When your a kid or young adult, the idea of living for ever is rather attractive, possibly because the idea of dying seems so unlikely an event to you.
However as you mature, the idea is seen to have a few (well, more than a few), drawbacks.
Not least of which is that if you avoided life's pitfalls and accidents, you might end up being around when the sun destroys the Earth in a few billions years time .... immortality would be a bit of a bummer then.
But realistically, eternal life is not likely, but a very long life is a possibility. However if offered it, would you accept the offer? Surprisingly a recent New Scientist survey has found that only 21 per cent of those adults asked would be 'very likely' to accept an offer of 'immortality'. A further 30 per cent would be 'some what likely' to accept such an offer. The remaining 50 per cent were more or less reconciled with living their allotted span (as long as it wasn't cut short). The reasons given for this were the obvious: Overpopulation, fear of a 'nursing home world' full of wrinkly geriatrics.
Perhaps more unsurprisingly, 58 per cent were happy with a moderately longer life expectancy, considering this to be a positive. There was still 48 per cent who agreed with the statement 'I think we should just accept our natural lifespan'.
Of course life expectancy globally has risen over the last 50 years for most countries (with notable exceptions, such as the ex Soviet block), but this trend may be peaking, as pollution and other environmental issues take a grip .... in fact the Mail On-line newspaper reported that "Britain and the US are the only 2 western nations where life expectancy is falling," describing a study looking at changes in longevity in high-income countries. This US study was based on recent changes in life expectancy across 17 high-income countries, rather than global changes.
The study found that a number of the 17 rich countries experienced decreased life expectancy from 2014 to 2015. Most bounced back, but the US and UK didn't ..... In the UK, life expectancy at birth declined by 0.19 years for women and 0.26 years for men. But aside from this recent localised blip, life expectancy for the vast majority of the developed world population (the rich always had better life expectancy), has almost doubled in the last 200 years.
Current projections suggest that for the developed countries this will continue .... however the caveat is that the period of healthy life, aka 'healthspan,' has not increased by anything like as much. This makes fears about a long life, with the majority of the extra years spent in poor health, seem well founded.
But despite these ethical questions, gerontologists are still working hard towards the goal of a vastly extended lifespan. Some even believe that some children alive now, will benefit from the chance of a 'radical lifespan extension,' but not necessarily the same improvement of healthspan. Some of you reading this, may also be offered treatments such as manipulation of gut microbiota to defend against the diseases of old age.
Mind you, longer lives in healthy states would mean higher taxes to pay for the treatments, virtually no state or occupational retirement pensions, and other social issues such as compulsory birth control as the price. Perhaps worse of all, that morning commute at 06:30am aged 135, doesn't seem that appealing .... but then again, given the alternative, I could live with that.
 |
| Eternal Youth - Long A Dream - 'The Fountain of Youth' (1546) Lucas Cranach the Elder |
However as you mature, the idea is seen to have a few (well, more than a few), drawbacks.
Not least of which is that if you avoided life's pitfalls and accidents, you might end up being around when the sun destroys the Earth in a few billions years time .... immortality would be a bit of a bummer then.
But realistically, eternal life is not likely, but a very long life is a possibility. However if offered it, would you accept the offer? Surprisingly a recent New Scientist survey has found that only 21 per cent of those adults asked would be 'very likely' to accept an offer of 'immortality'. A further 30 per cent would be 'some what likely' to accept such an offer. The remaining 50 per cent were more or less reconciled with living their allotted span (as long as it wasn't cut short). The reasons given for this were the obvious: Overpopulation, fear of a 'nursing home world' full of wrinkly geriatrics.
Perhaps more unsurprisingly, 58 per cent were happy with a moderately longer life expectancy, considering this to be a positive. There was still 48 per cent who agreed with the statement 'I think we should just accept our natural lifespan'.
Of course life expectancy globally has risen over the last 50 years for most countries (with notable exceptions, such as the ex Soviet block), but this trend may be peaking, as pollution and other environmental issues take a grip .... in fact the Mail On-line newspaper reported that "Britain and the US are the only 2 western nations where life expectancy is falling," describing a study looking at changes in longevity in high-income countries. This US study was based on recent changes in life expectancy across 17 high-income countries, rather than global changes.
The study found that a number of the 17 rich countries experienced decreased life expectancy from 2014 to 2015. Most bounced back, but the US and UK didn't ..... In the UK, life expectancy at birth declined by 0.19 years for women and 0.26 years for men. But aside from this recent localised blip, life expectancy for the vast majority of the developed world population (the rich always had better life expectancy), has almost doubled in the last 200 years.
Current projections suggest that for the developed countries this will continue .... however the caveat is that the period of healthy life, aka 'healthspan,' has not increased by anything like as much. This makes fears about a long life, with the majority of the extra years spent in poor health, seem well founded.
But despite these ethical questions, gerontologists are still working hard towards the goal of a vastly extended lifespan. Some even believe that some children alive now, will benefit from the chance of a 'radical lifespan extension,' but not necessarily the same improvement of healthspan. Some of you reading this, may also be offered treatments such as manipulation of gut microbiota to defend against the diseases of old age.
Mind you, longer lives in healthy states would mean higher taxes to pay for the treatments, virtually no state or occupational retirement pensions, and other social issues such as compulsory birth control as the price. Perhaps worse of all, that morning commute at 06:30am aged 135, doesn't seem that appealing .... but then again, given the alternative, I could live with that.
If you are ever offered eternal life and refuse it, send those people my way.
ReplyDeleteBowerick Wowbagger the Infinitely Prolonged is an immortal being who became immortal after an accident with a few rubber bands, a liquid lunch, and a particle accelerator. After a period of total boredom, especially on Sunday afternoons, he decided to insult everyone in the entire universe in alphabetical order. HitchHiker's Guide to The Galaxy
I don't know why people always seem to confuse eternal life with invincibility; I would welcome eternal life and end it all when it became too much or too boring. Just look at Highlander!
Of course Phil was unable to end it all in Groundhog Day, but that was for another reason.
Immortality is not as atractive as a very long life in good health. With the latter (say a few hundred years), you get to experience most things and enjoy them. With immortality you would soon be bored. 400 yrs tops, and then every day would be a repeat of a day you had already lived. Immortals face eternity no matter what it brings.
ReplyDeleteEven if we had conquered space exploration would not fill up the centuries and eons.
Anonymous You may be right, or you may not be. There is no telling what one's mindset will be after 150 years since no one has ever lived that long.
DeleteAs apes, living for 400 years is difficult to imagine just as a mayfly could not imagine living for a month.
If procreation depended on living for 400 years then we would live 400 years, our mindset would adapt.
For the record the records indicate that currently:
Delete46 people are fully verified as reaching 115.
19 of these people reached 116.
9 of these people are fully verified as reaching 117, and two of them have surpassed this age.
The oldest verified was French woman Jeanne Calment (21 February 1875 – 4 August 1997), aged 122 years, 164 days.
Oldest modern unverified claims range between 127 and 129, and the historical claims are in the same range for the upper limits.
Whether they would of wanted more when their time came, I guess depended upon their health at the time.
Those are interesting stats. I'm surprised that the oldest person isn't Japanese - perhaps there's a problem with verification? But French !? She's even smoking in the photograph!
DeleteIt's interesting too that no one has surpassed 122 years since 1997.
Quality of life is no doubt the deciding factor for staying in the game at any age.
Hmm, that's an interesting story. I wonder if that accounts for sizeable number of older pensioners and skews the figures? Just a thought. Thanks for comments.
DeleteAll the historical claims for ages greater than 100 also claim that the ancient was active, fathering children, leading their people etcetera. This in itself makes them highly improbable given how hard life was for most people before 1900.
ReplyDeleteMost people would have thought 80 an impossible age and most likely inflated these few who reached that sort of age range to be 100 plus. With no written records who would know otherwise? Imagine what people at the time thought of Pharoah Rameses the great who lived into his 90's? He must have seemed like a living God to his people.
I think we should accept that 120 is the maximum, and instead try to encourage better health outcomes for those who get past age 70.
I agree that quality of life rather than quantity should be the target. Most of the historical claims for ages greater than 100 are likely wrong, for the reason you alluded to. If peasants generally lived until mid 30's, and nobles maybe early 60's, then anyone who went into their 80's would seem very old and their age would be inflated. Thanks for the comment.
Delete