Aging program. Anti-aging program. The course of study is completely individual. It will take two to three years, depending on your internal pace, your composure and the time resources that you will be able to devote to it. Having reached the end of the training

Now there seems to be a real explosion in the number of users of the Google+ service. Statistical analysis conducted by Paul Allen, founder of Ancestry and head of the company that develops applications for Facebook, suggests that on Sunday, July 10, the number of Google+ users reached 7.3 million, and already exceeded 10 million on the 12th.

Mr. Allen suggests in his article that if Google doesn't disable the invitation button, then by the end current week the number of users can easily exceed 20 million people. Paul Allen notes: “The user base is growing so quickly that it is becoming difficult to keep track of the actual numbers.”

Of course, a number of 10 million or 20 million is huge in absolute values, especially considering that the service is only two weeks old. However, so far these figures are lost against the background of Facebook with its 750 million users. However, Mr. Alain’s statistics indicate that even today there is a demand for another big social network and Google is not necessarily doomed to fail in its attempt to launch it.

Facebook and Google are distinct competitors. More than any other company, Facebook is showing that new rivals can beat Google in important online markets. Now, however, Google has shown that Facebook's power may be shaken.

Google+ started with a small group of technical specialists and has been expanding rapidly since then. The invitation button is intended to limit the uncontrolled growth of the service in the early stages of development, but the relative ease of inviting friends was the key to rapid expansion. In addition, so far Google does not seem to be containing growth or limiting it very moderately.

Paul Allen isn't the only one impressed by Google+'s growth rate. “I predict that Google+ will go from 0 to 100 million users faster than any other service in history,” the Idealab founder and CEO noted in a recent post about Google+. His reasoning is this:

“The service is great. She is timely. People get involved in it with passion. According to rumors, the number of users has already exceeded 4.5 million. This may be an overestimate. The number may be 1 million or less for now, but I believe there are currently over 1 million people registered. Already today the service is perhaps the fastest growing (from 0 to 1 million) in history. Of course, this comparison is not entirely fair, because when Facebook was launched, when Twitter was deployed, and so on, these were small companies, and Google is huge. However, the product is beautifully executed, and many people liked it.

Next year will dot the i’s. Will there be obstacles along the way? Certainly. Will Facebook and Twitter respond with new innovations? Definitely. But I hasten to point out that Google+ is already quite good, and the team is so responsive, that it makes me believe they can win."

The FaceApp application can be downloaded for free, and understanding how it works is easy. Take a photo of yourself or select a photo from the photo gallery there and select the desired options. Voila!

This is what the app interface looks like when you select a photo before editing.

The application offers 8 various options photo transformation. First, the original photo (Original). Next, you can use 2 different smile modes (Smile and Smile 2), transform the original photo into a photo with the “wow” effect (Spark), and after pressing the button, turn into a child, a little lady or a man (and a man can be transformed, respectively, into old man or girl).

For test number 1, we selected the following application options:

1. Original
2. In old age
3. With a slight smile
4. Wow effect

Well, since the test was a lot of fun, we decided to also test the remaining options. For this purpose another photograph was taken.

1. Original
2. In old age
3. Child
4. Man

Here's the result:

Hmm... yes... The photo of the baby looks really cute. The photo in old age is probably somehow embellished. But it’s better not to comment on the photo as a man at all. Oh well, but the app is a lot of fun.

Now you can select several stars as guinea pigs and use the application to try out what they will look like in old age. We chose Angelina Jolie, Ryan Gosling, Blake Lively.

Conclusion. FaceApp didn't transform Angelina Jolie much, but male image she looks kind of weird!

Ryan looks great at any age. But his blonde transformation is not for the faint of heart.

But Blake Lively is always good, even as a man.

Let's summarize. The new app is a lot of fun. Be sure to try!

“Survival of the fittest,” - sometimes all sorts of “masters of life” pompously declare, misinterpreting the original meaning of Darwin’s thought.

“Survival of the fittest,” Darwin meant, evolutionary biologists explain to us.

Adapted to what? Toward maximum reproduction under current conditions. Who is this “adapted”? Individual person or a rabbit? Of course not. The individual will not survive in any case. The group of genes that created the most “adapted” rabbit survives. One that will surpass its fellows in ensuring its genes maximum survival by creating the most more their copies.

What is “maximum survival”? By what parameter will we maximize? “It's up to you,” Game Theory tells us. Do you want a local maximum of your copies at a single point in time? Receive and sign. Just don’t complain that oh, how fleeting happiness is after you die out from resource exhaustion.

Do you want to live happily ever after? That is, to maximize the area under the curve of your copies over time? Then please learn to control the resource consumption of your replicators or at least give them skills to wait long periods unfavorable conditions. Or better yet, both.

But the most chic thing is to grow their intelligence so that they themselves begin to control their population for you, plan the consumption of their resources, and even come up with more and more effective ways extract these resources. Such replicators can produce as many as 7.5 billion of your gene cooperatives, 30–40 trillion copies each. For bacteria, these are, of course, ridiculous numbers, but for eukaryotes it’s quite an indicator.

True, it takes a long time to grow intelligence, and there is a chance that it will not grow, the Neanderthals tell us. It’s all like this: if you, as a young, daring startup cooperative, decide using the “trillion macaques on typewriters” method to encode the ability to think into your replicators, then until your code is ready for production release, you have to create a population of these very beta replicators yourself also control. Otherwise, another sabrute called be fruitful_and_multiply() is trying to send all your efforts to /dev/null. Therefore, the “Genes and Sons” cooperative first had to hone the ability to prevent its creatures from becoming extinct or multiplying greatly. Why did he cheat in the first place? Having learned to control the influx of individuals through turning off reproduction, and the outflow through phenoptosis - either sharp, like salmon, or smooth, like us and a mouse.

At the same time, of course, we do not yet fully understand all the mechanisms of these processes. If (or rather, when) we understand, then all debates about the nature of aging will be resolved. To the question “where is the program” there will be an unambiguous answer: here it is, such and such genes, such and such control mechanisms, input parameters - here, such and such an algorithm.

How to test the hypothesis of programmed aging?

Another hypothesis: if aging is a program, it should have some key mechanisms that vary the main parameter of the program - life expectancy. By influencing these mechanisms, we must see an impact on the outcome of the program. This is what we are shown by the results of extending life significantly by knocking out developmental/aging genes in nematodes and mice.

How did evolution refine the mechanisms of aging?

When multicellular organisms arose, the war between selection at the individual level and group selection took a new turn. Group selection encouraged more and more new mechanisms of aging, and individual selection tried to hack them.

And over hundreds of millions of years, those species that did not have sufficiently strong defense mechanisms against hacking bypassed their aging program and fixed the genes for this hacking in their population due to selection pressure at the individual level, which, of course, more pressure group selection (since reproductive advantage individuals from life extension is realized much faster than the onset negative consequences this benefit for the entire population). But eventually these species, when this advantage was already fixed in the genes of a sufficiently large number of individuals, died out due to starvation caused by overpopulation, from which such a species suffered at least once during millions of years of evolution. And only those species in which group selection secured a sufficient number of redundant aging mechanisms, and those that learned to wait out “hunger times” in the form of spores or “hidden eggs” like an ageless hydra, avoided extinction.

By the way, the multidirectional action (antagonistic pleiotropy) of IGF1 is precisely the mechanism that allows the aging program to remain in the population. Moreover, the mechanism is very cunning, because this gene gives an evolutionary advantage to individuals on early stages development - rapid growth - which fixes it in the population, in exchange for the fact that these rapidly reproducing individuals remain mortal.

Moreover, such multidirectionality of IGF-1 is not some kind of inevitability and is not caused by any physical law. Evolution could have done well without it if it had not had the task of preventing overpopulation. After all, the hitch rapid growth with aging imposes clear restrictions on the fertility of each individual. And those individuals that could break this link would receive a clear evolutionary advantage in reproduction.

Surely evolution could not, over billions of years, uncouple puberty genes from their negative manifestations in the form of thymus involution and other manifestations of aging? After all, she was able to invent stunning things - first, to transform single-celled organisms into multicellular ones, then to drive fish onto land, teaching them to breathe air, and then to teach some to fly. She was able to create huge dinosaurs and whales, as well as many other absolutely fantastic life forms and ecosystems. But at the same time, the vast majority of her creatures have the same connection between the genes of puberty and aging: be it in nematodes or in humans. It is much more plausible that evolution actively “did not want” to break this link, rather than “could not”.

And yes, in the vast majority of species, but not in all. There are species that do not have a direct relationship between fertility (and this is the main criterion for the effectiveness of developmental genes) and aging. For some, fertility only increases with age:

Where is the paleontological evidence of extinct immortal species?

Well, as a hypothesis: 252 million years ago, about 90% of all species on earth became extinct. One of possible reasons This catastrophe is the explosive growth of single-celled bacteria, which destroyed one of the basic links in the ecological pyramid. After all, when an entire link in the ecological pyramid dies out, everything that is located above this link in the pyramid also runs the risk of becoming extinct. And there were several such disasters on Earth:

Couldn't evolution simply invent an immortal species that doesn't cause overpopulation?

By the way, evolution may have already been able to invent such an “immortal” species - this is the Hydra, beloved by gerontologists, which does not age. But to do this, she had to learn cryptobiosis (wait out hungry times), as well as reproduce both sexually and by budding. When there is a lot of food, the hydra clones itself by budding. And when it’s not enough, she grows either male or female genital organs and makes love, leaving the fertilized eggs to wait for better times at the bottom of the ocean. This is how she learned to wait it out unfavourable conditions- parents may die of hunger, but children will wait out the famine, since their development is frozen until better times come. Just like a dauer nematode larva.

And another species on the threshold of immortality is us, Homo Sapiens. Just to learn not to die out from overpopulation, we first had to grow brains for ourselves, and then, with their help, come up with a culture and society, and even scientific and technological progress that would provide us technical capabilities do not die from resource depletion in any population. I have no doubt that we will break this stupid aging program. It's a question of time.

Aging is natural physiological process, which is characteristic of all living organisms on the planet. It is a mechanism of gradual fading, deterioration of all systems of the human body, visual changes in the body, skin, cell structures.

In addition, aging is accompanied by a gradual loss of mental abilities. Therefore, the biological process affects all aspects of life: physical abilities, psychological health and wealth, social belonging, economic independence. A person’s functional capabilities are limited, so his lifestyle cannot remain the same: he interacts with society differently, does not tolerate physical exercise, emotionally not so stable.

The anti-aging program is aimed at slowing down the complex and multifaceted process laid down by nature and genetics. Old age is not a disease, it cannot be cured, but it can be improved in functionality, maintained general health and strength, it is quite possible to prevent the development of risky pathologies.

Anti-aging program: diagnostics abroad

Scientists have found that the aging process primarily affects the cardiovascular and nervous system body. The main determining factor is the accumulation of cholesterol on vascular walls. This leads to the fact that the cells are poorly supplied with the necessary nutrients and oxygen, begin to deform and collapse. Therefore, the organs and systems in which they are located begin to function worse.

The liver copes worse with cleansing the blood of water-soluble harmful toxins that accumulate inside the body. This leads to general poisoning, which manifests itself even externally - in the form age spots on the skin.

The kidneys do not filter as well, which contributes to the accumulation of significant volumes uric acid and other intermediate metabolic substances. A large number of harmful components causes inhibition metabolic processes, deterioration of cellular oxygen supply.

The foreign anti-aging program is aimed at determining all individual patient indicators that affect early aging body. Many years of research experience allow doctors to create diagnostic complexes that show the exact causes of premature aging or directions for prevention.

Anti-Aging Program at Anadolu Medical Center

Turkish medicine is very popular in the world due to its affordable pricing policy and the quality of services provided. Many patients from Russia annually turn to foreign specialists for the diagnosis and treatment of various pathologies.

For older age group patients are provided with a special anti-aging program; the main advantage of the anti-aging program is the speed of obtaining results and recommendations for slowing down the process of cell destruction. It includes a whole set of biochemical tests aimed at determining the content of biotin, magnesium, selenium, zinc, and other blood components.

After the study, the patient is provided with a full report of the results, as well as detailed recommendations by way of life, preventive measures, proper nutrition and treatment. After taking them into account, improved sleep is guaranteed, appearance, mental states and physical health, hair, normalization of problematic aspects, increasing skin elasticity.

Despite quite a large number of evidence in favor of programmed aging, many scientists today refuse to accept this concept, not even because such a program has not yet been found in general, but because the presence of a suicide program embedded in the body will, in turn, give rise to a whole series of intractable questions. The most important of them can be formulated simply: where did this program come from?

The evolutionary theory of the development of living beings dominant in modern biology postulates that in the process natural selection characteristics that increase adaptation are preserved, and those that decrease it are eliminated. Aging, by definition, is general decline adaptive properties of the organism and therefore could not gain a foothold in the process of evolution. In other words, any schoolchild who has studied the theory of evolution will answer the question: why does the hare run fast? He will say: in the process of evolution, slow hares became prey to predators, while faster individuals survived and gave birth to offspring. Speed ​​was an adaptive advantage and therefore became established through the process of natural selection. But what advantage could aging hares have over non-aging ones? After all, if aging is genetically programmed, then over millions of years (according to scientists) of evolution, inevitably, as a result of mutations, individuals should have appeared that would age little or not at all, and in any case they would have an advantage over the aging ones. It is also unclear how a trait that manifests itself in the post-reproductive period of life, when the individual no longer bears offspring, can be fixed in the process of natural selection. And finally, the most important thing: aging as a biological property practically does not manifest itself in living nature, that is, animals in natural conditions They die mostly even before signs of aging appear from predators, infections, hunger, etc. Even people in the Middle Ages practically did not live to old age - they died from wars and epidemics. It is difficult to resist the question formulated by the domestic gerontologist L.A. Gavrilov: “Is it really the guaranteed destruction of several accidentally surviving and doomed wild conditions old people may be a sufficient evolutionary basis for the formation and preservation in the genome special program self-destruction? .

For the first time, the German biologist A. Weissmann, whose name in the USSR for a long time was a symbol of pseudoscience - genetics. He wrote words that orthodox Marxists declared an apologetic for misanthropy: “Incompetent individuals are not only useless to the species, but even harmful, since they take the place of those who are capable. I view death not as a primary necessity, but as something that arose secondarily in the form of an adaptation. I believe that the duration of life is limited, not because unlimited life is contrary to the nature of life, but because unlimited life would be a luxury that would not provide any advantages.

Simply put, Weisman believed that aging and death are an adaptive mechanism not of an individual, but of the species or population as a whole. Since each new individual carries new characteristics, the faster the population is updated, the more variable the population is, and therefore more viable in changing conditions environment.

IN Lately All larger number The hypothesis of phenoptosis, put forward by Academician V.P. Skulachev, is gaining supporters, according to which aging and death evolved evolutionarily as a protection of the population from mutational degeneration, since with age the probability of mutations increases.

These and similar points of view are highly controversial. But one thing is clear: a living organism cannot simply “wear out” like a non-living mechanism, because it has the ability to self-heal. Or, as Academician Skulachev figuratively expressed this idea: “A horse and a cart cannot fail for one reason.”

Aging Program from a Christian Perspective

Many researchers, especially in past centuries, were haunted by the amazing longevity of the antediluvian patriarchs described in the book of Genesis, and even more so by its sudden cessation in subsequent generations. The lifespan of the first 26 generations is shown in the table:

Life expectancy in the first 26 generations

It is not difficult to notice a clear difference in life expectancy before Noah and after him. Until Noah, including himself, the period human life approximately the same: from 900 to 970 years. After Noah, life expectancy decreases all the time: Noah (10th generation) lived 959 years, and by the time of Moses (26th generation) the human age was reduced to 120 years. After him, the Bible no longer mentions a single case of a person living more than 120 years.

The first mention of old age and aging occurs in the Bible in the story of Abraham: Abraham and Sarah were old and advanced in years(Genesis 18:11). Before this, we never found people aging anywhere. As stated in Genesis 5, the patriarchs produced offspring at a very late age. For example, Methuselah and Lamech were nearly two hundred years old when their children were born, and the text clearly states that they had children later. Noah was already five hundred years old when his three sons were born. Moreover, at the same age he was entrusted with the most difficult work - to build and equip the ark, a task that could not possibly be entrusted to a weak old man. It follows from this that the first generations of people not only lived extremely long, but also remained young, in the biological sense, all their lives. Perhaps old age for them was a very short period before death.

Based on this, it can be assumed that during the time of Noah some event occurred that influenced life expectancy. This event is clearly indicated in the biblical text. In the time of Noah, the book of Genesis says, God was angry with people for their unrighteous behavior and decreed: ...my Spirit will not forever be despised by men... because they are flesh; let their days be a hundred and twenty years(Genesis 6:3). Usually this passage is interpreted following Professor A.P. Lopukhin, that is, one hundred and twenty years is “the period appointed by God for the repentance and correction of people, during which the righteous Noah prophesied about the flood and made the appropriate preparations for it,” from which it is made the conclusion is that the ark took 120 years to build.

But if we compare the following sequential passages from the book of Genesis: Noah was five hundred years old and Noah gave birth...: Shem, Ham and Japheth(Genesis 5, 32); And God said to Noah: ...Make yourself an ark from gopher wood(Genesis 6, 13-14); Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of water came to the earth(Genesis 7:6), then we will be convinced that Noah built the ark and prophesied the coming flood for no more than 100 years. Therefore, one should rather agree with the opinion of Josephus, who saw the literal meaning in these words - the reduction of human life to 120 years. This point of view has another weighty argument: today it is officially recognized and documented maximum duration human life is 122 years (French woman Jeanne Louise Calment 1875-1997). Reliability of information about the alleged incident longer duration life is in doubt. And although after Noah the maximum life expectancy was not immediately established at 120 years, but decreased gradually, this only indicates that the prophecy was not fulfilled immediately.

Anyway, based on the research Holy Scripture It is difficult to admit that aging is simply “wear and tear” of the body, otherwise how can we explain the huge difference in life expectancy before Noah and after him? Christian teaching clearly indicates that human body was created by God to be potentially immortal. Thus, the 123rd rule of the Council of Carthage reads: “If anyone says that Adam, the primordial man, was created mortal, so that even if he sinned, even if he did not sin, he would die in the body, that is, he would leave the body, - not as a punishment for sin, but according to the necessity of nature, let him be anathema." Aging is a property that appeared after the fall of our ancestors and apparently underwent a change after the flood. Only the question remains open: is this property expressed as a genetic program? But here is what can be stated quite definitely:

1) the consequences of ancestral sin, according to the teaching of the Church, are inherited from generation to generation;

2) aging is a consequence of ancestral sin and at the same time a biological property of the body;

3) biology today knows only one way of preserving and hereditary transmission of biological properties - genetic.

If we can find and decipher a hypothetical aging program, then blocking this program will be much more convenient and the easy way victory over aging than the endless correction of “breakdowns” that constantly arise in the aging body.

From a book published by the Publishing House Sretensky Monastery in 2012