"Aging is a barbaric phenomenon that shouldn't be tolerated in polite society."
Aubrey de Grey
Key words: biogerontology, curing aging, elderly, geriatrics, gerontology, immortal, immortalism, life span, memes
In May 25, 1961, Kennedy promised to land a man on the moon even though the US did not even have a space program yet. On July 20, 1969, Neil Armstrong fulfilled that promise. The main step in curing aging is to make civilization aim in that direction. If curing aging becomes a goal of human civilization, we will cure it. When technology appears imminent, we will discover it. It is human instinct to take the final step. Personally, I do not think we are close to developing the technology to cure aging. But when we are there, when there is a "Sputnik" in aging research, we will cure aging independently of its detractors.
There are multiple social, cultural, and economic implications for an end of aging. If we were to develop a cure for aging tomorrow, the impact on humankind would be unprecedented. This is an working draft which I hope tackles the most important issues--some questions have been addressed before though.
Just like any medical breakthrough, a cure for aging would initially be available to only a few. Although it is difficult to foresee the costs of a hypothetical cure for aging, this is the most likely scenario in biomedical research. It is likely that given the widespread appeal of curing aging, governments would intervene to make the aging cure available for the public in general. Therefore, the most likely scenario, at least judging from other medical breakthroughs like antibiotics, is that there will be a first phase where only the rich will be able to profit, followed by a mass dissemination of the cure for aging. It is highly likely that in a matter of time everyone would be able to benefit from the cure of aging, at least in industrialized nations.
There are two possibilities for curing aging: 1) curing aging in newborns probably using germline interventions, meaning children would be aging-free but adults would still age, making us the last mortal generation; 2) curing aging in adults by some therapies, meaning newborns would still be programmed to age, despite having the possibility of avoiding aging once as adults (Stock, 2004). In addition, it is possible that we witness a combination of these two possibilities: a case where senescence is eliminated by germline interventions but some age-related diseases still prevail and have to be tackled by medicine in adults. Whatever the scenario, non-aging humans would soon prevail. People who would still age--either for personal beliefs, ignorance, or lack of resources--would die sooner than non-aging individuals and so with time the percentage of aging humans would decrease: a simple case of Darwinistic selection.
Assuming we cure aging and all age-related pathologies, including cancer, heart disease, and neurodegeneration, our average lifespan would increase considerably. The average lifespan (t0.5) of a non-aging population is given by the equation (Finch, 1990, p. 29):
t0.5 = -ln 0.5/IMR
Assuming the initial mortality rate, the IMR, of a typical population in an industrialized nation (0.0005/year) we have t0.5 = 1,200 years. Using a lower IMR of 0.0002/year--see previous calculations--gives t0.5 = 3,500 years. Of course this assumes a constant IMR, which may not be the case if there are wars or pests that increase the IMR. Even so, this is at least a 15-fold increase in average lifespan.
A society mostly composed of non-aging individuals living on average more than 1,000 years would face many challenges. For instance, prison sentences would have to be reviewed to address these issues. As argued by others (Haigh and Bagaric, 2002), a prison term of a few years makes a small deterrent for some who expects to live over 1,000 years. Life sentences would also have to be reviewed. Could the state afford to keep criminals in prison for hundreds of years? It is doubtful and other solutions had to be sought.
Similarly, retirement would have to be changed if not abolished and many adjustments would have to be made. For instance, just like people are entitled to a certain amount of vacations every year, maybe we would also be entitled to several years of vacations every century or so. Given the foreseeable problems in healthcare due to the increasing percentage of people over 65 in industrialized nations, curing aging would be highly beneficial from an economic perspective.
Figure 1: Overpopulation is already a problem in some countries. Source: unknown.
Overpopulation is another problem one instinctively foresees and aging is indeed a problem in some countries with overpopulation scenarios (Fig. 1). Forcing people to die of aging is ethically unacceptable and practically impossible. An end of aging would eventually lead to overpopulation problems worldwide, but this process would take decades. In the meantime, and a species capable of conquering immortality can conquer many other trophies, we could increase food production worldwide and eventually expand into space. Avoiding reproduction could be a possible course of action but I don't believe that to be the most likely scenario. Expansion, constant unbounded expansion into the stars appears a much better solution.
For me, probably the greatest danger of curing aging is not overpopulation but the cultural or intellectual stagnation of humankind. Nobel physicist Max Plank wrote:
"A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with the idea from the beginning."
The current human culture would be predominant because older persons would never retire, probably would hardly change their ideas, and would block the way to the younger and revolutionary ideologies. Culturally, or memetically, humankind has been evolving at an astonishing pace. If we compare human society 1,000 years ago with our society now we see an extraordinary evolution in terms of ideas, education, even ethics. Despite the fact that someone brilliant at his/her job would be able to continue at it forever, to have a generation of men and women stopped in time could be a catastrophe for humankind.
Maybe brain implants and other alterations to the mind might change us, but the problem remains that the persons might not be interest in this. It is highly speculative to talk about the psychology and cognitive evolution of non-aging humans; perhaps if neurons divide in great numbers we might change our way of thinking more easily. Most of the cognitive and ideological changes in humans, however, happen during childhood not adulthood. It is therefore my opinion that an end of aging in a near future would not be helpful for humankind's culture. We need a few generations where education is well implemented worldwide to have a human mass that has the right ideology and ambition to become eternal. An end to genetic evolution can be obviated with genetic engineering; it is the end of the cultural evolution that could become a problem.
Overall, I study aging for what can be considered selfish reasons. Still, aging will be the greatest cause of suffering affecting me and the ones I love. My ultimate objective is to the extend healthy lifespan of humans and I hope others can profit from my work. Overall, just like the 50% life-extension during last century was beneficial and is now cherished, I think a further life-extension of the human species, even a cure for aging, will be beneficial despite potential problems.
One last interesting question is: what will I do when I--or someone else, it's not really important--cure aging? Well, apart from eradicating aging I want to improve myself in other directions in accordance to my philosophy. Perhaps then I would try to solve humankind's problems like hunger, war, and suffering. "To wipe every tear from every eye" like Abraham Lincoln said. Finally, after becoming all I could be and finding peace and harmony in my existence, I would follow my true passion: discovering the secrets of the universe.
Thank you for visiting my website. I believe cooperation and networking are essential for success, so please feel free to contact me.
Copyright © 1997 - 2002, 2004, 2005 by João Pedro de Magalhães. All rights reserved.