The scientific world is at it again. They are trying to cure aging. A biomedical gerontologist and chief scientist of a foundation passionate for research of longevity, Aubrey de Grey says that possibly within his own lifetime doctors could cure aging- and get rid of the diseases that follow age. The goal is indefinite living.
“I’d say we have a 50/50 chance of bringing aging under what I’d call a decisive level of medical control within the next 25 years or so,” de Grey said in an interview before delivering a lecture at Britain’s Royal Institution academy of science.
“And what I mean by decisive is the same sort of medical control that we have over most infectious diseases today.”
De Grey sees a time when people will go to their doctors for regular “maintenance,” which by then will include gene therapies, stem cell therapies, immune stimulation and a range of other advanced medical techniques to keep them in good shape. He describes aging as the gradual build up molecular and cellular damage.
Now I love the beauty of life. I want to be a mountain climbing, active old lady. I can’t be more fascinated than older people who are confident and living life. But I personally don’t like the thought of living on this earth for 1,o00 years, do you? And the idea of regular “maintenance” is a little invasive? It just seems morally wrong. And frankly confusing.
This idea may seem a little far fetched, but the 2005 Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) forked over $20,000 to disprove the theory, it was never done. His focus would be on killing diseases of old age. “This is absolutely not a matter of keeping people alive in a bad state of health,” he told Reuters. “This is about preventing people from getting sick as a result of old age. The particular therapies that we are working on will only deliver long life as a side effect of delivering better health.”
What would be the ecological effect on people living so long on this earth, we already mistreat the world so badly now? What individuals would be able to participate in indefinite living? I am assuming only the ones who have the “means” of doing this. Wouldn’t it be hard to watch others around you die? Is it morally wrong to physically alter our stem cells, and inner workings? Were we created initially to age? What are the psychological and mental impacts of living so long?
If this science were to happen in my life time where would it stop? What else would be invented? Would humans be capable of taking on the responsibility of a long life span? In response to concerns about overpopulation, should be we all live to be 200, de Grey says: “There are plenty of ways to keep population down even if we don’t let old people get sick—we could kill every other baby, for example. I hope you see my point: old people are people too. If we reject ageism, we are, inescapably, morally obliged to do our best to keep them healthy just as we do for the young, both by applying existing medicine and by developing medicine that does not yet exist.”
- Who Wants to Live Forever? Scientist Sees Aging Cured (frstephensmuts.wordpress.com)
- Aubrey de Grey interviewed on Aging and AI at HPlus Magazine (nextbigfuture.com)
- Moving beyond embryonic stem cells: Encouragement on the horizon (physorg.com)
- Can the Human Lifespan Reach 1,000 Years -Some Experts Say “Yes”: Daily Galaxy (serioussamp.wordpress.com)
- The Future of Immortality (bigthink.com)
- F.D.A. Approves Stem Cell Therapy to Reduce Facial Wrinkles (ducknetweb.blogspot.com)
- These cures are no longer science fiction (theglobeandmail.com)