An Aubrey de Grey, perhaps I should say THE Aubrey de Grey, has proposed that, within about 25-30 years, we should be able to extend the human lifespan almost indefinitely. Google his name if you want to find out more.
This wouldn’t necessarily mean immortality, as extending human lifespan doesn’t, in and of itself, guarantee protection from other kinds of natural disasters that could wipe us all out in one swipe.
Still (to very loosely paraphrase de Grey), if you were laying on your deathbed, knowing you were about to die, and someone whispered in your ear that, with just few treatments you could go back to feeling and looking like you were, say, 25, would you say “yes” or “no.”
With no caveats whatsoever. Obviously this would be difficult-if-not-impossible to implement across society (the measures necessary to control population alone would hvve liberals and right-wingers alike screaming bloody murder), but personally, and selfishly? I would do nearly anything to live forever. The thought of dying without experiencing even a tiny fraction of what’s available in the world (as I almost certainly will do, even if I live to be a thousand) depresses me beyond measure, and I honestly don’t believe that I could ever get bored of life as long as I had my health. The massive range of activity that the world offers, well…
To stop myself rambling, I’ll just say that I have often fantasized about being the character of Hob Galding, in the Sandman graphic novels. Being able to live the future…
I might take it on my deathbed especially if I was pretty young but I don’t think I would wish for that outside of the scenario. I would like to live to be about 80 or so and that is about it. The idea of dying young used to terrify me but I worked through it and, even now at 32, I have lived enough where an early death wouldn’t be a complete tragedy. I am a thrill seeker and am fully prepared to die that day when I fly a plane or do something else somewhat risky. I would worry about my kids but that is why I buy as much life insurance as I can and have everything planned out.
I dunno. I like being alive, but I think there are some dark times ahead for this country, and at my age I’ll probably die before most of them hit. I’m not sure if that isn’t for the best.
‘Living indefinitely’ in terms of not aging does not mean being immortal. It simply means that ‘old age’ will be removed as one of the causes of death. My guess is that the average lifespan of a human would increase to maybe 200-300 if that were the case, before you were killed in an accident, or killed by a disease or a random organ failure, or simply went though a period of unhappiness great enough that you killed yourself.
Even if you eliminated all natural causes of death, accidents would still get you. 4.4% of all deaths today are accidental. 1.3% are suicide, and 0.7% are homicide (in the U.S.). There’s 6.5% of people right there who die of unnatural causes. Then there are the ‘natural’ causes which aren’t age-related, such as sudden stroke, septicemia, food poisoning, etc.
Also, the accident rate is much higher for young people, because they are more vigorous and active. So it might be higher overall if everyone is young and vigorous.
If you don’t age, at some point the odds are going to catch up with you.
No, no, no. It’s just that declining to have kids is the kindest thing we can do to future generations, under the existing circumstances. We’ll know if we can extend human life indefinitely soon enough with the people who exist already
Already acknowledged, more or less, in my OP.
Well, who knows how long a given individual would live, barring accidents? I think that with extended age we would all get smarter, and tend to avoid situations in which we might die by accident, or by the other possibilities that you cite.
It seems almost certain that, eventually, one would eventually die regardless of how long one could live. After all, the sun will inevitably burn itself out, and that will be that for life on Earth, as we know it. But with a lifespan of hundreds of years, how much could we figure out to save ourselves in the meantime?
I don’t get this. Birthrates in the developed worth are already well below replacement levels. It’s not clear to me how are kids will be better off with declining populations and an increasingly-aged population that will need to be supported by a decreasing number of working people.
Because that’s where we’re headed right now. In 30 years, Europe will only have 1.4 working people for every retired person. We’re somewhat better off in North America, with 2.5.
Have kids. Lots of them. They’ll help carry the load. People are not a liability, they are an asset.
Or, after living for 100 years we might become wild risk-takers as we yearn for new experiences. We really have no way of knowing.
If you mean true immortality by some artificial means like constant off-site brain backups, then maybe. But otherwise, nah. For instance, if there’s a 10% chance that you’ll be killed in a non-age related incident in the next 50 years, then if that stayed the same for each subsequent 50 year period you’d only have a 35% chance of living to be 500, and only a 12% chance of making it to 1000. Your chance of living to be 10,000 is minute, about like winning the lottery.
Well, I wouldn’t want to be immortal. But a treatment that would either halt my aging or even make me younger…yeah, I’d probably be willing to give up a sizable chunk of my savings for THAT.
If such a process ever becomes a reality it will eventually have some rather profound implications. Still, I think we can get around most of them.
I’d take someone up on the Immortality offer faster than you could say Count De St. Germaine.
I’d have a great time… being able to talk to people about “The Good Old Days” when cars ran on “Petrol”, when Newspapers were actually printed on paper (“Made from Trees, you know…”), and it was legal to smoke little rolled up tubes of tobacco leaf wrapped in paper with a filter on the end, if that was your thing.
And, of course, about the time I tied an onion to my belt to go to the shops, as was the fashion at the time…
Seriously though, I’d be up for living forever (barring getting hit by Lightning, a meteorite, or anything else unpleasant), provided I didn’t age past, say, 30 or so. After all, it wouldn’t be a lot of fun being the world’s oldest person but not being able to remember anything and having to wear nappies every time you went out in public… :eek:
Your genius and insights, drmark2000, are very much welcome back on the boards.
If accidents were to be the only cause of death, and if the rate of accidental death were 19/100,000 a year (per Wikipedia), then the chance of living any number of years in a row is 0.99981[sup]n[/sup]. Of course, every day you wake up the clock is reset.
