It's one thing to ask why we get old and die, which, given the inevitability of death poses a philosophical question, and it's another to ask how does getting old and dying look under a microscope, and hurray for science and medical advances.

I am eternal. My body is mortal. It's not always preferable to extend breathing in a body. To be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord. Death where is thy sting? Grave, where is thy victory?

"Can't take life seriously as you won't get out of it alive". Red Skelton

We will all die a physical death, but the soul will remain immortal, for those that believe.

When we die our soul goes to heaven to live for an eternity.

Eternity is a long time, especially towards the end. - Woody Allen

In number 6 above you used the word "husband". Were Adam and Eve married at the time or just living together?

Also, notice that God put them in a garden. There were no fast foods or processed junk foods. Manufactured foods came about much later when man thought he knew better.

Hey, that sounds like what happened to my Windows computer!

I, for one, wish I would never die.

I want to live to help my great grandchildren scavenge for food, water, warmth, and a safe place to sleep, all because me and my generational peers screwed up the earth for them; the least I can do is live to lend a hand.

That's the sad reality of married life: Usually, one will die and leave the other alone. More often than not the husband dies first but it does happen the other way around too. There have been men who outlived their wives by decades. One might consider taking up smoking. :-)

This is a great video (15 minutes long, so grab a sandwich): the Stanford graduation speech from the late Steve Jobs. He speaks of life--and of death. (IF you wish to hear only the death part, which is profound, it starts at 9:00 minutes in the video)
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UF8uR6Z6KLc[/ame]

"Believe that the dots will connect down the road"--Steve Jobs.

Sure, one never knows. In the book I mentioned in my opening post, most of the "cures" for aging will depend on genetic engineering being developed further. So perhaps part of the reason for writing the book, the way it was written, might have been to promote genetic research. If people think the big breakthroughs will come from genetic research, they might be encouraged to donate more money.

It has been said that, if there was a cure for no other disease than terminal cancer, the world would be overpopulated--mass starvation and dehydration--within one generation.

The same can be said for eternal life. As Steve Jobs said in his graduation speech, linked above: Death is the greatest invention for life.

It is the natural order of things that all things shall pass.
http://coolkayaker1.blogspot.com/200...hall-pass.html

There's no such thing as eternal life. The title of the book I mentioned, in my opening post, only suggests it: "The Strange Science of Immortality". When you think about it, it wouldn't be easy to come up with a better title than that. What else could the title have been? "The Strange Science of Trying to Live a Lot Longer?" There is another book titled, "Live Long Enough To Live Forever". It speculates that if you could live another 10 or 15 years, by that time the technology would exist to help you live forever. But it's just speculation because the technology just isn't there yet.

Not only that but it's very likely that most people wouldn't be able to afford the genetic modification treatments it would require. And fresh stem cells would have to be engineered in a lab and periodically injected into your body. This alone might cost $15,000.00 or more every ten years.

A large number of people haven't even saved enough retirement money to last 15 or 20 years. And I doubt that any health care plan would pay for these treatments..

Also, if this thread is any indication, a lot of people wouldn't want it. So I doubt it would lead to over population. But if you really want to know what happens when people live longer and longer, just look at Japan. The birth rate has been gradually going down for a long time. I think it's the same in Europe too. Look at Italy and other such places. The birth rate keeps going down.

Totally incorrect, there is no eternal life for this carnal body which is going back to the dust from whence it came, but there is eternal life after our death for the soul. Best to not worry so much about how long the body will live and instead focus on where the soul will live on since it will be a lot longer than the time here. Be ready!

If you go back a post or two you will notice we were talking about the physical body. Let's not confuse the issue.

As far as the soul is concerned, eternal life of the soul is based on one's personal faith and nothing more.

You might want to start a new thread with the following heading: Eternal life of the soul is a fact that I can prove beyond any doubt!

I agree with KIR that there a short lifespan for our human body, but eternal life for the soul.
We are not human beings having a spiritual experience.
We are spiritual beings having a human experience.

I finally got past the exaggerated use of the word immortality and looked up an explanation of telomeres. You'll find a link below. Very interesting...and tucked at the bottom of the article, encouragement to reduce oxidative stress, something we all can actually do for ourselves.

Thanks for the topic, VPL. I need to reduce oxidative stress.

Are Telomeres The Key To Aging And Cancer?

"As far as the soul is concerned, eternal life of the soul is based on one's personal faith and nothing more." Sorry you have it wrong! Where you spend your eternity is based on one's faith, not if eternal life of the soul is a reality. Eternal life of the soul is a fact!

You're welcome and thanks for the link. I read the whole thing; it was interesting. It said oxidative stress is caused by oxidants and not long ago I read that iron is a potent oxidant. Red meat is a source of iron so maybe that's one reason why vegans and vegetarians, like seventh day Adventists, live so much longer. Their average life expectancy is 88.

Glycation was mentioned too and the article seems to suggest that calorie restriction is something we can do about it. We can restrict calories by avoiding high-calorie processed foods.

Dr. Dean Ornish, along with Dr. Blackburn did a study that showed we can lengthen telomeres by eating a healthy vegan diet, moderate exercise and stress reduction. This lifestyle increases the enzyme telomerase and it's what allows telomeres to lengthen. It helps DNA to repair itself. So we can stay younger by living a healthy lifestyle.

Soul
 

The word “soul” in the Bible is a translation of the Hebrew word ne′phesh and the Greek word psy·khe′. The Hebrew word literally means “a creature that breathes,” and the Greek word means “a living being.” * The soul, then, is the entire creature, not something inside that survives the death of the body. Consider how the Bible shows that the human soul is the whole person:

Adam, a living soul, at the time of his creation

Adam was not given a soul—he “became a living soul”

When God created the first man, Adam, the Bible says that “man became a living soul.” (Genesis 2:7, King James Version) Adam was not given a soul—he became a living soul, or person.


The Bible says that the soul can work, crave food, eat, obey laws, and touch a dead body. (Leviticus 5:2; 7:20; 23:30; Deuteronomy 12:20; Romans 13:1) Those activities involve the entire person.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is the soul immortal?

No, the soul can die. Dozens of Bible verses refer to the soul as being mortal. Here are some examples:

“The soul that sinneth, it shall die.”—Ezekiel 18:4, 20, King James Version.


In ancient Israel, the punishment for the most serious offenses was that the “soul shall be cut off.” (Exodus 12:15, 19; Leviticus 7:20, 21, 27; 19:8, King James Version) The person would “be put to death.”—Exodus 31:14, King James Version.


After a person dies, the literal term “dead soul” is used for the corpse in some Bible verses. (Leviticus 21:11, footnote; Numbers 6:6, footnote) Although many Bible translations use the terms “dead body” or “dead person” in those verses, the original Hebrew uses the word ne′phesh, or “soul.”


“Soul” can mean “life”

The Bible also uses “soul” as a synonym for “life.” For example, Job 33:22 uses the Hebrew word for “soul” (ne′phesh) as a parallel for “life.” Similarly, the Bible shows that a person’s soul, or life, can be risked or lost.
This use of the word for “soul” helps us to understand verses in which the soul is said to be “going out” or “departing.” (Genesis 35:18; King James Version) This figure of speech indicates that the person’s life is ending. Some translations render this expression at Genesis 35:18 as “she breathed her last.”—Good News Translation; New Jerusalem Bible.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Where belief in an immortal soul comes from

Christian denominations that believe in an immortal soul get this teaching, not from the Bible, but from ancient Greek philosophy. The Encyclopædia Britannica says: “Biblical references to the soul are related to the concept of breath and establish no distinction between the ethereal soul and the corporeal body. Christian concepts of a body-soul dichotomy originated with the ancient Greeks.”

God does not condone merging his teachings with human philosophies, such as belief in an immortal soul. Instead, the Bible warns: “Look out that no one takes you captive by means of the philosophy and empty deception according to human tradition.”—Colossians 2:8.

Something To Think About
 

Death
 

This is my last word on this topic,


Death, and What Happens When We Die,

The Bible makes it clear that God did not originally intend for humans to die. He created the first human pair Adam and Eve, placed them in an earthly paradise called Eden, and instructed them to have children and extend their Paradise home earth wide. They would die only if they disobeyed his instructions.—Genesis 1:28; 2:15-17.
Lacking appreciation for God’s kindness, Adam and Eve did disobey and were made to pay the prescribed penalty. “You [will] return to the ground,” God told Adam, “for out of it you were taken. For dust you are and to dust you will return.” (Genesis 3:19) Before his creation Adam did not exist; he was dust. And for his disobedience, or sin, Adam was sentenced to return to dust, to a state of nonexistence.
Death is thus an absence of life. The Bible draws the contrast: “The wages sin pays is death, but the gift God gives is everlasting life.” (Romans 6:23) Showing that death is a state of total unconsciousness, the Bible says: “For the living are conscious that they will die; but as for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all.” (Ecclesiastes 9:5) When a person dies, the Bible explains: “His spirit goes out, he goes back to his ground; in that day his thoughts do perish.”—Psalm 146:3,*4.



2 Peter 3:13

But there are new heavens and a new earth that we are awaiting according to his promise, and in these righteousness is to dwell.


Revelation 21:4

And he will wipe out every tear from their eyes, and death will be no more, neither will mourning nor outcry nor pain be anymore. The former things have passed away.”

Gamby, what about "this day you shall be with me in paradise?" Jesus
"I am persuaded that neither life nor death nor principalities nor powers etc. can separate us from the love of Christ?" Paul
"I will never leave you nor forsake you" jesus.

Ecclesiastes is about questionings of what life means and considerations and meditations about the meaning of life.
Framing one's beliefs by pointing to one verse ignores that the book is chock-full of the author discovering the errors of his thinking and the author tracks the progression of his beliefs from the beginning to the end of Ecclesiastes.

For example, contrast the verse you quoted with Ecclesiastes 12:7
"Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was, and the spirit shall return unto to God who gave it"

It seems that the Bible is open to interpretation. One sees things one way and another sees the opposite. If everyone saw everything in the same way, wouldn't there be just one religion for the whole world?

Where did the Quran come from? Is that not the word of God?

What about the Jewish faith and their belief that Christ was just a philosopher and not the son of God? Is that incorrect?

Could it be that the Bible was simply great fiction written by man and not at all inspired by God? Although, perhaps it was inspired by the thought that there might be a God.

1 Corinthians Chapter 15


13 But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen:

14 And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.

15 Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.

16 For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised:

17 And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.

18 Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished.

19 If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.

20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.

21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.

22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtrtxW_64PU

If the original question was why do we get old and die- because that's the way it is! Keep it simple, people. It has nothing to do with religion, it's just that things come into being, age and die. Happens to everybody and every thing. Time to enjoy what life you have left!

Villages PL: I find the studies done by experts very confusing and contradicting. Iron creates an oxidative reaction but iron is essential to the blood. Many narratives are circulating that meat protein is essential especially for people over the age of 65. The bigger danger to the body is inflamation .

I don't believe a doctor would place every patient he/she had on a vegan diet because each person health age and needs vary. Such things as ability to absorb nutrients they need, the effect of fiber on their digestive system their need for iron because perhaps they are anemic, etc. The bigger concern is a person's ability to creating tasting and nutrient needed meals . I mean you just don't buy frozen vegetables and mix them around
i could be wrong about all this but based on the Restaurant Discussion thread it doesn't appear many villagers are intrigued by a vegan diet

As to eternal life far too complicated and taxing for me.

"The bible is the word or God. How do we know this? Because the bible said so. " You got to remember the bible was written when science didn't exist and every unexplained thing was contributed to a God. Later they downsized to only one God. Have you ever seen the demonstration of a story told to a person at the head of the line then passed down the line to the 10th person? The last persons story didn't even closely resemble the original. Imagine now passing it on for 2000 years and through untold number of languages.
Even today with our high tech media they report a story that many times has so many mistakes to make the whole story inaccurate 30 minutes later.

rubicon, yes, iron is essential but can be obtained from vegetables and one thing about iron is that some of it gets recycled in the body. So, most of us don't need a big new supply every day. Of course there may always be exceptions. I never rule out exceptions although I have been accused of it many times. I never say everyone must do this or that.

To restate it another way: Iron is essential but excess iron may be harmful. If a doctor says someone needs more iron based on a blood test, then they probably do and should follow the doctors advice.

People over 65 need more meat protein? Let me give that some thought; perhaps some people do need it. It might be a good subject for a new thread. I need some time on that one.

.... Eternal life is free. You can't get from vegetables.
I am sad for those who have no faith... And very very grateful for the most precious gift I have ever received.

Research...yum, good stuff
Nutrition Journal | Full text | Diet, iron biomarkers and oxidative stress in a representative sample of Mediterranean population

:BigApplause:

Could not agree with you more....... I cannot not imagine being without the personal knowledge of having a better long home waiting.

Now this makes sense and I will not spend any of my precious time trying to figure out why we die. Instead, I'll spend the rest of my days having fun spending time with family and friends laughing and having a ball.

I love that VPL starts threads that have no concrete answers to. Like asking, "how many angels dance on the head of a pin".

Just remember. "Man Plans, GOD Laughs".

After I posted to rubicon I realized I forgot to point out the difference between non-heme iron from plants and heme iron from animal protein but your link has it covered. I would just add this: The reason heme iron is so bad is that it accumulates and builds up in the body and can therefore reach toxic levels. On the other hand, you can never get too much non-heme iron from plant based foods. Your body will only keep what it needs for normal body functions.

Thanks for your input, I totally agree. Let's not wait around for research that may never materialize, lets do everything that we already know how to do, like eat a healthy-whole-foods plant-based diet. :mmmm:

Hi villages PL: Appreciate the reply. As to 65+ eating more meat the study explained it had to do with the reduction in absorption rate of nutrients by seniors. Makes sense to me.

Again we find the experts reverse themselves. Reported in the New England Journal of Medicine is the following findings.

Current guidelines by WHO, American Heart Association and other groups set daily sodium targets between 1,500 and 2,300 milligrams. The average US daily consumption is about 3,400 milligrams. The new study tracked 100,000 people in 17 countries for more than 3 years. Those who consumed less than 3,000 milligrams daily had a 27% higher risk of heart attack or stroke than those consuming 3,000 to 6,000 Risk of death or major events increased with intake above 6,000.

At the risk of being accused of confirmation bias it seems the Greeks common sense approach of "Moderation in all things" once again is validated

This thread as been split between discussion of mortal life and eternal life.

I read two accounts this morning of what faith can achieve, both concerning Eastern Europeans under the yoke of communism. The Poles had credited Pope John Paul with giving them the strength and determination to succeed in their fight for democracy. another part of the article pointed to an observation of a US government official who was taken to a Russia church where he found the exterior badly deteriorated and in need of repair. However when he entered the church he found the interior to be extremely beautiful and in a pristine state. The obvious reason was to escape detection from the communist so these parishioners could practice their faith

Perhaps a strong faith and the promise of eternal life has a positive affect on our longevity? One thing for sure you have to admire people such as those above who demonstrate such tenacity in the face of such dangerous and life threatening adversity

rubicon, I found the Daily Sun article about high-protein diets for the elderly. It was published on March 9, 2014. The heading was: "High-protein diets: Bad for the middle-aged, good for the elderly" The sub-heading was "Study: High protein diet in those 66 and older likely to live longer". But the article never said how much longer they would live, on average, and it never quantified the amount of protein. In that regard the heading conflicted with the actual information in the body of the article.

The lead author of the study, Valter Longo, said the following: Among the older subjects, the source of proteins was less important. The important thing is that "those entering a period of frailty" take in more protein to reduce "their loss of weight and muscle mass."

My problem is with a lack of specifics in the article. The information seems to suggest that the subjects were suffering from protein deficiency, but the amount of protein was not quantified.

When I did an on-line search on how to calculate one's protein requirement, I found the following formula: Body weight in lbs. X 0.4 = number of protein grams per day. And about 1/3 more protein is needed when the source is plant-based.

The study was about "those entering a period of frailty." So you have to imaging that they are not getting much exercise, if any. Under those conditions the most that one can hope for is to "reduce [the] loss of weight and muscle mass." Protein by itself is not going to build lean muscle.

The article mentioned that plant-based nutrients have important protective effects. So, to the extent that someone over consumes animal protein, they will be displacing the all important plant-based nutrients.

It seems that at some point nature may box a person in. If the person is frail and doesn't get much exercise, they're unlikely to have a good appetite. So if they're only eating a very small volume of food, they will likely do better with a more concentrated source of protein, like eggs, chicken or fish. (The calculation method I provided above should do it.)

All of this assumes that the frail elderly don't like beans etc. and won't eat them in any significant quantities. So one would just do the next best thing under the circumstances.

About the sodium: Reductionist thinking strikes again! I'll explain more about this at some later time.

About the Greeks: I will repeat what I've said before: In what year did they say "Moderation in all things"? Back then their access to highly processed junk foods (manufactured foods) were essentially non-existent.
So their saying "Moderation in all things" cannot be applied today. It simply wouldn't work.