Published by deborah.woehr on 21 Feb 2006 at 09:26 am
Living to be 100?
Quoted from Yahoo! News
ST LOUIS, United States (AFP) - Life expectancy may balloon to 100 years old in rich nations thanks to scientific advances, but such progress could widen the gap between wealthy and poor nations, according to researchers.
ADVERTISEMENTWithin the next 10 years, state-of-the-art, anti-ageing technologies could — if they come into widespread use — radically start altering global demographics, extending people’s lifespans by 20 years, according to Shripad Tuljapurkar, a Stanford University biologist.
This article goes on to address the problems these anti-aging technologies could cause, such as a global underclass. I immediately thought about my country’s Social Security problem. My generation won’t have the same luxury, but that’s for another post.
Next, I thought about whether or not I would want to live to be 100. The average life expectancy for my family is 82, which is a good number. I wouldn’t mind living to be 100 as long as I had my mind and I could get around reasonably well.
What about you? How do you feel about anti-aging technologies?
Gone Away on 21 Feb 2006 at 6:33 pm #
Who do I sue for being born in 1948 instead of 1984? Someone has to bear the blame!
Seriously though, they’re welcome to it. I’ve earned my old age and darned if I’ll let anyone take it from me. And I’m ready to go on the appointed date too…
deborah.woehr on 21 Feb 2006 at 6:48 pm #
I don’t know how I feel about science messing with nature. Although it would be great seeing how far technology has advanced in 2066, I value the quality of my life (and those of my family) as well.
Benjamin Solah on 22 Feb 2006 at 1:23 am #
I’m shit scared of death, so I’m for living longer.
deborah.woehr on 22 Feb 2006 at 6:55 am #
At your age, the thought of death should be far off in the distance. It sounds like you have a healthy mind, Ben.
Lee Carlon on 23 Feb 2006 at 3:43 am #
I gonna be the preachy one who spoils all the fun, I personally think we should be concentrating on ensuring everybody (in the world) has a good quality of life, before we reward ourselves with even more.
Having said that, I’d like to live for as long as possible.
Fredcq on 23 Feb 2006 at 4:56 am #
That is such a tough question for me to answer. I would immediately have said yes last week but we visited my wife’s grandmother in this nursing home over the weekend. The place was absolutly beautiful. There were plants, trees, libraries, bird cages and fishtanks. But walking around the place still made me depressed. It was literely room after room of older people sitting in wheelchairs in front of the tv. I was going to post about this at my site but it was so depressing to me that I changed my mind. So now, I’m depressing up your blog. Sorry.
So I don’t know at this point if I could really handle being in that situation. I keep telling myself that as long as I can think and type, I will be able to do it.
deborah.woehr on 23 Feb 2006 at 9:12 am #
I agree with the equality issue, Lee. Why should some people have that option and not others?
Fred, I hear you about the nursing homes. I don’t like to think about those because they’re too close for comfort. I’m grateful that my grandmother is not in one of those places. She’ll turn 80 this summer and is still able to live on her own.
Melly on 23 Feb 2006 at 2:32 pm #
Beeing the geek that I am, I’ve been following anti-ageing for quite some time. Futuristics predict that the currently born kids will live much longer than we do, or the extra 20 years. Nearly immortal. That’s what they say, don’t jump down my throat
Touching on what Lee said, I believe that with longer life expentancy our society will also change. The urgency will disappear and with it perhaps calmer days will come. Who knows?
The eternal optimist.
deborah.woehr on 23 Feb 2006 at 2:48 pm #
Society has been due for change for a long time. Let’s hope you’re right in that they’re good changes.
Lee Carlon on 23 Feb 2006 at 4:56 pm #
I’m not so sure melly, (and sorry for hijacking Deborah) but I’m a pessimist when it comes to other people and society. I believe society, at least western, to a large part is run on fear, fear of not having enough to support yourself, provide for the kids, health care, fear of other people, whatever, as we get longer lives that fear will be increased because we’ve got to provide for ourselves even more, and as such our concern for other people will diminish even further, we’ll be too busy worrying about ourselves.
Immortality (And I know we’re not really talking about that), in my opinion, would create far more problems than it would solve.
And I’ll end that depressing comment with a smiley
Melly on 24 Feb 2006 at 7:08 am #
Lee, I hope you’re still around (and I also apologize Deborah), but the ramifications of immortality (long life span), will create changes you haven’t considered.
You look at an immortal society and still see the same social structure. I don’t think that would be the case. For one thing, I doubt people will have kids. It might not happen immediately, but I think the cahnge will happen. (Maybe one kids when you’re 500 or something, just to see what the fuss is all about
Of course, no one can prove what they think might happen, but I think the changes will be deeper than just continuing to live our lives as usual just longer.
What do you think? Or perhaps, Deborah, we should continue this elsewhere?
deborah.woehr on 24 Feb 2006 at 10:26 am #
Oh, let’s continue this! Both of you have some great perspectives.
Lee, I admit that I don’t watch the news because I see society going down the toilet. Unless medical technology keeps up with anti-aging, we’ll have an unprecedented medical crisis on our hands. Social Security is already overburdened, which may (or may not) provide us with a paltry retirement income. Yes, I’m seeing the negative ramifications of this technology.
But.
I was told by my husband’s late grandfather that society moves like a pendulum, swinging from one extreme to the other. The past three decades have shown a build-up of society’s corruption. I’m not just referring to the government, but everyone. Something’s going to happen that will make the pendulum swing the other way.
Melly, I don’t know if people will stop having kids but it is possible. Raising a family is expensive, and the costs are rising each year. I can’t imagine living to be 500! I wonder how many books I can write in that time. Hmm.
Lee Carlon on 24 Feb 2006 at 2:29 pm #
Melly, you are absolutely correct, there are things I haven’t considered, but I’m just not so sure people would change. I’ve heard people say before, ‘If i could live forever I’d really contribute and change the world,’ I don’t buy that for a second, if the people who say that meant it, they wouldn’t wait for the immortality pill.
I think, for the most part, most people would continue as they have being so far. Human nature is a powerful thing, and it takes a lot of effort to change. I’m not saying it can’t be done, it can, but most people just don’t seem bothered enough. Given immortality those people get the ultimate put off clause, ah I’ll do it tomorrow, next year, next century, whatever.
And I do think people will have still have kids, the people that are having kids now, the birth rate has dropped off, and I think we’re at a situation now where only the people who want kids (and the unlucky ones who accidents happen too) are having them, rather than a couple of generations ago when everybody had kids, because that’s what you did.
I’m also not convinced the human brain/mind could cope with immortality, and I’m not talking about the physical object in our heads. I just don’t think our mids could look down the barrel of immortality and be okay with that.
Deborah, your husband’s grandfather sounds like he was a smart man, but with people who live forever in charge, they would have a monopoly, and once they get to the top, it’s gonna take a whole lot of heaving to knock them off.
Do you think you could write novels for 500 years? I can’t imagine what else I would (want to) do, but I just wander if it might not become more of the same old, same old.
Oh, and thanks for being a gracious host. (Sorry for the long comment).
deborah.woehr on 25 Feb 2006 at 9:54 am #
Novels and/or blogs. Of course, I would have to set up a separate page to list 500 years’ worth of archives. Wow.
Jonathan M. Dobson on 25 Feb 2006 at 1:41 pm #
Then there’s this site: ImmInst.org, the Immortality Institute.
An essay contest produced this winner: http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=202&t=8267&s=
Lots more articles here, too.