Extreme Life Extension

“Won't life extension increase the world’s population and tax our planet's resources?”

posted on April 7,2008

Last week, I said some people’s first reaction to the prospect of extreme life extension is negative rather than positive. We hear many objections, some more than others. I’m going to cover some of the more important ones over the next few weeks. A few objections are bogus and irrational, but some illustrate very important issues that need to be addressed. One of the more common objections is…

Obviously, yes, the world’s population would almost certainly increase. But maybe not as much as you think. Amazingly enough, when you factor out immigration, industrialized countries are actually seeing population declines rather than increases. However, even though our current resources and technologies could support 6 billion more people (according to world renowned economist Julian Simon), this concern should still be studied. 

Life extensionists are generally responsible problem-solving people who share these concerns. And the longer we keep ourselves alive, the more brainpower we have to see these problems through by developing better technologies for cheaper and more plentiful pure food, water and air as well as clean abundant energy and affordable housing.

Just as technology extends lives, it makes life more livable for larger populations. Since the Industrial Revolution, alarmists screamed doom and gloom about overcrowding and limited resources (backed by their "statistics"). However, the opposite has happened. The population increased by 740% since then, and standards of living have soared. It's not so much a question of resources as it is one of education, individual productivity and distribution - social, not life extension problems. As long as people produce more than they consume, it's impossible to run out of resources.

But the real issue is this… Telling people they should die to make room for others is not a rational or moral solution to any problem. When we have age reversal capabilities, no one will be forced to take advantage of them. And no one has the right to withhold them from others in the name of this or any other objection. As long as someone can support his or herself and does not force someone else to support them, they have an undeniable right to life.

Stay positive.

LONGEVITY IN OTHER SPECIES

Humans are long-lived in comparison to similarly-sized mammals, but some other species manage far greater feats of comparative longevity - and a few appear not to age at all, so far as scientists can determine at this time. Can we learn anything from their biochemistry?

http://www.fightaging.org/archives/001452.php

"How is it that a whale can resist cancer effectively enough to live for two centuries in the wild, bearing in mind a whale has so many, many more cells than we humans that might become cancerous. How does the construction of naked mole-rat cellular membranes allow them to shrug off oxidative damage and live nine times longer than similar rodent species? Why do lobsters - and possibly some species of clam - seem not to age at all?"

Back to Top