Blood doping

[AsuraSyn]

Suicidesoldier#1

Oh, you'd need to condition no doubt. Your heart rate would be at 210 forever, and as a result your kidneys and liver would need conditioning to, both compensate in terms of metabolism, and to filter your blood. But the human body is theoretically capable of it.

Our muscles can take it, martial artists condition their bones to break through concrete, to become harder than concrete, even though ordinarily it would break. Take a hammer, for instance; human strength could break concrete with it, but what does a hammer have? Speed and momentum, but hardness. You have to hit harder than with a hammer but with fists of iron you could easily shatter concrete; some people wear like gloves before they do it. So with fists as strong as steel, which bones are half the strength but double it in terms of weight to strength ratio (so they're a quarter the weight!), with increased density, and the ability to heal, you can punch through concrete. Tendons in humans are half the strength of steel, but horses can be over it. See, some humans, like martial artists, have super hard tendons, which they condition over time; tendons more or less keep your muscles to your bones, but when you exercise they get stronger, and much tougher, as well. So, tendons keep your muscles from ripping off if you strain too hard, so with some stronger tendons, which is totally possible, you won't have to worry about that.

You'd need some "hardening", so to speak, to get used to those levels without hurting yourself, but it's possible for short feats.


My objective is one of two things. Either, say, make a heart 10 times bigger, to take the constant flow of blood like it's nothing, or get a hydraulic robotic heart at those levels. Advantages of a robotic heart at those levels is, you no longer to need to monitor the heart rate; you won't pass out if it's too low, since it's always over the level it needs to be. In fact, you might even suppress real adrenaline, and just bump up a few things to be at those levels constantly. Your blood pressure would be high, but with thicker blood, or perhaps better, a hydraulic heart, it would be easier.

Since, your heart operates in constant, rhythmic, pulses. This is say, 2.3 PSI, but if spread out over time, say a constant flowing of blood, the PSI could be lower and blood could circulate faster. Hearts are only about 10% efficient while machines can be 85%-90%. So say, use some plutonium-238 as a battery, or Americurium-238 which is honestly better (lasts 4 times longer, or 80 years, but is weaker) and you can operate for a heart for about 10-12 grams or so, which at most only needs about 1-1.3 watts or so of power (although it consumes 10 watts, due to the inefficiency).


So, keep the blood circulating, only thing is, now your metabolism needs to be more efficient (you know 400 pound fat people who eat one 500 calorie meal a day? Turn that into raw power, instead, and make them say, 200 pounds OF MUSCLE! A low metabolism is an evolutionary advantage, after all) for nutrients, and you need better breathing. Circular breathing can more than double oxygen, then you got blood doping, but, it would be difficult higher than this. Since the PSI is lower you could maybe afford to have really thick blood. I thought about a copper blood bone marrow change, since copper blood doesn't have cells, but the hemocyanin floats freely, allowing a much higher density (although bone marrow transplants have a .5-2% SURVIVAL rate, that is the operate itself) or somehow constantly recycling PFC's (which can transport 40 times the oxygen and help in swollen tissue blood ordinarily can't enter, but you would need to recycle them after you exhale somehow, since it leaves your system in about 48 hours) with say, a gas mask or something, but idk.

You could probably increase lung efficiency, then increase blood doping stuff, then have circular breathing.


One way to do is to control the nervous system, say electrocute it; particularly if you couldn't feel pain, you could work an athlete say, even when they're unconscious, and make them work out super hards and become super strong.

Better yet, with 10 times the circulation, you get 10 times the healer, and 10 times less downtime between exercises. You could work out 10 times more, so you could condense 10 years worth of exercise into 1, or 20 into 2 etc. and become super amazing really quickly. Throw in some growth hormone and, you could be uber strong all the time. Might be like on an adrenaline rush constantly, idk. But everything would be 10 times slower, so that's a faster reaction time as well, so you could say, shoot 10 people before they could shoot you. On top of being just strong enough to carry around armor that would resist rifle rounds.


To be safe, you might add some titanium foam to the bones (which automatically attach themselves to bone, pretty nifty) and throw in some silicon instead of relying on cartilage to make sure they don't break any bones or something. Use some kind of inert fiber to insure they don't tear any ligaments, instead serve as their ligaments. Replace them when they wear out (the artificial cartilage that is, so you don't have to worry about joint problems).

I think about this kind of stuff, a lot. Perhaps too much. Project Orion, I'll call it. Maybe they'll be Spartans, maybe Myrmidons. Maybe they'll just be called soldiers. Whatever the case, they'll be amazing.

Oh uh, great athletes. *le cough*

Yes.



Also, electrodes in bear brains, get them to carry around large radios on their backs. Control their bodies.

Bear skulls can deflect 9mm rounds, and bear hide easily absorbs .357 magnum rounds. They can heal injuries like lizards, and can regrow kidneys, eyes, hands, fingers, all kinds of things. Since bears try to rip out each other's throats a lot, they've grown the ability to grow back stuff. So they'd make great soldiers, if we just electrocuted them and controlled their nervous system.

The military thought about sugar water for bees. I say just spray them in honey and release bears.

The heart/lung functionality seems terribly inefficient. Why not remove the entire process and replace it with something more effective?
Correct me if I'm wrong but the purpose of the lungs is to oxygenate the blood, the purpose of the heart is to circulate said blood, newly oxygenated, to the organs and bodily systems that need said oxygen, yes? Why not cut the middleman out and remove the heart and lungs and replace the blood with a more oxygen enriched substitute? A slurry of nanite driven biomatter, say 80% oxygen rich, flooding the organ system itself. No need for circulation in the traditional sense if it absorbs oxygen straight from the outer dermis the way our skin cells do. Although that would require repurposing the epidermis into a more efficient oxygen gathering device, I suppose, but regardless, even if that's not feasible, we could then simply swap out our oxyslurry every week or so instead of drawing breathe every second or two. For those in a more strenuous line of work, soldiers, athletes, heavy laborers, they could just add a tank of the slurry and a rebreather to circulate the used slurry with the new and reoxygenize it from the ambient atmosphere.
Thinking about it, we would need to retain some minor lung capacity, maybe a microlung stored somewhere, simply to let us talk. Vibrating air with vocal chords and all.
I like the pure energy concept instead of the sloppy process currently used, however, it's our cellular mitochondria that create the energy that runs our bodies from oxygen delivered through the blood. By bathing them in a higher level of oxygen, wouldn't they begin to produce even more energy allowing the body to develop faster, strong and just all around better? I know the regenerative abilities of certain animals is also within humans since, ya know, we do it constantly, just not as big a scale as regrowing a limb, but if our bodies were suddenly flooded with, say, a hundred times the current energy output, we'd theoretically be indestructible, no?

[Suicidesoldier#1]

AsuraSyn

The heart/lung functionality seems terribly inefficient. Why not remove the entire process and replace it with something more effective?
Correct me if I'm wrong but the purpose of the lungs is to oxygenate the blood, the purpose of the heart is to circulate said blood, newly oxygenated, to the organs and bodily systems that need said oxygen, yes? Why not cut the middleman out and remove the heart and lungs and replace the blood with a more oxygen enriched substitute? A slurry of nanite driven biomatter, say 80% oxygen rich, flooding the organ system itself. No need for circulation in the traditional sense if it absorbs oxygen straight from the outer dermis the way our skin cells do. Although that would require repurposing the epidermis into a more efficient oxygen gathering device, I suppose, but regardless, even if that's not feasible, we could then simply swap out our oxyslurry every week or so instead of drawing breathe every second or two. For those in a more strenuous line of work, soldiers, athletes, heavy laborers, they could just add a tank of the slurry and a rebreather to circulate the used slurry with the new and reoxygenize it from the ambient atmosphere.
Thinking about it, we would need to retain some minor lung capacity, maybe a microlung stored somewhere, simply to let us talk. Vibrating air with vocal chords and all.
I like the pure energy concept instead of the sloppy process currently used, however, it's our cellular mitochondria that create the energy that runs our bodies from oxygen delivered through the blood. By bathing them in a higher level of oxygen, wouldn't they begin to produce even more energy allowing the body to develop faster, strong and just all around better? I know the regenerative abilities of certain animals is also within humans since, ya know, we do it constantly, just not as big a scale as regrowing a limb, but if our bodies were suddenly flooded with, say, a hundred times the current energy output, we'd theoretically be indestructible, no?

The only way to be indestructible would be to say, replace our cell walls with graphene, but that would take super advanced nanotech. The problem with artificial blood is that you would need a constant, outside source. It would eventually scape through the skin, when your breathe (such as how your blood alcohol content is measured when you breathe), and through other parts of your body. Your body only produces blood through bone marrow, so you'd need to augument bone marrow in order to be able to do it.


Right now, human on human bone marrow transplants have a .5% to 2% chance of survival. Perhaps if we could put a person into stasis but activate healing only in bone marrow, say a forced coma? I have no idea. I do know that it's used to help cure cancer, and recently HIV, so it's got a lot of potential and investment into it. Therefore developing a way to produce say, copper blood, which half as weak as iron blood, could be 20 times denser without the viscosity issue, could solve the issue (although this blood would appear blue or purplish if mixed with regular blood, as well). Perhaps bone marrow augmentation, but idk.

Since the lungs could be flushed with more blood if it was denser, the lungs could absorb more oxygen, and thus oxygenate the body. The problem with artificial lungs is that they are like, 10,000 pounds, like iron lungs, or more, and kind of suck. Something the size of a building could not replace liver functions, as there are things it simply can't do. Since much of our body is chemical based, we need to consume foods, or chemicals, and convert it with our bodies; creating a machine to do that would basically require our body.

Oxygen concentrators exist, but they only have say, 8 hour battery lifes, but some plutonium-238 could solve that, so it could double or more the oxygen in the air you breathe (high oxygen breathing isn't an issue, as long as it's below 50% and at atmospheric pressure).

You'd need a mask or something maybe, though, to breathe that in. You might look like bane.


Birds, for instance, have 10-11 times the respiratory efficiency we have, with circular breathing and such. Dinosaurs were perhaps 13 times higher; they also have lung tissue, completely self contained, since it doesn't need a diaphragm and sucks in by itself, imagine aveolis that suck in air, that lined their spinal cord and other areas of their ribcage for more surface area, to get more air. Since they fly for hours on end, at high altitudes, it's necessary. As well, if their lung is punctured, who cares, cause like, it doesn't hold air like a sac, but millions of smaller sacs, so it's self contained. Infections are an issue, but you can build a tolerance to snake venom, anthrax, small pox, and even gangrene, so that likely isn't as big an issue as long as you slowly condition a person.

One potential solution is bacteria; if we could do it correctly, we could have every cell have bacteria synchronized with our body, as to replicate and operate when they do, and all the waste we make, such as carbon dioxide, salts etc. could go on to feed the bacteria. While pooping and such feeds bacteria as is, we could just convert that into bacteria food at the cellular level, and be constantly recycling oxygen, energy, glucose, and everything even. Plants have photosynthesis, but these could use chemosynthesis, or use heat. So, there'd be some waste, since there is no perfect recycling, but being 10 times more efficient is possible.

Purposefully infecting every cell in the body seems absurd though. Genetic virus therapy could be, say, replace all genes in the body with a virus (instead of trying to replace 1 gene, you could modify your genome than get it to replace it), and before the virus kills you, each need changed gene cell has a resistance to the virus. So basically, you could have an RNA virus that changes DNA. Since DNA based viruses couldn't have human cells DNA (lest they turn into human cells, instead of virus cells) they could replace it, thus creating human cells.


The problem with retro therapy is one of two things. Either, A, the virus continues to multiply long after your body is infecting, essentially killing you like any other virus we have no resistance to (since if our bodies had a resistance, it wouldn't infect every cell), or causes uncontrolled cell growth since it makes an infinite copy of cells, instead of viruses. Viruses say, infect a cell, take over the RNA replication process, insert their own RNA, and create 2000 more viruses; this then infects 2000 more cells, then 4 million, then 8 billion etc. until your whole body is infected. A great way to change someone's DNA in 3 trillion different cells all at once, since DNA changes otherwise need to be made at birth, but nothing tells the virus to stop. If it just multiples your whole body turns into mush and you die. If it preserves the host cell, instead of destroying it, you get uncontrolled cell growth, or cancer.

Thus, gene therapy is very dangerous. The secret may be to, however, make the new cells resistant the virus. You'd need an RNA based virus that has human cell DNA, and that changes the DNA, but uses it's own RNA; so it would need to be an RNA and DNA based virus. But, the new DNA, with the changes in it, would then be resistant to the virus, and tell your immune system how to destroy it. This would also prevent the virus from spreading, and infecting others, making unwanted changes. Still, we grew up as a baby to an adult, and all our changes have already come. We could very easily splice one cell as a baby and let it grow into an adult, but doing that after we're born is hard enough as is. The thing is, you've stopped growing; your growth are stopped, you no longer change from 6 pound baby to a 100+ pound person. So, say, growing a new tail, even if you've changed your DNA? Won't really work. The best bet for any changes will be non DNA. But, it's plausible; perhaps, say, lizards can regrow limbs, some humans have regrown lost fingers, toes, even kidneys, eyes, or other other organs. If humans were to, somehow, say, protect cellular memory, and get the body to remember it's shape, it could always heal back to that. So, if you lose an arm, the cells heal, but you get a stub healed arm, where the bone, skin, etc. veins, all just recirculated back to your body. But, if you could say, somehow, tell it to grow an arm, you could regrow arms and limbs and such. Lizards have been shown to not only regrow tails, but other limbs, as well, as well as many other animals; we can regrow livers, and chimps can regrow kidneys, but it can be possible to regrow other organs, we already did it once. Rather than change DNA, we could change around cellular memory.


For instance, nematodes can survive complete DNA destruction. At several thousand times the lethal radiation dosage to humans, which obliterates their DNA, they regrow their DNA. Their DNA *repair* process is so great what would for sure kill you in a matter of seconds is now protected against. As well, we could always revert back to a previous form; we couldn't get stronger or faster, but our arms would grow back just the same. We would need to exercise, get to our peak, and then do it, but it would work. So basically, no scar tissue, it would all be awesome.

So splicing ourselves with lizard DNA, idk. But splicing ourselves with stuff to augment our DNA? Plausible. Obama's not a lizard but he may have certain properties that allow him to repair damaged organs. Also lengthens life span maybe. Being cold blooded, you'd absorb heat, that is energy, form outside sources. Instead of sun bathing, you could absorb energy from a heat suit. So you could screw that inefficient super heating mammalian metabolism and have the energy to be super strong all you wanted. You could do a mixture of all of it if you wanted.

Instead of a suit, you could put little pellets of lead covered, steal covered, titanium covered, ceramic covered U-235 or, P-238 in your body, to constantly generate heat. That could make it so you were constantly absorbing enough energy, heat energy, to focus the rest of your energy on other things. The majority of the energy you consume from food is used to maintain your body temperature of 98.6.

[AsuraSyn]

Suicidesoldier#1

The only way to be indestructible would be to say, replace our cell walls with graphene, but that would take super advanced nanotech. The problem with artificial blood is that you would need a constant, outside source. It would eventually scape through the skin, when your breathe (such as how your blood alcohol content is measured when you breathe), and through other parts of your body. Your body only produces blood through bone marrow, so you'd need to augument bone marrow in order to be able to do it.


Right now, human on human bone marrow transplants have a .5% to 2% chance of survival. Perhaps if we could put a person into stasis but activate healing only in bone marrow, say a forced coma? I have no idea. I do know that it's used to help cure cancer, and recently HIV, so it's got a lot of potential and investment into it. Therefore developing a way to produce say, copper blood, which half as weak as iron blood, could be 20 times denser without the viscosity issue, could solve the issue (although this blood would appear blue or purplish if mixed with regular blood, as well). Perhaps bone marrow augmentation, but idk.

Since the lungs could be flushed with more blood if it was denser, the lungs could absorb more oxygen, and thus oxygenate the body. The problem with artificial lungs is that they are like, 10,000 pounds, like iron lungs, or more, and kind of suck. Something the size of a building could not replace liver functions, as there are things it simply can't do. Since much of our body is chemical based, we need to consume foods, or chemicals, and convert it with our bodies; creating a machine to do that would basically require our body.

Oxygen concentrators exist, but they only have say, 8 hour battery lifes, but some plutonium-238 could solve that, so it could double or more the oxygen in the air you breathe (high oxygen breathing isn't an issue, as long as it's below 50% and at atmospheric pressure).

You'd need a mask or something maybe, though, to breathe that in. You might look like bane.


Birds, for instance, have 10-11 times the respiratory efficiency we have, with circular breathing and such. Dinosaurs were perhaps 13 times higher; they also have lung tissue, completely self contained, since it doesn't need a diaphragm and sucks in by itself, imagine aveolis that suck in air, that lined their spinal cord and other areas of their ribcage for more surface area, to get more air. Since they fly for hours on end, at high altitudes, it's necessary. As well, if their lung is punctured, who cares, cause like, it doesn't hold air like a sac, but millions of smaller sacs, so it's self contained. Infections are an issue, but you can build a tolerance to snake venom, anthrax, small pox, and even gangrene, so that likely isn't as big an issue as long as you slowly condition a person.

One potential solution is bacteria; if we could do it correctly, we could have every cell have bacteria synchronized with our body, as to replicate and operate when they do, and all the waste we make, such as carbon dioxide, salts etc. could go on to feed the bacteria. While pooping and such feeds bacteria as is, we could just convert that into bacteria food at the cellular level, and be constantly recycling oxygen, energy, glucose, and everything even. Plants have photosynthesis, but these could use chemosynthesis, or use heat. So, there'd be some waste, since there is no perfect recycling, but being 10 times more efficient is possible.

Purposefully infecting every cell in the body seems absurd though. Genetic virus therapy could be, say, replace all genes in the body with a virus (instead of trying to replace 1 gene, you could modify your genome than get it to replace it), and before the virus kills you, each need changed gene cell has a resistance to the virus. So basically, you could have an RNA virus that changes DNA. Since DNA based viruses couldn't have human cells DNA (lest they turn into human cells, instead of virus cells) they could replace it, thus creating human cells.


The problem with retro therapy is one of two things. Either, A, the virus continues to multiply long after your body is infecting, essentially killing you like any other virus we have no resistance to (since if our bodies had a resistance, it wouldn't infect every cell), or causes uncontrolled cell growth since it makes an infinite copy of cells, instead of viruses. Viruses say, infect a cell, take over the RNA replication process, insert their own RNA, and create 2000 more viruses; this then infects 2000 more cells, then 4 million, then 8 billion etc. until your whole body is infected. A great way to change someone's DNA in 3 trillion different cells all at once, since DNA changes otherwise need to be made at birth, but nothing tells the virus to stop. If it just multiples your whole body turns into mush and you die. If it preserves the host cell, instead of destroying it, you get uncontrolled cell growth, or cancer.

Thus, gene therapy is very dangerous. The secret may be to, however, make the new cells resistant the virus. You'd need an RNA based virus that has human cell DNA, and that changes the DNA, but uses it's own RNA; so it would need to be an RNA and DNA based virus. But, the new DNA, with the changes in it, would then be resistant to the virus, and tell your immune system how to destroy it. This would also prevent the virus from spreading, and infecting others, making unwanted changes. Still, we grew up as a baby to an adult, and all our changes have already come. We could very easily splice one cell as a baby and let it grow into an adult, but doing that after we're born is hard enough as is. The thing is, you've stopped growing; your growth are stopped, you no longer change from 6 pound baby to a 100+ pound person. So, say, growing a new tail, even if you've changed your DNA? Won't really work. The best bet for any changes will be non DNA. But, it's plausible; perhaps, say, lizards can regrow limbs, some humans have regrown lost fingers, toes, even kidneys, eyes, or other other organs. If humans were to, somehow, say, protect cellular memory, and get the body to remember it's shape, it could always heal back to that. So, if you lose an arm, the cells heal, but you get a stub healed arm, where the bone, skin, etc. veins, all just recirculated back to your body. But, if you could say, somehow, tell it to grow an arm, you could regrow arms and limbs and such. Lizards have been shown to not only regrow tails, but other limbs, as well, as well as many other animals; we can regrow livers, and chimps can regrow kidneys, but it can be possible to regrow other organs, we already did it once. Rather than change DNA, we could change around cellular memory.


For instance, nematodes can survive complete DNA destruction. At several thousand times the lethal radiation dosage to humans, which obliterates their DNA, they regrow their DNA. Their DNA *repair* process is so great what would for sure kill you in a matter of seconds is now protected against. As well, we could always revert back to a previous form; we couldn't get stronger or faster, but our arms would grow back just the same. We would need to exercise, get to our peak, and then do it, but it would work. So basically, no scar tissue, it would all be awesome.

So splicing ourselves with lizard DNA, idk. But splicing ourselves with stuff to augment our DNA? Plausible. Obama's not a lizard but he may have certain properties that allow him to repair damaged organs. Also lengthens life span maybe. Being cold blooded, you'd absorb heat, that is energy, form outside sources. Instead of sun bathing, you could absorb energy from a heat suit. So you could screw that inefficient super heating mammalian metabolism and have the energy to be super strong all you wanted. You could do a mixture of all of it if you wanted.

Instead of a suit, you could put little pellets of lead covered, steal covered, titanium covered, ceramic covered U-235 or, P-238 in your body, to constantly generate heat. That could make it so you were constantly absorbing enough energy, heat energy, to focus the rest of your energy on other things. The majority of the energy you consume from food is used to maintain your body temperature of 98.6.

What about a two phase infection? The RNA virus replacing our cells ad infinum and once the body is reduced to a puddle of base gene stock, we could reproduce the growth process with a separate RNA virus then infecting the mass to "repair" the previous DNA sequence with whatever mods we desire mixed in?

[Suicidesoldier#1]

AsuraSyn

Suicidesoldier#1

The only way to be indestructible would be to say, replace our cell walls with graphene, but that would take super advanced nanotech. The problem with artificial blood is that you would need a constant, outside source. It would eventually scape through the skin, when your breathe (such as how your blood alcohol content is measured when you breathe), and through other parts of your body. Your body only produces blood through bone marrow, so you'd need to augument bone marrow in order to be able to do it.


Right now, human on human bone marrow transplants have a .5% to 2% chance of survival. Perhaps if we could put a person into stasis but activate healing only in bone marrow, say a forced coma? I have no idea. I do know that it's used to help cure cancer, and recently HIV, so it's got a lot of potential and investment into it. Therefore developing a way to produce say, copper blood, which half as weak as iron blood, could be 20 times denser without the viscosity issue, could solve the issue (although this blood would appear blue or purplish if mixed with regular blood, as well). Perhaps bone marrow augmentation, but idk.

Since the lungs could be flushed with more blood if it was denser, the lungs could absorb more oxygen, and thus oxygenate the body. The problem with artificial lungs is that they are like, 10,000 pounds, like iron lungs, or more, and kind of suck. Something the size of a building could not replace liver functions, as there are things it simply can't do. Since much of our body is chemical based, we need to consume foods, or chemicals, and convert it with our bodies; creating a machine to do that would basically require our body.

Oxygen concentrators exist, but they only have say, 8 hour battery lifes, but some plutonium-238 could solve that, so it could double or more the oxygen in the air you breathe (high oxygen breathing isn't an issue, as long as it's below 50% and at atmospheric pressure).

You'd need a mask or something maybe, though, to breathe that in. You might look like bane.


Birds, for instance, have 10-11 times the respiratory efficiency we have, with circular breathing and such. Dinosaurs were perhaps 13 times higher; they also have lung tissue, completely self contained, since it doesn't need a diaphragm and sucks in by itself, imagine aveolis that suck in air, that lined their spinal cord and other areas of their ribcage for more surface area, to get more air. Since they fly for hours on end, at high altitudes, it's necessary. As well, if their lung is punctured, who cares, cause like, it doesn't hold air like a sac, but millions of smaller sacs, so it's self contained. Infections are an issue, but you can build a tolerance to snake venom, anthrax, small pox, and even gangrene, so that likely isn't as big an issue as long as you slowly condition a person.

One potential solution is bacteria; if we could do it correctly, we could have every cell have bacteria synchronized with our body, as to replicate and operate when they do, and all the waste we make, such as carbon dioxide, salts etc. could go on to feed the bacteria. While pooping and such feeds bacteria as is, we could just convert that into bacteria food at the cellular level, and be constantly recycling oxygen, energy, glucose, and everything even. Plants have photosynthesis, but these could use chemosynthesis, or use heat. So, there'd be some waste, since there is no perfect recycling, but being 10 times more efficient is possible.

Purposefully infecting every cell in the body seems absurd though. Genetic virus therapy could be, say, replace all genes in the body with a virus (instead of trying to replace 1 gene, you could modify your genome than get it to replace it), and before the virus kills you, each need changed gene cell has a resistance to the virus. So basically, you could have an RNA virus that changes DNA. Since DNA based viruses couldn't have human cells DNA (lest they turn into human cells, instead of virus cells) they could replace it, thus creating human cells.


The problem with retro therapy is one of two things. Either, A, the virus continues to multiply long after your body is infecting, essentially killing you like any other virus we have no resistance to (since if our bodies had a resistance, it wouldn't infect every cell), or causes uncontrolled cell growth since it makes an infinite copy of cells, instead of viruses. Viruses say, infect a cell, take over the RNA replication process, insert their own RNA, and create 2000 more viruses; this then infects 2000 more cells, then 4 million, then 8 billion etc. until your whole body is infected. A great way to change someone's DNA in 3 trillion different cells all at once, since DNA changes otherwise need to be made at birth, but nothing tells the virus to stop. If it just multiples your whole body turns into mush and you die. If it preserves the host cell, instead of destroying it, you get uncontrolled cell growth, or cancer.

Thus, gene therapy is very dangerous. The secret may be to, however, make the new cells resistant the virus. You'd need an RNA based virus that has human cell DNA, and that changes the DNA, but uses it's own RNA; so it would need to be an RNA and DNA based virus. But, the new DNA, with the changes in it, would then be resistant to the virus, and tell your immune system how to destroy it. This would also prevent the virus from spreading, and infecting others, making unwanted changes. Still, we grew up as a baby to an adult, and all our changes have already come. We could very easily splice one cell as a baby and let it grow into an adult, but doing that after we're born is hard enough as is. The thing is, you've stopped growing; your growth are stopped, you no longer change from 6 pound baby to a 100+ pound person. So, say, growing a new tail, even if you've changed your DNA? Won't really work. The best bet for any changes will be non DNA. But, it's plausible; perhaps, say, lizards can regrow limbs, some humans have regrown lost fingers, toes, even kidneys, eyes, or other other organs. If humans were to, somehow, say, protect cellular memory, and get the body to remember it's shape, it could always heal back to that. So, if you lose an arm, the cells heal, but you get a stub healed arm, where the bone, skin, etc. veins, all just recirculated back to your body. But, if you could say, somehow, tell it to grow an arm, you could regrow arms and limbs and such. Lizards have been shown to not only regrow tails, but other limbs, as well, as well as many other animals; we can regrow livers, and chimps can regrow kidneys, but it can be possible to regrow other organs, we already did it once. Rather than change DNA, we could change around cellular memory.


For instance, nematodes can survive complete DNA destruction. At several thousand times the lethal radiation dosage to humans, which obliterates their DNA, they regrow their DNA. Their DNA *repair* process is so great what would for sure kill you in a matter of seconds is now protected against. As well, we could always revert back to a previous form; we couldn't get stronger or faster, but our arms would grow back just the same. We would need to exercise, get to our peak, and then do it, but it would work. So basically, no scar tissue, it would all be awesome.

So splicing ourselves with lizard DNA, idk. But splicing ourselves with stuff to augment our DNA? Plausible. Obama's not a lizard but he may have certain properties that allow him to repair damaged organs. Also lengthens life span maybe. Being cold blooded, you'd absorb heat, that is energy, form outside sources. Instead of sun bathing, you could absorb energy from a heat suit. So you could screw that inefficient super heating mammalian metabolism and have the energy to be super strong all you wanted. You could do a mixture of all of it if you wanted.

Instead of a suit, you could put little pellets of lead covered, steal covered, titanium covered, ceramic covered U-235 or, P-238 in your body, to constantly generate heat. That could make it so you were constantly absorbing enough energy, heat energy, to focus the rest of your energy on other things. The majority of the energy you consume from food is used to maintain your body temperature of 98.6.

What about a two phase infection? The RNA virus replacing our cells ad infinum and once the body is reduced to a puddle of base gene stock, we could reproduce the growth process with a separate RNA virus then infecting the mass to "repair" the previous DNA sequence with whatever mods we desire mixed in?

We'd just die.

Why not infect like say, cow meat?


Also, it wouldn't work out too well, since it uses the bodies stuff against itself; once the body's organs and such are mush, the viruses can no longer reproduce. Viruses are thus self destructive.

Basically you'd still need to keep to the original since it won't turn into whatever we want more or less, as creating life from just pure biomass is nigh impossible. Also viruses turning us into mush is kind of the end. We can't really like, control what a virus does after it replicates, since it's an incredibly simple, so simple it's literally not even an a life form.

[AsuraSyn]

Suicidesoldier#1

AsuraSyn

What about a two phase infection? The RNA virus replacing our cells ad infinum and once the body is reduced to a puddle of base gene stock, we could reproduce the growth process with a separate RNA virus then infecting the mass to "repair" the previous DNA sequence with whatever mods we desire mixed in?

We'd just die.

Why not infect like say, cow meat?


Also, it wouldn't work out too well, since it uses the bodies stuff against itself; once the body's organs and such are mush, the viruses can no longer reproduce. Viruses are thus self destructive.

Basically you'd still need to keep to the original since it won't turn into whatever we want more or less, as creating life from just pure biomass is nigh impossible. Also viruses turning us into mush is kind of the end. We can't really like, control what a virus does after it replicates, since it's an incredibly simple, so simple it's literally not even an a life form.

But if there was a way to preserve the brain and nervous system even when the body is reduced to primordial soup, wipe out the virus or let it die out on it's own success, and then reconstruct a body around said system, we could theoretically make ourselves into our dream body.
I've heard there's research being done to see about regrowing lost limbs by putting the stub into a tank of proteins programed to simulate growth in the womb, though you'd likely end up with a baby limb for several years without some kind of acceleration technique. If viable, perhaps we could simulate the virus effect by simply breaking the body down piecemeal, or layer by layer, until we had a fundamental format to turn into an uber human. Clarifying the protein soup with genome carrying nanites we could dictate the structure the new growth would take to any degree we'd desire, no?

EDIT: Btw, am I the only one amazed at how far we've come in this conversation from simple blood doping?

[CH1YO]

Suicidesoldier#1

CH1YO

Suicidesoldier#1

CH1YO

Suicidesoldier#1

CH1YO

If it can be done naturally then there is no rationale to stop that nor to allow it be done unnaturally.

But blood doping is natural! ninja

It's just another method.

It's about as natural as injecting oneself with massive amounts of testosterone to increase muscle growth.

Except that EPO isn't like testosterone in that all it does is increased blood cells.

Also testosterone injections have limited functions; you need a constant increase in testosterone for muscle growth, and you need estrogen inhibitors, to really get any benefit, since your body will up the estrogen to compensate if you're a male, or just go out of whack if you're a female.


In any case, more blood means more oxygen and vitamins, which don't directly increase performance.

You still have to put in the work and effort to get the effects, for the most part.

Nothing directly increases performance, they are analogous in that they both do indirectly.

Uh... well anyways, this imitates high altitude training but is safer and cheaper.

Thus, I am in favor of it. ninja

It's cheaper than standing on a big rock? Really?

[Suicidesoldier#1]

AsuraSyn

Suicidesoldier#1

AsuraSyn

What about a two phase infection? The RNA virus replacing our cells ad infinum and once the body is reduced to a puddle of base gene stock, we could reproduce the growth process with a separate RNA virus then infecting the mass to "repair" the previous DNA sequence with whatever mods we desire mixed in?

We'd just die.

Why not infect like say, cow meat?


Also, it wouldn't work out too well, since it uses the bodies stuff against itself; once the body's organs and such are mush, the viruses can no longer reproduce. Viruses are thus self destructive.

Basically you'd still need to keep to the original since it won't turn into whatever we want more or less, as creating life from just pure biomass is nigh impossible. Also viruses turning us into mush is kind of the end. We can't really like, control what a virus does after it replicates, since it's an incredibly simple, so simple it's literally not even an a life form.

But if there was a way to preserve the brain and nervous system even when the body is reduced to primordial soup, wipe out the virus or let it die out on it's own success, and then reconstruct a body around said system, we could theoretically make ourselves into our dream body.
I've heard there's research being done to see about regrowing lost limbs by putting the stub into a tank of proteins programed to simulate growth in the womb, though you'd likely end up with a baby limb for several years without some kind of acceleration technique. If viable, perhaps we could simulate the virus effect by simply breaking the body down piecemeal, or layer by layer, until we had a fundamental format to turn into an uber human. Clarifying the protein soup with genome carrying nanites we could dictate the structure the new growth would take to any degree we'd desire, no?

EDIT: Btw, am I the only one amazed at how far we've come in this conversation from simple blood doping?

Maybe, but I think about this kind of stuff all the time; blood doping is only the beginning! See, if soldiers could be put past a certain point, which I know is physically possible, they could be just good enough to, when using 200+ pound armor, to resist bullets. If 5 times stronger, we're talking, a 375 pound combat pack, so a 130 pound pack lasts about 30 days, and a 130 pound pack is also equal to a machine gun back, so both combined might be 160; plus 200, and we've got, a fairly realistic soldier with an SAS pack, with special forces capabilities, who's also protected against bullets and has a thousands of rounds and an uber powerful machine gun. If humans were just 5 times stronger on average, which it would be easy enough to be above this, they could be pretty amazing.

While machines would be better, the fact of the matter is, if it worked, say, tomorrow, or in 2 years, it would work. We could now wage wars, quite possibly with stun guns even if we felt like it, with soldiers virtually invincible to small arms fire, like an Ak-47 or machine gun, let alone shrapnel and such, for multiple shots, and that likely would resist IED attacks, as well. We'd have almost no casualties.

And here's the crazy thing, see. We have max, like maybe, 100,000 soldiers deployed right now in Iraq and such. Let's say the entire procedure, equipment and all, cost 100,000 per soldier (although it would likely be cheaper). This is 10 billion dollars; the entire troop scape invasion was about 300,000 soldiers, or it would be 30 billion dollars. 30 billion dollars, one time. We've paid more for that in medical bills. So when you think about it, it's an insignificant cost. Over 10 years, that's 3 billion per year, or 6 billion if we decided to have an additional 300,000 in reserves, or to swap out (say every 6 months, so a 6 month deployment, 6 months on and off). 1 million is 30-60 per year.


The thing is, we wouldn't even need as many soldiers at that point, and with say, efficient hybrid vehicles, the number one convoy out there, about 90%, oil trucks, wouldn't be as necessary either; with a longer range, they could be further back from the front lines, and drones, or small unmanned tanks, could deliver the fuel, thus reducing the causality amount even more. These soldiers could run around on foot longer than most special forces, on rations alone (augmented with survival goods along the way could be many months), but they could be transported by vehicle, on foot, house to house, and even if they got tired, made a mistake, slipped up, they wouldn't die, due to the armor.

The entire concept is kill or be killed, since no armor is good enough to resist rifle rounds that is reasonable to carry around. But if humans were just 4-5 times stronger, let alone 7.5+? It would be incredible. With the synergistic effects, it would be fantastic.


Since I happen to know that lots of other animals, most animals can do it, we're just the ones at a loss compared to most of the natural world. We could, nervous system wise, just electrocute ourselves, at worst, to make ourselves move how we want, thus eliminating the whole, need to be engineered like a gorilla thing, since our bodies are capable, as well.

As for the goop, it's really hard to take goop and turn it into something useful. Humans have, only evolved over millions of years. Taking goop and saying "go!" and turning it into a human is wildly complex. Even mother's wombs still come from the mom, they take a brain to regulate hormones subconsciously and thyroid glands and s**t. Instead, it would be easier to slowly replace someone's cells, utilizing their own body to do it (like with a virus, which makes virus cells, instead of say, human cells, which we would want), absorbing food and such along the way. So it would be cool, but by the time we can turn goop into anything we want we're best off just making some mutons from raw beef and calling it a day.

[Suicidesoldier#1]

CH1YO

Suicidesoldier#1

CH1YO

Suicidesoldier#1

CH1YO

It's about as natural as injecting oneself with massive amounts of testosterone to increase muscle growth.

Except that EPO isn't like testosterone in that all it does is increased blood cells.

Also testosterone injections have limited functions; you need a constant increase in testosterone for muscle growth, and you need estrogen inhibitors, to really get any benefit, since your body will up the estrogen to compensate if you're a male, or just go out of whack if you're a female.


In any case, more blood means more oxygen and vitamins, which don't directly increase performance.

You still have to put in the work and effort to get the effects, for the most part.

Nothing directly increases performance, they are analogous in that they both do indirectly.

Uh... well anyways, this imitates high altitude training but is safer and cheaper.

Thus, I am in favor of it. ninja

It's cheaper than standing on a big rock? Really?

Yes, yes it is. Mountain Everest rock climbing is like 50,000 dollars per trip, and living on prime property like that, which is livable, which is already scarce, is already expensive.

Owning your own private track field, just for you, and having your own private well paid trainers, just for you, and living in the mountains is well, expensive. Your own mountain resort designed for perfect workout routines, built custom made into the mountains, will be expensive, as it's already hard enough to go to a good gym as it is.


Plus, you're going to be starting off and training in low oxygen. When you're low on oxygen, training as an athlete is probably a very dumb thing to do. And yet, that's the only legal way to do it.

It just sounds silly.

[Suicidesoldier#1]

Alternativley, we could make a giant space station, control the atmosphere how we want, so simulate high altitude, put stuff in their like allergens to build immune resistances, and then increase the gravity, so the people would be slowly, constantly gaining strength. If done correctly, than the perception of gravity could be slower as well, so people's reaction times would improve, and it wouldn't seem as weird.

As well, in high gravity, it's harder to pump blood so, on earth, it would become easier to do that as well, improving the heart's ability to pump blood.

I've heard that all you need is a little facility to spin around on for a few minutes in order to maintain yourself (or to not atrophy), even in space, so in lower gravity you could easily keep everything you've gained.


It would need to be a pretty big facility, so, I'm think uranium powered, maybe a sterling engine, or even potentially something thermoelectric (although it's really inefficient) to save on the need for steam and such.

Might work.

[CH1YO]

Suicidesoldier#1

CH1YO

Suicidesoldier#1

CH1YO

Suicidesoldier#1

CH1YO

It's about as natural as injecting oneself with massive amounts of testosterone to increase muscle growth.

Except that EPO isn't like testosterone in that all it does is increased blood cells.

Also testosterone injections have limited functions; you need a constant increase in testosterone for muscle growth, and you need estrogen inhibitors, to really get any benefit, since your body will up the estrogen to compensate if you're a male, or just go out of whack if you're a female.


In any case, more blood means more oxygen and vitamins, which don't directly increase performance.

You still have to put in the work and effort to get the effects, for the most part.

Nothing directly increases performance, they are analogous in that they both do indirectly.

Uh... well anyways, this imitates high altitude training but is safer and cheaper.

Thus, I am in favor of it. ninja

It's cheaper than standing on a big rock? Really?

Yes, yes it is. Mountain Everest rock climbing is like 50,000 dollars per trip, and living on prime property like that, which is livable, which is already scarce, is already expensive.

Owning your own private track field, just for you, and having your own private well paid trainers, just for you, and living in the mountains is well, expensive. Your own mountain resort designed for perfect workout routines, built custom made into the mountains, will be expensive, as it's already hard enough to go to a good gym as it is.


Plus, you're going to be starting off and training in low oxygen. When you're low on oxygen, training as an athlete is probably a very dumb thing to do. And yet, that's the only legal way to do it.

It just sounds silly.

It sounds silly because you decided to make it sound that way.

[Suicidesoldier#1]

CH1YO

Suicidesoldier#1

CH1YO

Suicidesoldier#1

CH1YO

Nothing directly increases performance, they are analogous in that they both do indirectly.

Uh... well anyways, this imitates high altitude training but is safer and cheaper.

Thus, I am in favor of it. ninja

It's cheaper than standing on a big rock? Really?

Yes, yes it is. Mountain Everest rock climbing is like 50,000 dollars per trip, and living on prime property like that, which is livable, which is already scarce, is already expensive.

Owning your own private track field, just for you, and having your own private well paid trainers, just for you, and living in the mountains is well, expensive. Your own mountain resort designed for perfect workout routines, built custom made into the mountains, will be expensive, as it's already hard enough to go to a good gym as it is.


Plus, you're going to be starting off and training in low oxygen. When you're low on oxygen, training as an athlete is probably a very dumb thing to do. And yet, that's the only legal way to do it.

It just sounds silly.

It sounds silly because you decided to make it sound that way.

Well yes.

It's expensive to live in the mountains with exercise equipment n stuff D:

[CH1YO]

Suicidesoldier#1

CH1YO

Suicidesoldier#1

CH1YO

Suicidesoldier#1

CH1YO

Nothing directly increases performance, they are analogous in that they both do indirectly.

Uh... well anyways, this imitates high altitude training but is safer and cheaper.

Thus, I am in favor of it. ninja

It's cheaper than standing on a big rock? Really?

Yes, yes it is. Mountain Everest rock climbing is like 50,000 dollars per trip, and living on prime property like that, which is livable, which is already scarce, is already expensive.

Owning your own private track field, just for you, and having your own private well paid trainers, just for you, and living in the mountains is well, expensive. Your own mountain resort designed for perfect workout routines, built custom made into the mountains, will be expensive, as it's already hard enough to go to a good gym as it is.


Plus, you're going to be starting off and training in low oxygen. When you're low on oxygen, training as an athlete is probably a very dumb thing to do. And yet, that's the only legal way to do it.

It just sounds silly.

It sounds silly because you decided to make it sound that way.

Well yes.

It's expensive to live in the mountains with exercise equipment n stuff D:

I know.

[AsuraSyn]

Suicidesoldier#1

AsuraSyn

But if there was a way to preserve the brain and nervous system even when the body is reduced to primordial soup, wipe out the virus or let it die out on it's own success, and then reconstruct a body around said system, we could theoretically make ourselves into our dream body.
I've heard there's research being done to see about regrowing lost limbs by putting the stub into a tank of proteins programed to simulate growth in the womb, though you'd likely end up with a baby limb for several years without some kind of acceleration technique. If viable, perhaps we could simulate the virus effect by simply breaking the body down piecemeal, or layer by layer, until we had a fundamental format to turn into an uber human. Clarifying the protein soup with genome carrying nanites we could dictate the structure the new growth would take to any degree we'd desire, no?

EDIT: Btw, am I the only one amazed at how far we've come in this conversation from simple blood doping?

Maybe, but I think about this kind of stuff all the time; blood doping is only the beginning! See, if soldiers could be put past a certain point, which I know is physically possible, they could be just good enough to, when using 200+ pound armor, to resist bullets. If 5 times stronger, we're talking, a 375 pound combat pack, so a 130 pound pack lasts about 30 days, and a 130 pound pack is also equal to a machine gun back, so both combined might be 160; plus 200, and we've got, a fairly realistic soldier with an SAS pack, with special forces capabilities, who's also protected against bullets and has a thousands of rounds and an uber powerful machine gun. If humans were just 5 times stronger on average, which it would be easy enough to be above this, they could be pretty amazing.

While machines would be better, the fact of the matter is, if it worked, say, tomorrow, or in 2 years, it would work. We could now wage wars, quite possibly with stun guns even if we felt like it, with soldiers virtually invincible to small arms fire, like an Ak-47 or machine gun, let alone shrapnel and such, for multiple shots, and that likely would resist IED attacks, as well. We'd have almost no casualties.

And here's the crazy thing, see. We have max, like maybe, 100,000 soldiers deployed right now in Iraq and such. Let's say the entire procedure, equipment and all, cost 100,000 per soldier (although it would likely be cheaper). This is 10 billion dollars; the entire troop scape invasion was about 300,000 soldiers, or it would be 30 billion dollars. 30 billion dollars, one time. We've paid more for that in medical bills. So when you think about it, it's an insignificant cost. Over 10 years, that's 3 billion per year, or 6 billion if we decided to have an additional 300,000 in reserves, or to swap out (say every 6 months, so a 6 month deployment, 6 months on and off). 1 million is 30-60 per year.


The thing is, we wouldn't even need as many soldiers at that point, and with say, efficient hybrid vehicles, the number one convoy out there, about 90%, oil trucks, wouldn't be as necessary either; with a longer range, they could be further back from the front lines, and drones, or small unmanned tanks, could deliver the fuel, thus reducing the causality amount even more. These soldiers could run around on foot longer than most special forces, on rations alone (augmented with survival goods along the way could be many months), but they could be transported by vehicle, on foot, house to house, and even if they got tired, made a mistake, slipped up, they wouldn't die, due to the armor.

The entire concept is kill or be killed, since no armor is good enough to resist rifle rounds that is reasonable to carry around. But if humans were just 4-5 times stronger, let alone 7.5+? It would be incredible. With the synergistic effects, it would be fantastic.


Since I happen to know that lots of other animals, most animals can do it, we're just the ones at a loss compared to most of the natural world. We could, nervous system wise, just electrocute ourselves, at worst, to make ourselves move how we want, thus eliminating the whole, need to be engineered like a gorilla thing, since our bodies are capable, as well.

As for the goop, it's really hard to take goop and turn it into something useful. Humans have, only evolved over millions of years. Taking goop and saying "go!" and turning it into a human is wildly complex. Even mother's wombs still come from the mom, they take a brain to regulate hormones subconsciously and thyroid glands and s**t. Instead, it would be easier to slowly replace someone's cells, utilizing their own body to do it (like with a virus, which makes virus cells, instead of say, human cells, which we would want), absorbing food and such along the way. So it would be cool, but by the time we can turn goop into anything we want we're best off just making some mutons from raw beef and calling it a day.

Why not go even further and engineer soldiers then?
Seriously, we could manipulate base genomes in the womb to encourage size and density growth of an individual and then, as they grow and develop, condition them to be superhuman making them even more efficient.

If we took a person and put them through the conditioning you've described from, say, 13 on, by the time they were in their twenties they'd be borderline indestructible, even more so than a normal person conditioned this way since their entire development would have been focused around this program to increase their physical abilities, making them naturally 7 times stronger or more, instead of the more likely 4 to 5 times, no?
Combine that with some new procedures designed to preserve longevity and/or replace older, less efficient cells and tissue, and you've got an entire generation of super soldiers that could, theoretically, live for centuries at their peak.

[Suicidesoldier#1]

AsuraSyn

Suicidesoldier#1

AsuraSyn

But if there was a way to preserve the brain and nervous system even when the body is reduced to primordial soup, wipe out the virus or let it die out on it's own success, and then reconstruct a body around said system, we could theoretically make ourselves into our dream body.
I've heard there's research being done to see about regrowing lost limbs by putting the stub into a tank of proteins programed to simulate growth in the womb, though you'd likely end up with a baby limb for several years without some kind of acceleration technique. If viable, perhaps we could simulate the virus effect by simply breaking the body down piecemeal, or layer by layer, until we had a fundamental format to turn into an uber human. Clarifying the protein soup with genome carrying nanites we could dictate the structure the new growth would take to any degree we'd desire, no?

EDIT: Btw, am I the only one amazed at how far we've come in this conversation from simple blood doping?

Maybe, but I think about this kind of stuff all the time; blood doping is only the beginning! See, if soldiers could be put past a certain point, which I know is physically possible, they could be just good enough to, when using 200+ pound armor, to resist bullets. If 5 times stronger, we're talking, a 375 pound combat pack, so a 130 pound pack lasts about 30 days, and a 130 pound pack is also equal to a machine gun back, so both combined might be 160; plus 200, and we've got, a fairly realistic soldier with an SAS pack, with special forces capabilities, who's also protected against bullets and has a thousands of rounds and an uber powerful machine gun. If humans were just 5 times stronger on average, which it would be easy enough to be above this, they could be pretty amazing.

While machines would be better, the fact of the matter is, if it worked, say, tomorrow, or in 2 years, it would work. We could now wage wars, quite possibly with stun guns even if we felt like it, with soldiers virtually invincible to small arms fire, like an Ak-47 or machine gun, let alone shrapnel and such, for multiple shots, and that likely would resist IED attacks, as well. We'd have almost no casualties.

And here's the crazy thing, see. We have max, like maybe, 100,000 soldiers deployed right now in Iraq and such. Let's say the entire procedure, equipment and all, cost 100,000 per soldier (although it would likely be cheaper). This is 10 billion dollars; the entire troop scape invasion was about 300,000 soldiers, or it would be 30 billion dollars. 30 billion dollars, one time. We've paid more for that in medical bills. So when you think about it, it's an insignificant cost. Over 10 years, that's 3 billion per year, or 6 billion if we decided to have an additional 300,000 in reserves, or to swap out (say every 6 months, so a 6 month deployment, 6 months on and off). 1 million is 30-60 per year.


The thing is, we wouldn't even need as many soldiers at that point, and with say, efficient hybrid vehicles, the number one convoy out there, about 90%, oil trucks, wouldn't be as necessary either; with a longer range, they could be further back from the front lines, and drones, or small unmanned tanks, could deliver the fuel, thus reducing the causality amount even more. These soldiers could run around on foot longer than most special forces, on rations alone (augmented with survival goods along the way could be many months), but they could be transported by vehicle, on foot, house to house, and even if they got tired, made a mistake, slipped up, they wouldn't die, due to the armor.

The entire concept is kill or be killed, since no armor is good enough to resist rifle rounds that is reasonable to carry around. But if humans were just 4-5 times stronger, let alone 7.5+? It would be incredible. With the synergistic effects, it would be fantastic.


Since I happen to know that lots of other animals, most animals can do it, we're just the ones at a loss compared to most of the natural world. We could, nervous system wise, just electrocute ourselves, at worst, to make ourselves move how we want, thus eliminating the whole, need to be engineered like a gorilla thing, since our bodies are capable, as well.

As for the goop, it's really hard to take goop and turn it into something useful. Humans have, only evolved over millions of years. Taking goop and saying "go!" and turning it into a human is wildly complex. Even mother's wombs still come from the mom, they take a brain to regulate hormones subconsciously and thyroid glands and s**t. Instead, it would be easier to slowly replace someone's cells, utilizing their own body to do it (like with a virus, which makes virus cells, instead of say, human cells, which we would want), absorbing food and such along the way. So it would be cool, but by the time we can turn goop into anything we want we're best off just making some mutons from raw beef and calling it a day.

Why not go even further and engineer soldiers then?
Seriously, we could manipulate base genomes in the womb to encourage size and density growth of an individual and then, as they grow and develop, condition them to be superhuman making them even more efficient.

If we took a person and put them through the conditioning you've described from, say, 13 on, by the time they were in their twenties they'd be borderline indestructible, even more so than a normal person conditioned this way since their entire development would have been focused around this program to increase their physical abilities, making them naturally 7 times stronger or more, instead of the more likely 4 to 5 times, no?
Combine that with some new procedures designed to preserve longevity and/or replace older, less efficient cells and tissue, and you've got an entire generation of super soldiers that could, theoretically, live for centuries at their peak.

But then we can't suppress the population. Criminals, crazy people, whoever can do this. We're back at square one.

Unless we don't allow them good armor, but Idk if that would work out.


This wouldn't be that great for living forever. If we could cure cancer, theoretically we could, but we'd still age; we'd need some way to revert back to your old self.

Say, a DNA replacement thingy, although it would really need to, more or less, replace cellular memory since the DNA doesn't actually change much, and it would need to clean out junk build up, like little bits of ash that we breathe in, that build up over time, that we can't. Nanobots could make us live forever, but that's at best hundreds if not thousands of years in the future. Actual, legitimate nanobots, to change around our chemical structure. But preliminary stage technology may be able to at least repair DNA, say having a simple function to constantly reproduce with our cells in a symbiotic relationship, and then replace the old the newly degraded DNA (since cells are a copy of a copy of a copy) with some new DNA. Perhaps we could use a virus to do this, so we could constantly be reverting back to a certain age, so we'd never age; although we wouldn't be able to have scars or, likely, even get stronger or something (unless there was hyperplasia, or the creation of new cells).


But if we could live forever, then we'd probs need to enforce some population control measures or go to other planets or something, so that's an issue in and of itself.

We could make everyone super strong, but their hearts would need to be some 10 times bigger at least, since technologically replacing (more like just adding in a new robot heart on top of the old heart) would be relatively difficult. This heart would take a ton of energy, and they'd likely need a better circulatory system in general, like veins and such, to resist PSI issues. So idk how well that would work out; plus it wouldn't be constantly flowing. Maybe, we could coat major arteries and veins with cardiac tissue, like, line their veins, with it, so it would be fairly spread out; instead of just say, two hearts, or 10 hearts, their entire torso could contain lots of cardiac tissue around their veins. Get shot in the chest; no problem, you have a huge heart surrounding all your veins. As well, you could have a bird respiratory system with circular breathing all over your body, like along your spine (like real birds, actually) and be great at breathing, as well. You would need an oversized liver (although that's pretty easy) and some large/extra kidneys (maybe four in their gut, two in their chest) to help filter the blood and such but it might work. Although all that would be pretty difficult to pull off. Bane's little thing could actually just be circulating blood faster, and adding some, which would explain his vascular constriction and increase in size due to an increase in blood blow, and potentially his super strength if it stimulated say, adrenaline production.


I always thought one great side effect of bane's stuff could be pain reduction, which would allow him to lift weights without pain, so you could exercise without feeling it and thus it would be easy to work out, and also it would explain like, being punched a lot, getting hit by cars, punching through concrete etc. and not instantly going unconscious. Of course afterwards it's revealed he's broken both his hands, multiple ribs and a femur but hey, he beat batman! Kind of. Not really he was in jail.

Also PFC's would allow more oxygen, so that could actually do something useful; could throw in some electrolytes, vitamins, and glucose for energy for all these new actions, even theoretically some ATP, and vasolidators to counteract the vasoconstriction of adrenaline, hopefully decreasing the heart rate and blood pressure (some stuff for the brain specifically might improve intelligent; with PFC's, it would transfer loads more oxygen, so extra blood flow wouldn't be necessary). But more interesting is something that is constantly injecting something intravenously. See, if you inject yourself with too much heroin, it stays in your system for too long, and you die! But rather than swallow a bunch of pills too quickly or snort too much coke in too short of a time, you could inject 50 times the amount you couldn't absorb all at once, slowly through your blood stream. See, you snort a line of coke and, it stays in your blood stream, all of it, for a very long time, slowly being released. But if you release a small amount in your blood stream, and constantly update it, then you could theoretically say, have 10 times the effect without overdosing, since you only have so much in your entire system at once (but since it's constantly coming from an outside source, it's a lot more). Since the problem with testosterone comes from the sudden drop, you could also conveniently be taking some estrogen blockers and slowly increasing your testosterone so your body doesn't go haywire at the sudden hormone boost, thus making steroids useful. Also potentially growth hormone, which would also explain why he's so tall compared to everyone else. Could work. Although it would require constant maintenance as you would need to routinely replace various chemicals, and tubes would be exposed all over your body.


Some fat loss drugs use caffeine as an additive, since it elevates the bodies operating levels and makes them burn more energy. What if there was like, a drug, that made you flex a lot, and stimulated your muscles? Theoretically, they could repair themselves, and you'd be stronger.

You'd also conveniently be flexing all the time, so you'd appear huge and could be uber tough, allowing you to like, resist blows, from punching or something, like martial artists. A lot of people can already do it (like me!) but it would be a convenient way to allow anyone to do it, or to near super human limits. Of course it would be painful to be like this all the time, maybe even hard to move. Hence the pain killers!

[AsuraSyn]

Suicidesoldier#1

AsuraSyn

Why not go even further and engineer soldiers then?
Seriously, we could manipulate base genomes in the womb to encourage size and density growth of an individual and then, as they grow and develop, condition them to be superhuman making them even more efficient.

If we took a person and put them through the conditioning you've described from, say, 13 on, by the time they were in their twenties they'd be borderline indestructible, even more so than a normal person conditioned this way since their entire development would have been focused around this program to increase their physical abilities, making them naturally 7 times stronger or more, instead of the more likely 4 to 5 times, no?
Combine that with some new procedures designed to preserve longevity and/or replace older, less efficient cells and tissue, and you've got an entire generation of super soldiers that could, theoretically, live for centuries at their peak.

But then we can't suppress the population. Criminals, crazy people, whoever can do this. We're back at square one.

Unless we don't allow them good armor, but Idk if that would work out.


This wouldn't be that great for living forever. If we could cure cancer, theoretically we could, but we'd still age; we'd need some way to revert back to your old self.

Say, a DNA replacement thingy, although it would really need to, more or less, replace cellular memory since the DNA doesn't actually change much, and it would need to clean out junk build up, like little bits of ash that we breathe in, that build up over time, that we can't. Nanobots could make us live forever, but that's at best hundreds if not thousands of years in the future. Actual, legitimate nanobots, to change around our chemical structure. But preliminary stage technology may be able to at least repair DNA, say having a simple function to constantly reproduce with our cells in a symbiotic relationship, and then replace the old the newly degraded DNA (since cells are a copy of a copy of a copy) with some new DNA. Perhaps we could use a virus to do this, so we could constantly be reverting back to a certain age, so we'd never age; although we wouldn't be able to have scars or, likely, even get stronger or something (unless there was hyperplasia, or the creation of new cells).


But if we could live forever, then we'd probs need to enforce some population control measures or go to other planets or something, so that's an issue in and of itself.

We could make everyone super strong, but their hearts would need to be some 10 times bigger at least, since technologically replacing (more like just adding in a new robot heart on top of the old heart) would be relatively difficult. This heart would take a ton of energy, and they'd likely need a better circulatory system in general, like veins and such, to resist PSI issues. So idk how well that would work out; plus it wouldn't be constantly flowing. Maybe, we could coat major arteries and veins with cardiac tissue, like, line their veins, with it, so it would be fairly spread out; instead of just say, two hearts, or 10 hearts, their entire torso could contain lots of cardiac tissue around their veins. Get shot in the chest; no problem, you have a huge heart surrounding all your veins. As well, you could have a bird respiratory system with circular breathing all over your body, like along your spine (like real birds, actually) and be great at breathing, as well. You would need an oversized liver (although that's pretty easy) and some large/extra kidneys (maybe four in their gut, two in their chest) to help filter the blood and such but it might work. Although all that would be pretty difficult to pull off. Bane's little thing could actually just be circulating blood faster, and adding some, which would explain his vascular constriction and increase in size due to an increase in blood blow, and potentially his super strength if it stimulated say, adrenaline production.


I always thought one great side effect of bane's stuff could be pain reduction, which would allow him to lift weights without pain, so you could exercise without feeling it and thus it would be easy to work out, and also it would explain like, being punched a lot, getting hit by cars, punching through concrete etc. and not instantly going unconscious. Of course afterwards it's revealed he's broken both his hands, multiple ribs and a femur but hey, he beat batman! Kind of. Not really he was in jail.

Also PFC's would allow more oxygen, so that could actually do something useful; could throw in some electrolytes, vitamins, and glucose for energy for all these new actions, even theoretically some ATP, and vasolidators to counteract the vasoconstriction of adrenaline, hopefully decreasing the heart rate and blood pressure (some stuff for the brain specifically might improve intelligent; with PFC's, it would transfer loads more oxygen, so extra blood flow wouldn't be necessary). But more interesting is something that is constantly injecting something intravenously. See, if you inject yourself with too much heroin, it stays in your system for too long, and you die! But rather than swallow a bunch of pills too quickly or snort too much coke in too short of a time, you could inject 50 times the amount you couldn't absorb all at once, slowly through your blood stream. See, you snort a line of coke and, it stays in your blood stream, all of it, for a very long time, slowly being released. But if you release a small amount in your blood stream, and constantly update it, then you could theoretically say, have 10 times the effect without overdosing, since you only have so much in your entire system at once (but since it's constantly coming from an outside source, it's a lot more). Since the problem with testosterone comes from the sudden drop, you could also conveniently be taking some estrogen blockers and slowly increasing your testosterone so your body doesn't go haywire at the sudden hormone boost, thus making steroids useful. Also potentially growth hormone, which would also explain why he's so tall compared to everyone else. Could work. Although it would require constant maintenance as you would need to routinely replace various chemicals, and tubes would be exposed all over your body.

If we could modify our mitochondria to produce more ATP, for which it would need more oxygen from the cell therefore good intake is a must, we could reduce the effect of aging simply by making our bodies more efficient on a cellular level.
In our youth our cells are rather excitable, more so than in adulthood, hence why a tiny child grows into a big-a** adult, but if we could maintain a level of excitement, cellular that is, close to that level our bodies would continuously renew themselves to the degree that the physical aging process would halt. This is actually easier to accomplish than most people would think as a retroviral approach, as you previously suggested, could modify our mitochondria. We could then simply program the retrovirus to modify the mitochondria to request more oxygen from the nucleus and thus increase it's production of ATP, supercharging our bodies on a cellular level. The excess energy might even be directable into the nervous system as you suggest, allowing for an inherent level of strength close to the one achievable from the conditioning process we discussed. Combine that cellular efficiency with the enhancement program and you might produce human beings with performance levels 10x or more the current norm.
If we could get humans that efficiently designed, and then simply stop relying so much on technology that would then be useless (why use a bulldozer pumping toxins out when you can just shove a boulder the same distance without any strain?) we could decrease green house gases and increase plant production, further increasing the oxygen concentration in the atmosphere, allowing for even further enhanced performance. Once we get to a population density an area can no longer support comfortably, we could simply begin expanding humanity's domain to other planets since the harshness of the environment would not be much of an issue with our new uberhumans. Just form an atmosphere and get some green plants going to produce oxygen and we can start, literally, moving mountains around in the lesser gravity.