeded what it was intended for. The main function of human beings in evolution is procreation, which is usually completed by the 25th year of age. With our scientific prowess, we have prolonged our age, thus inviting a host of new diseases. I would add autoimmune diseases to the ones that you have mentioned. However, from an evolutionary point of view, this is perfectly fine. Most of the diseases affect man after the age of 25, by which he has procreated in any case. So it doesn't really matter if you die after then; your contribution to evolution is complete! The irrational behavior of human beings has also significantly contributed to the above-mentioned predicaments.
So, in a way, nature is trying to shift the mean age group back by a couple of decades through these diseases?
Yes. Biology has always been and still remains the driving and limiting force for human survival. In vitro fertilization may postpone the age limit for procreation, but this is not for general application. Therefore, I argue that the biological function of humans is basically over with at 20–25 years, and that is what nature is used to as well. Through the various balancing forces, it will always try to maintain the mean age around this.