If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(io9)   What if the state really decided to force you to live healthily? The results would be a horrifying dystopia, in which everybody lived to be 120. Hear that, Mayor Bloomberg?   (io9.com) divider line 53
    More: Scary, Antihypertensive Drug, smother, unit of alcohol, distilled water  
•       •       •

4925 clicks; posted to Main » on 12 Apr 2013 at 9:27 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



53 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-12 05:02:42 PM
Plus the laws would change every few months. Remember when decaf coffee was bad for you? Then it was good for you, then it was bad again. And margarine was better for you than butter until it wasn't any more. Aspartame or no aspartame? HFCS or not? Eggs, nutritious or lethal?

/double plus ungood
 
2013-04-12 05:05:43 PM

bingethinker: Plus the laws would change every few months. Remember when decaf coffee was bad for you? Then it was good for you, then it was bad again. And margarine was better for you than butter until it wasn't any more. Aspartame or no aspartame? HFCS or not? Eggs, nutritious or lethal?

/double plus ungood


Good point.
 
2013-04-12 08:38:29 PM
southparkstudios.mtvnimages.com

COME HERE AND KILL ME, YOU LITTLE BASTARD
 
2013-04-12 09:19:13 PM
Better to add life to your years than add years to your life.

Now where's that bowl of Cheetos...
 
2013-04-12 09:29:47 PM
Imagine the mess that Social Security would be.
 
2013-04-12 09:34:38 PM
Why not just renew on Carousel?
 
2013-04-12 09:34:59 PM
I'll never get that 5 3 2 minutes of my life back.
 
2013-04-12 09:35:10 PM
Yeah, I see that as lasting for maybe one generation, two tops. Then it'll be mandatory smoking for everyone to get all the old retired geezers to croak.
 
2013-04-12 09:35:42 PM

bingethinker: Plus the laws would change every few months. Remember when decaf coffee was bad for you? Then it was good for you, then it was bad again. And margarine was better for you than butter until it wasn't any more. Aspartame or no aspartame? HFCS or not? Eggs, nutritious or lethal?

/double plus ungood


Lewis Black, is that you?
 
2013-04-12 09:36:59 PM
I'm kind of surprised this hasn't turned into a yoga chick picture thread.
 
2013-04-12 09:37:25 PM
What if every day was my birthday?

What if it snowed cocaine every winter?

What if up was down and down was up?

What if this article had a point?
 
2013-04-12 09:46:41 PM
Because living the longest life possible is my only priority.
 
2013-04-12 09:47:41 PM
Living to be 120 would be a nightmare.
 
2013-04-12 09:50:29 PM
Yeah its all fun and games when they are coming for the smokers and the fatties, but what about when they want Volstead act part 2 electric boogaloo?
 
2013-04-12 09:52:27 PM
In the spirit of today's democrats , I would like to yield all my adult decisions, responsibilities, and obligations to some faceless beaurocrat.

Just kidding

It is not the function of the government to keep the citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the government from falling into error.
Robert H. Jackson
 
2013-04-12 09:52:28 PM

jayphat: bingethinker: Plus the laws would change every few months. Remember when decaf coffee was bad for you? Then it was good for you, then it was bad again. And margarine was better for you than butter until it wasn't any more. Aspartame or no aspartame? HFCS or not? Eggs, nutritious or lethal?

/double plus ungood

Lewis Black, is that you?


I am an angry middle-aged guy, but I'm not him.
 
2013-04-12 09:55:00 PM

dfenstrate: In the spirit of today's democrats , I would like to yield all my adult decisions, responsibilities, and obligations to some faceless beaurocrat.

Just kidding

It is not the function of the government to keep the citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the government from falling into error.
Robert H. Jackson


I think those living in NYC are just really scared of the world. Only explanation for allowing the baby tyrant, Bloomberg.
 
2013-04-12 10:11:16 PM
If I had the money and family of, say, Mick Jagger, I'd go for it.  I'll pass, thanks.
 
2013-04-12 10:13:11 PM
I'm sure people would give up a little freedom to ensure they were hot.  I'm joking, but I know people actually would.
 
2013-04-12 10:15:08 PM
If the last 10 years of my life were spent in a diaper barely aware of what year it was why would I want to live it?

/OTOH if the last 10 years of my life were spent like Hugh Hefner I might now mind
 
2013-04-12 10:24:38 PM
Women live longer than men because of  microchimerism resulting from pregnancy.  We just have to figure out how to get men pregnant.
 
2013-04-12 10:25:18 PM
screw soda. i want to get high and get laid for cash just like adults should, without getting arrested for it.
 
2013-04-12 10:28:48 PM
I just finished up my first cup of booze tonight.  It's 4 days to payday so we're down to citrus infused vodak and sprite zero.  Nothing like a 2:1 mix of soda to vodak and we have a lot of soda.

/not really an alcoholic
//I can't believe I typed that with a straight face
 
2013-04-12 10:41:18 PM
I ran three miles this morning (a new record for me) then ate half a pizza for dinner. I like to balance it out.
 
2013-04-12 10:41:47 PM

Smeggy Smurf: I just finished up my first cup of booze tonight.  It's 4 days to payday so we're down to citrus infused vodak and sprite zero.  Nothing like a 2:1 mix of soda to vodak and we have a lot of soda.

/not really an alcoholic
//I can't believe I typed that with a straight face


I'm not saying it's healthy but I am saying fark the government and their regulations.  I'm going to die happy.  Pickled, but happy
 
2013-04-12 10:47:27 PM
Some people would rebel, live underground, and eat ratburgers?
 
2013-04-12 10:58:05 PM

Vegetative reproduction: We just have to figure out how to get men pregnant.


dl.dropboxusercontent.com
 
2013-04-12 11:03:47 PM

bingethinker: Plus the laws would change every few months. Remember when decaf coffee was bad for you? Then it was good for you, then it was bad again. And margarine was better for you than butter until it wasn't any more. Aspartame or no aspartame? HFCS or not? Eggs, nutritious or lethal?

/double plus ungood


Butter/Margarine is probably the only one of those that legitimately represents a reversal of the consensus of scientific opinion, rather than public opinion running away with preliminary evidence.
 
2013-04-12 11:11:41 PM
120? Hell no. Im 27 and i dont think i could handle even say another 30 years. Most people are dicks. My body already aches and society as a whole has become so ridiculous that it just chafes.

There is a reason people drink. Its called other people
 
2013-04-12 11:12:46 PM

SpacemanSpoof: Some people would rebel, live underground, and eat ratburgers?


Exactly. I've SEEN that future. Do you know what it is? It's a 47-year-old virgin sitting around in his beige pajamas, drinking a banana-broccoli shake, singing "I'm an Oscar Meyer Wiener".
 
2013-04-12 11:14:21 PM

Vegetative reproduction: Women live longer than men because of  microchimerism resulting from pregnancy.  We just have to figure out how to get men pregnant.


Women dont live longer. Men die sooner. Mainly from the stress of dealing with women
 
2013-04-12 11:32:11 PM
DigitalCoffee: Exactly. I've SEEN that future. Do you know what it is? It's a 47-year-old virgin sitting around in his beige pajamas, drinking a banana-broccoli shake, singing "I'm an Oscar Meyer Wiener".

He doesn't know how to use the 3 shells!
 
2013-04-12 11:38:51 PM

Vegetative reproduction: Women live longer than men because of  microchimerism resulting from pregnancy.  We just have to figure out how to get men pregnant.


But then abortions would be mandatory (no pun intended).
 
2013-04-12 11:51:09 PM
Isn't overthrowing a power/system designed to keep everyone as healthy and productive as possible one of the recurring themes in action and sci-fi movies?  Something along the lines that being human means being able to make your own dumb decisions?
 
2013-04-13 12:02:06 AM
Your life ends at 40.

After that it's a few decades of "wow, still here" as a body that was never designed to last that long slowly fails one system at a time.

Everybody you thought was cool is going to hate you after 40, and anything you loved to do will now be seen as "tragic", "creepy", or "trying too hard to look young".

Your friends will all disappear to raise families, and you will be all but unemployable in today's market.

/enjoy your youth, it's all you get.
 
2013-04-13 12:06:21 AM
It would be worth it to live in the kind of world in the article, just because it would mean I was in a movie and I could see Jason Statham kick 110 year old Lady Dictator off the top of a building.
 
2013-04-13 12:17:16 AM
FTFA: "That being said, as far as we know we will always need men to continue the human race. The challenge then would be to keep enough men around to continue a healthy population, while keeping them to a minimum in order to maximize average lifespan in the total population of humans. That will take some experimentation. It won't be a pretty business."

What? Maybe one guy for every thousand women? Well.... I gotta say, if I made the cut, I would definitely be OK with this.
 
2013-04-13 12:31:35 AM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: FTFA: "That being said, as far as we know we will always need men to continue the human race. The challenge then would be to keep enough men around to continue a healthy population, while keeping them to a minimum in order to maximize average lifespan in the total population of humans. That will take some experimentation. It won't be a pretty business."

What? Maybe one guy for every thousand women? Well.... I gotta say, if I made the cut, I would definitely be OK with this.


Couldn't you just sterilize a bunch of them? Not lt anyone know who but just possible not of baby daddies knocking up comrades. Or go the Giver route and just kill sex drives and regulate breeding as a job.
 
2013-04-13 12:42:51 AM
No, not really. Your lifespan is determined by genetics far more than what you eat. While your lifestyle does have an effect, it is far the second factor to your genes. If you have the genes to live a long life, you are probably going to, though your quality of life may diminish if you are unhealthy. If you have the genes for a short life then no amount of diet and exercise is going to keep the reaper at bay.

It sucks, we'd like to think we are all masters of our own destiny and can do anything, but your genetics predetermine a whole lot, and aging is part of it.
 
2013-04-13 01:02:33 AM

bingethinker: Plus the laws would change every few months. Remember when decaf coffee was bad for you? Then it was good for you, then it was bad again. And margarine was better for you than butter until it wasn't any more. Aspartame or no aspartame? HFCS or not? Eggs, nutritious or lethal?

/double plus ungood


And done here. Nice try, do-gooder control freaks.

/waiting for re-Nedufication
 
2013-04-13 01:06:24 AM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: FTFA: "That being said, as far as we know we will always need men to continue the human race. The challenge then would be to keep enough men around to continue a healthy population, while keeping them to a minimum in order to maximize average lifespan in the total population of humans. That will take some experimentation. It won't be a pretty business."

What? Maybe one guy for every thousand women? Well.... I gotta say, if I made the cut, I would definitely be OK with this.


you know those machines they use to milk cows?
that's how it's going to be.

cant risk letting the seeders catch a STD
 
2013-04-13 01:08:05 AM

Oldiron_79: Yeah its all fun and games when they are coming for the smokers and the fatties, but what about when they want Volstead act part 2 electric boogaloo?


You won't have to worry about that. The do-gooders learned their lesson and have concentrated their efforts to perfect the art of frog boiling. By the time vodak is banned, the tax on it will be so preposterous no one except Monty Burns will still be drinking, and he would have had to pay for a special permit that allows certain days of the week and only a couple locations.
 
2013-04-13 01:18:46 AM

Enigmamf: bingethinker: Plus the laws would change every few months. Remember when decaf coffee was bad for you? Then it was good for you, then it was bad again. And margarine was better for you than butter until it wasn't any more. Aspartame or no aspartame? HFCS or not? Eggs, nutritious or lethal?

/double plus ungood

Butter/Margarine is probably the only one of those that legitimately represents a reversal of the consensus of scientific opinion, rather than public opinion running away with preliminary evidence.


No, in my lifetime it's been sugar/honey/corn syrup/sugar again; eggs have gone from very good to sort of bad to very bad then really good/bad/okay/good again. Cholesterol was Very bad, then split into two parts, then into THREE parts. None of those was pure public opinion--it was all based on good science. Even Vitamin C and trace minerals have gone through various permutations as we learn more.

Hell, the big thing for a while was being thin until someone realized that a fat person who exercised was better off than a skinny person who sat around on their ass all day long. Maybe we as a species should concentrate less on "living healthy" as a pure abstract notion and just think about "living less unhealthy" and then long life would happen as a by product of not consuming pure lard and raw salt as a daily meal.
 
2013-04-13 02:45:03 AM
Firstly, my point wasn't that "knowledge has never changed" - my point was that scientific consensus has not flipped nearly as often as people think, and that people have gained that mistaken perception due to various dietician crazes that sweep across public opinion, mostly as part of public relations campaigns to sell books, and other forms of bad science reporting.

Neither sugar nor any form of refined disaccharide has ever been "good", at least not since starvation became less frequent than obesity. Anyone telling you sugar is "good" now is lying to you - it is merely considered by some (and, I don't believe by a consensus of the scientific community - I see it as falling into the camp of vitalistic anti-intellectual types) to be "less bad" than HFCS.

Cholesterol is also a very poor example. We've learned to differentiate subtypes of it, and found that different types have different effects. That's knowledge moving in one direction, not reversing itself repeatedly. It's not like one week LDL was good, the next it was bad, the next it was good again.
 
2013-04-13 04:43:41 AM

Enigmamf: Firstly, my point wasn't that "knowledge has never changed" - my point was that scientific consensus has not flipped nearly as often as people think, and that people have gained that mistaken perception due to various dietician crazes that sweep across public opinion, mostly as part of public relations campaigns to sell books, and other forms of bad science reporting.

Neither sugar nor any form of refined disaccharide has ever been "good", at least not since starvation became less frequent than obesity. Anyone telling you sugar is "good" now is lying to you - it is merely considered by some (and, I don't believe by a consensus of the scientific community - I see it as falling into the camp of vitalistic anti-intellectual types) to be "less bad" than HFCS.

Cholesterol is also a very poor example. We've learned to differentiate subtypes of it, and found that different types have different effects. That's knowledge moving in one direction, not reversing itself repeatedly. It's not like one week LDL was good, the next it was bad, the next it was good again.


ORLY? Sugar is not "bad" for you either, it just is; and glucose is certainly very necessary for life, just try living without it for a while. And the butter/margarine thing is hardly an example of the thing you're talking about either--there was a legitimate reason to think that butter was very bad and that oleomargarine was in fact much better for you, given the state of science at the time--and science is NOT reversing itself on either butter or margarine, but merely progressing in saying given what we now know, it seems that butter is better than partially hydrogenated vegetable oils after all. That's not going back and saying Oops, our bad!

Trying to pretend some foods are "bad" and some are "good" vastly oversimplifies the fact that all food carries some risk and some benefits--there are vitamins that are carried solely in fats, for instance (E and K spring to mind) and if you totally eliminated fat from your diet you'd be deficient in those in next to no time. You really do need fat in your diet, and you really do need sugar, since that's what your brain runs on; and you really do need to exercise to lose weight.  Sure, you don't need AS MUCH fat or AS MUCH sugar as currently in the modern American diet; but that's not the same thing as saying "Sugar is bad! Fat is bad! Chemicals are bad! Natural things are good!" Arsenic is natural, but you don't want to be eating too much of it, and too much selenium makes your hair fall out, you know?
 
2013-04-13 05:28:11 AM

sycraft: No, not really. Your lifespan is determined by genetics far more than what you eat. While your lifestyle does have an effect, it is far the second factor to your genes. If you have the genes to live a long life, you are probably going to, though your quality of life may diminish if you are unhealthy. If you have the genes for a short life then no amount of diet and exercise is going to keep the reaper at bay.

It sucks, we'd like to think we are all masters of our own destiny and can do anything, but your genetics predetermine a whole lot, and aging is part of it.


This is what makes QA fall down when he says 3D printing and space travel are not possible (even though we do them) and bangs on about life extension and I say the only progress we have made is to eat better and get rid of some disease, there has been no life extension. Even 60% of your personalitiy is genetic and you won`t change that.
 
2013-04-13 06:21:16 AM
You know who else thought people didn't have the right to be unhealthy?
 
2013-04-13 06:27:07 AM
25.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-04-13 08:09:45 AM

The Goddamn Batman: Living to be 120 would be a nightmare.


Dear lord, at that age, you wouldn't even crap liquid. It would be some new phase unknown to science.
 
2013-04-13 08:20:48 AM
Shut up and eat your bland, nourishing gruel, ancient citizen.
 
Displayed 50 of 53 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report