You must log in or register to comment.
Life extension is the concept of extending the human lifespan, either through incremental improvements in medicine or through radical increases in maximum lifespan beyond its generally-settled biological limit of around 125 years.[1] This field of study has been explored by numerous researchers and advocates, including “life extensionists”, “immortalists”, and “longevists” (those who aspire to achieve prolonged lifespans themselves). These researchers and advocates hypothesize that future advancements in tissue rejuvenation, stem cells, regenerative medicine, molecular repair, gene therapy, pharmaceuticals, and organ replacement (such through artificial organs or xenotransplantations) will eventually enable humans to have indefinite lifespans through complete rejuvenation to a state of optimal health and youth (agerasia[2]). The ethical implications of life extension are a subject of discourse among bioethicists.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_extension
I hope we don’t have radical life extension any time soon. At this point, the only people who would get it are billionaires. Can you think of any billionaires you’d want around any longer than absolutely necessary?
Well, the phase of very hight price is very usual, even kind of necessary, for big innovations. Do you remember time when only millionaires could afford mobile phone or microwave oven? And it’s those first pioneers, necessary rich, that enable more investment into development, mass production and subsequent price reduction. I think we hardly can skip it…
On the other hand, billionaires are not necessarily on the boat of extending their own life… Andrew Steele, the author of Ageless, met them in Davos, Switzerland and this is the result 👇 https://youtu.be/yMs0UHoZsQI
I’m happy to lower my life expectancy if that means billionaires die earlier too.
Parasites having microwaves is one thing, them lasting longer is a massive issue for the world. Imagine trump living 200 years, being elected another 10 times. Or Putin, or netaniarrurrght.
First we solve the billionaires problem, then we solve longevity. One problem is much bigger than the other.
Let’s make a though experiment. Imagine that there would already be a functional technology for indefinite life extension, so people would not have to die of aging (they could choose it, but it wouldn’t be necessary) and people would live practically indefinitely long. But the society would have a problem about billionaire.
Would you suggest to solve the problem with billionaires by infecting all humans with a noncurable illness that is debilitating them for many decades, sucking energy from their bodies and joy from their minds, making them weak, frail and in last years also dependent and often bedridden, stealing their independence and dignity and finally killing 110 000 people every single day?
Just to solve a problem with several hundreds, thousands of billionaires?
Or would you target think and work hard to solve the problem with billionaires by soon other way and reserve killing of all humans only as a last possibility?
It is not only about your personal lifespan. It about life of every single human.
That’s such a massive extrapolation that there’s no longer any relation to any current problem. Longevity is fiction, but somewhat plausible. Your scenario is fantastic fantasy.
Currently, the top 10% is literally destroying the world. Them living longer means the world will end sooner, longevity or not, amongst many other problems.
And they are just the face of the evil nature of humans. If we don’t solve our evil there is no point in living longer. I don’t want to live in a world where human evil has more power, nor do I think the other species would want to.
You’re talking about creating hell.