weedstain

This is something I have thought about for some time and found it amusing, but when you think about it, its kind of makes sense.

If somebody used medication or treatment to make them look 10 years younger (for sake of arguement), then if this person began treatment at 50, they should be looking about 40 if the treatment works yes?

10 years on when this perosn is now 60, they should be looking 50 because of the treatment. HOWEVER, when this perosn WAS 50, they looked 40, so shouldn't this mean thoretically the person would still look 40? If the person carried on with the treatment they would look always look 40?

Would just like to hear your views please.

Master_Shake

Assuming that the treatment worked exactly that way every time, then yes, the person could appear to be perpetually 40 (or at least, every 10 years he/she could lose 10 years off his/her looks and then continue the process of aging to what looks like 50).

However, as with most medications, there might be diminishing returns with continued usage. The more he/she uses it, the less effective it would be over time. So maybe at actual age 60 he/she uses the treatment and it only takes off 9 years instead of 10. Then the next treatment only takes off 8 years, etc...

Also, what do you mean by taking off years? Do you mean purely external physical signs of aging like wrinkles, thining hair, etc.. Or do you mean more complete physical signs including loss of body mass, decreased hormone production, etc. Such a treatment might not be effective for everyone since not everyone looks that much different between 40 and 50.

Finally, would the treatment restore the person to what he/she looked like when 10 years younger, or would it just impart a general state of 10 years youthfulness that is more or less the same for everyone; there are some people who look better at 50 than at 40. I can't think of any celebrity examples off hand but surely there might be cases of people who are overweight at 40 but manage to trim down over the course of 10 years. Would such a treatment then pack the weight back onto such a person? Imagine that perpetual cycle of weight gain that accompanies the treatment every 10 years.

__________________
-------------
You know something, I don't think the sun even... exists... in this place. 'Cause I've been up for hours, and hours, and hours, and the night never ends here.

weedstain

I was thinking just external signs, mainly skin. I know that different people are affected more or less strongly by different things as they age, and so it's pretty far fetched for anything like this to work on everyone. What I was thinking was that any brand that claims it makes you look years younger could be sued because of this theory. Again far fetched.

Master_Shake

Maybe, but most of the facial and skin cream ads always put "results not typical" in small lettering on the bottom part of the screen.

Also, I think many of these companies are just fronts for the mob to launder money.

__________________
-------------
You know something, I don't think the sun even... exists... in this place. 'Cause I've been up for hours, and hours, and hours, and the night never ends here.

tiberry

This sounds more like a math problem...

__________________
My life's work is to bridge the gap between that which is perceived by the mind and that which is quantifiable by words and numbers.

basmoq

you hurt my mind with this one

__________________
"There's someone out there for everyone - even if you need
a pickaxe, a compass, and night goggles to find them."

ratbastid

You'd be a real puzzler when you show up at the morgue dead of old age and looking 40...

Hell, you'd be the hottest person in the rest home! All the grannies would want to feed you creamed corn!

Seriously, though, the manufacturers of products that claim to make you look younger don't intend it to be a permanent, lasting effect like you're describing. As you describe it, you'd expect the first treatment to still be working fifty years later. In the real world, those products are effective (to whatever degree they are) while they're actually on your face, and then not later.

Reese

It's possible that the treatments would take more years off as you aged. At 50 if the medicine took away all your wrinkles, tightened and thickened your skin as tight as it could be to make you look 40. At 60 there were just too many wrinkles to get rid of so you look 45, at 70, you're really getting more wrinkles so the best the treatment can make you look is 50(just assuming)

at 50 the treatment is overkill because you just can't look under 40(assuming) At 60, the treatment is at it's working harder and can't get you to look 40 anymore, at 70, the best the treatment can make you look is 50 but you look 20 years younger compared to when you were 50 you only looked 10 years younger.

That makes no friggin sense.

under you're theory. if you took a 1 times treatment when you were 50 but took it 5 times, you'd look 10..

__________________
“It is better to be rich and healthy than poor and sick” - Dave Barry

wilbjammin

Those surgeries look so fake. Stretched plastic looking skin looks like crap, and I can almost always tell when something has been done. I makes you look kind of younger, but after a while it makes you look less than human if you keep doing it.

Approaching this from the way you framed it. I think that ten years means ten years. You have to do continuing surgeries to maintain the look, if you do the surgeries to look ten years younger and then don't do anything you'll look worse after 10 years pass than if you didn't do anything. That is part of why people get so addicted to that kind self-modification.

__________________
Innominate.

Xell101

You'd just be doubling up on the same effects, not double it's effective range.