1893Re: Almost no breeding
- Jan 21, 2013Joe, thank you for starting a new thread on this list.
Average life expectancies have increased greatly because more of us are living to slightly older ages, not because we are living longer than a few lucky humans always have. Thanks to tremendous reductions in child mortality -- still way too high -- and better health care globally, life expectancy averages out to look as if we used to die at 40 and now live to 80.
These successes for humanity wouldn't be causing excessive population density if we had decreased birth rates at the same time. But we didn't, and still haven't.
Our lifespans could be increased greatly by new developments, as you suggest. Already, organs from cadavers are "washed" clean of living tissue so only the structure remains. Stem cells from the intended recipient are planted on the framework and a new, fully functioning organ is implanted with no fear of rejection -- the main cause of transplant failure. Infection is also a leading cause because of anti-rejection drugs, which are unnecessary.
The cost of this procedure could be reduced, but it will always be too expensive for everyone in need. Only the wealthy will get these new body parts, so I don't imagine this increasing our population density much.
Today, thousands of children under five die each day for want of less than $1 worth of essential salts, minerals, and medications in clean water. The choice between creating a new liver for an alcoholic billionaire or saving tens of thousands of poor children is obvious in today's world. Our technology advances faster than our ethics, same as it ever has.
If we could improve our population density, more life-saving methods would potentially be available to all. More of us could live out our lives in better health and for longer spans, if we want to. Creating more of us isn't necessary to achieve this -- in fact, it precludes success.
On 1/7/13 3:15 PM, joseph2u4us wrote:
> Hi everyone, I just joined up. I would have joined the main, big
> group but didn't actually meet the requirement for wanting human
> I don't really want much or any breeding either.
> Here is how that would work. You might have guessed that I want the
> people here to have their lifespans greatly extended. I think there
> is enough understanding of stem cells and genetics to do that within
> a decade, with enough resolve. We should put oodles of money into
> this because by reversing agedness from a 70 effective age to a 30
> efa, most common degenerative diseases could be reversed or cured,
> Thanks, Joe
> P.S. Now that I've clarified my views, if you could, let me know if i
> might be welcome in the main group.
> VHEMT Volunteers and Supporters may subscribe to
> Yahoo! Groups Links
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>