If offered a life prolonging drug - would you take it?

Kermit.de.frog · 09-07-2014 05:08AM #1

Some scientists think aging is an illness in itself that can be cured and predict within 30 years this "illness" will be eliminated by a single tablet. Yeah they believe that.

A question though - would you take a pill that helps you live hundreds of years longer?

Or do you think death is the natural cycle and you would rather that than pretensions to the contrary?

The sun will destroy the earth - want to be around for that?

Turtwig · 09-07-2014 05:11AM

Yes I'd take it. (Assuming it's safe and more effective than a placebo)

I want to live as long as possible without distress. If I let nature take it's course I'd have died before I'd have any memories in a whole heap of pain.

Seeing the sun destroy the earth would be awesome!

franklyon · 09-07-2014 05:57AM

I think you would be dead long before you saw that happe unless you were watching through a telescope from a different planet.

mickydoomsux · 09-07-2014 07:12AM

Of course i would.

There's nothing noble or good about dying of old age. It ****ing sucks.

Maphisto · 09-07-2014 08:13AM

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Some scientists think aging is an illness in itself that can be cured and predict within 30 years this "illness" will be eliminated by a single tablet. Yeah they believe that.

A question though - would you take a pill that helps you live hundreds of years longer?

Or do you think death is the natural cycle and you would rather that than pretensions to the contrary?

The sun will destroy the earth - want to be around for that?

Depends - if it stops you aging so you don't get any older - sure why not.

There's a few people round here (some relatives) I'd make sure didn't get their mits on it :mad:

Fat Christy · 09-07-2014 08:16AM

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Some scientists think aging is an illness in itself that can be cured and predict within 30 years this "illness" will be eliminated by a single tablet. Yeah they believe that.

A question though - would you take a pill that helps you live hundreds of years longer?

Depends, can I stay 22 for the 100 years or will I be walking around looking like a corpse? I'll live for another 100 years but only if I can stay sexy.

Peregrine · 09-07-2014 08:24AM

Yes but I'd probably kill myself after a hundred years old. I don't want to live for hundreds of years.

Besides, the planet probably couldn't sustain everyone living that long.

RoyalMarine · 09-07-2014 08:38AM

Fat Christy wrote: »

Depends, can I stay 22 for the 100 years or will I be walking around looking like a corpse? I'll live for another 100 years but only if I can stay sexy.

This! This is the most important question that would affect people's decision.

Would human's also be subject to diseases such as alzheimer's and dementia, as were living a LOT longer and our brains would obviously degrade over time.

Also, since we live so much longer, we take in more info, can our brains hold this, or would it come to a point where we begin forgetting important stuff?

ShooterSF · 09-07-2014 08:45AM

Nimr wrote: »

Yes but I'd probably kill myself after a hundred years old. I don't want to live for hundreds of years.

Besides, the planet probably couldn't sustain everyone living that long.

I'd wager extending the lives of researchers would usher in an even faster advancement in those areas. After all how many years of a researchers life is currently spent actually doing their job after learning and before retiring.

I wonder would people become more adverse to risk if you had say 500 years to live barring an accident.

SEPT 23 1989 · 09-07-2014 09:00AM

Dracula never came across as particularly happy so no

Akrasia · 09-07-2014 09:01AM

I've always presumed that 'there will be a cure for that' before something kills me

And if Ray Kurzweil is to be believed, I might be right.

Advances in gene therapy, stem cell research, personalised drugs, nanotechnology, diagnostics technology, 3d printing, food technology etc etc are progressing at an astonishing rate.

In 30 years time, when I'm 61, the state of technology will be as different then as it was 31 years ago when I was born (no internet to speak of, no mobile phones, no human genome sequencing, computers with a less than a millionth the information processing power of modern pcs etc)

Kurzweil said that we are continuing to improve technology on a logarithmic scale, which in practical terms means accellerating improvements in technology. A doubling of average processing power from 2.4ghz to 4.8ghz is a hell of a lot more than a doubling of processing power from 8hz to 16hz

Even if the pace of R&D slows to a fraction of the current pace, the improvements will still be mind boggling compared to what we have now

BeerWolf · 09-07-2014 09:04AM

I really doubt a tablet will EVER "cure" death - evolutionary, majority of creatures have been designed to eventually die from cell degradation. Maybe stem cells.

To put it in incredibly basic layman terms;

You started life as an egg that started splitting up into cells, these cells keep getting renewed throughout your life from splitting. Think of these cells as a brand new massive stack of pages when you're a baby. Each split of the cell, a page is removed from the stack. As you know, a large stack of things is strong as well. Eventually, the stack of pages will get less and less, until the cell can no longer split and effectively no longer exists once the last cell dies... this is what causes weakness and system failure in old age.

Heck, even if you manage to physically keep yourself alive via devices I'd imagine you would become like a 'ghoul' in Fallout 3 within 250 years cause your brain cells are degrading and you lose your memories... unless development exists for transferring your consciousness into a computer (like in Ghost in the Shell).

ianobrien · 09-07-2014 09:10AM

Ah no. I don't want my old age to last for decades! I would go off my little head if I was stuck in adult nappies with a drool catcher for 50 years (or even 6 months). If you did take it and then developed a degenerative disease can you imagine the extra suffering you would have?

If it could be designed to prolong the middle portion of your life and stop when the body starts to get "creaky" I might think about it.

BeerWolf · 09-07-2014 09:14AM

ianobrien wrote: »

If it could be designed to prolong the middle portion of your life and stop when the body starts to get "creaky" I might think about it.

Would you rather be like the Turritopsis dohrnii, an immortal Jellyfish, that has it's life cycle in reverse where it turns into a baby at old age and starts life again? :pac:

Duggy747 · 09-07-2014 09:20AM

I just don't want to be in a wheelchair, drooling on my shoulder while staring out the window and pooing my nappy frequently with the ingredients of undigested mushy apple sauce when I'm in my 80's.

Wibbs · 09-07-2014 09:23AM

Akrasia wrote: »

Even if the pace of R&D slows to a fraction of the current pace, the improvements will still be mind boggling compared to what we have now

Maybe, maybe not. Divining the future tends to throw up the same idea of constant progress. Another tendency is to miss a major component in the future. EG for all the future gazing of the 20th century who thought of the internet? It was all flying cars and gaffs on the moon.

longevity therapies will be for the elites at first, then it will trickle down to the rest of humanity. If it works of course. It does look to be an engineering problem, however the psychology of living for centuries is quite another matter. I suspect it'll be a minority of individuals who by fluke will have the required psychology to survive majorly extended life. I reckon most will choose dying around the century mark and 1000 year old humans who are mentally healthy would be incredibly rare.

Sociological problems will be another major issue. The new poor of longevity might target the rich of longevity. Population control would be a given. The whole landscape of human existence and what it means to be human would change.

It may turn out like the story of manned spaceflight. It will be possible to go further, but we'll choose to stay closer to home as it were. No "moonshots" of 1000 year lifespans, but more "low earth orbit" lifespans of 130 kinda thing.

IMHO what is more likely is that rather than improve ourselves beyond a certain point we'll engineer our own evolutionary replacements. Replacements with the psychology to live for centuries.

GalwayGuy2 · 09-07-2014 09:37AM

Wibbs wrote: »

Maybe, maybe not. Divining the future tends to throw up the same idea of constant progress. Another tendency is to miss a major component in the future. EG for all the future gazing of the 20th century who thought of the internet? It was all flying cars and gaffs on the moon.

longevity therapies will be for the elites at first, then it will trickle down to the rest of humanity. If it works of course. It does look to be an engineering problem, however the psychology of living for centuries is quite another matter. I suspect it'll be a minority of individuals who by fluke will have the required psychology to survive majorly extended life. I reckon most will choose dying around the century mark and 1000 year old humans who are mentally healthy would be incredibly rare.

Sociological problems will be another major issue. The new poor of longevity might target the rich of longevity. Population control would be a given. The whole landscape of human existence and what it means to be human would change.

It may turn out like the story of manned spaceflight. It will be possible to go further, but we'll choose to stay closer to home as it were. No "moonshots" of 1000 year lifespans, but more "low earth orbit" lifespans of 130 kinda thing.

IMHO what is more likely is that rather than improve ourselves beyond a certain point we'll engineer our own evolutionary replacements. Replacements with the psychology to live for centuries.

You lost me there?

Anyway, my answer is: DEFINITELY.

SVJKarate · 09-07-2014 09:48AM

The world population is already growing so rapidly it will lead to economic and political instability. We older folks need to die off and maintain a process of rejuvenation on the planet. I won't be taking that pill.

Steviemoyne · 09-07-2014 09:49AM

Another definitely from me. If I can still be walking around 1000 years from now then yes, I'd take the pill.

iDave · 09-07-2014 09:51AM

Live fast die young

Vojera · 09-07-2014 10:02AM

The planet doesn't have space for us all if we don't keep dying. As a species I imagine the world would be a better place without us, so I wouldn't take the pill.

BeerWolf · 09-07-2014 10:03AM

Steviemoyne wrote: »

Another definitely from me. If I can still be walking around 1000 years from now then yes, I'd take the pill.

How could someone be perfectly fine with that ? Unless you're a complete loner you'd grow increasingly more depressed as the people you know pass away

Maphisto · 09-07-2014 10:07AM

BeerWolf wrote: »

How could someone be perfectly fine with that ? Unless you're a complete loner you'd grow increasingly more depressed as the people you know pass away

The ones you like would get the pill

The ones you don't - not so much

Wibbs · 09-07-2014 10:09AM

GalwayGuy2 wrote: »

You lost me there?

Well humans are the only animals to externalise their evolution and have done for a very long time. IE rather than wait around for our bodies to adapt we used brains and tools to bypass the process. EG diet. Because of our mastery of fire and cooking we didn't need to evolve different teeth and guts. In an ecosystem we're the apex predator yet purely physically we're totally unsuited to such a niche. Spears and guns and knives even it up.

In the last century in particular we've started to change our biological and evolutionary destiny even more(in the developed world anyway). Consider that if this was the 1800's around half of the people reading this wouldn't even have made it to adulthood let alone get the chance to reproduce.

Now with our exploration of the very building blocks of life and evolution it's likely we'll tweak humans even more. Add in artificial intelligence and artificial life and "humans' of a thousand years hence might be a very different being, as different to us today as we are to Homo Erectus, or even compared to a lemur.

sebastianlieken · 09-07-2014 10:14AM

I think if you took a pill that would make you live for years, the average person wouldn't take advantage of their situation - quite the contrary in fact. I think people would procrastinate about achieving anything in their life because they have so many more years to accomplish what it is that they want to achieve.

Tell a student he has 2 months to prepare a report - he'll only do it in the last week.
Tell someone they have 300 hundred years to live - they'll merely survive for the majority of their life, and only truly live for the last few fleeting years.

ShaShaBear · 09-07-2014 10:16AM

Again, if it prevented degradation of cells and kept us from ageing, I'd be on for taking it. There are so many things I'd love to do and while I'm still young, I know I'll never get them all done in a lifetime!
Of course I'd probably get bored after a while, and end things myself. But I would much rather know that day will never creep up on me without my knowing, and I'd achieved absolutely everything I imagined in my lifetime before choosing to die peacefully in my sleep while spooning my OH

Wibbs · 09-07-2014 10:20AM

BeerWolf wrote: »

How could someone be perfectly fine with that ? Unless you're a complete loner you'd grow increasingly more depressed as the people you know pass away

Indeed. It would take a very different psychology to the average person. We can sometimes see this with people who live to great ages, 100+. They have a few commonalities. Superior insulin control being one, but another seems to be a stoicism when faced with bereavements. They grieve, but chalk it up to "sure that's life" and move on. I've even seen that in my own family where unusually enough the men outlive the women and 90+ isn't rare. When they lose people, they move on rapidly, to the point where it's often commented upon that they're "cold". They're also more socially adaptable in that they continue to make new friends and connections throughout life and engage with current tech and culture more than most their age(my grandfather got into Thin Lizzie and Led Zep in his late 70's

).

Caliden · 09-07-2014 10:25AM

If anything does ever exist it will cost millions so only the elite can afford it.

BeerWolf · 09-07-2014 10:26AM

Wibbs wrote: »

"humans' of a thousand years hence might be a very different being, as different to us today as we are to Homo Erectus, or even compared to a lemur.

And then THIS happened.

Wibbs · 09-07-2014 10:27AM

sebastianlieken wrote: »

I think if you took a pill that would make you live for years, the average person wouldn't take advantage of their situation - quite the contrary in fact. I think people would procrastinate about achieving anything in their life because they have so many more years to accomplish what it is that they want to achieve.

That would be an issue alright. A huge part of our psychology is tied into our lifespan and pretty clear stages within that, particularly reproductive stages. Without these anchor points things could get very confusing.

Maximus Alexander · 09-07-2014 10:28AM

If you're not religious or suffering from an illness that makes life unbearable, I can't understand why anyone would want to die. All the fun is happening here.

I'd live forever if given the option, as long as I could also check out whenever I wished.

If offered a life prolonging drug - would you take it?

Your options 126 votes

Comments