Your genes are a bigger part of your mortality than ever

+ Do smart cities actually suck? ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌
The Conversation

For a long time, it was thought that our genes accounted for about 20–25% of the human lifespan. But a new study says it's actually more like 50-55%.

This makes sense. Fewer of us are dying in accidents or of infections than we used to. We're now instead more likely to suffer from conditions to which we are genetically predisposed, like cancer or dementia. You can take the findings as good news or bad but they certainly update our thinking on human mortality.

Of course the bigger picture here is that humans continue to live longer and longer lives. Another new study looks at whether we can keep pushing the limit on mortality by mapping where people live longer across Europe and what conditions on the ground might explain the differences.

New technology is a big part of the picture when it comes to longer lives and better health, but does it make for a happier existence? A ranking of cities suggests that so-called smart cities – areas that lean heavily into technology in their infrastructure – are not generally great places to live. In fact, the most high-tech cities in the ranking don't score highly for social cohesion, transportation and even economic performance. Perhaps that's why futuristic mega city proposals are so often scaled back before they're ever built.

And as preparations for the Winter Olympics enter their final hours, organisers will be making their final checks on the AI systems that will help in this year's judging. How will this technology change the competition?

Laura Hood

Senior Politics Editor, London

Your genes matter more for lifespan now than they did a century ago – here's why

Karin Modig, Karolinska Institutet

Why genetic influence on lifespan appears to have doubled.

Where are Europe's oldest people living? What geography tells us about a fragmenting continent

Florian Bonnet, Ined (Institut national d'études démographiques); Carlo Giovanni Camarda, Ined (Institut national d'études démographiques); France Meslé, Ined (Institut national d'études démographiques); Josselin Thuilliez, Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS)

Analysis of mortality data spanning 450 regions in Europe is categorical: longevity across the continent is a two-tier affair.

Why futuristic, tech-centred 'smart city' projects are destined to fail

Pascual Berrone, IESE Business School (Universidad de Navarra)

Technology alone can't make a city a good place to live.

The EU-India agreement is huge – and it illustrates the changing role of trade in a fractured world order

Sangeeta Khorana, Aston University

The 'mother of all deals' aims to create a free-trade area covering nearly a quarter of the world's population.

AI is coming to Olympic judging: what makes it a game changer?

Willem Standaert, Université de Liège

As the International Olympic Committee (IOC) rolls out AI-assisted judging at the Winter Olympics, how is this new technology set to revolutionise the sports industry?

 
 
 
 
NewerStories OlderStories Home

0 comments:

Post a Comment