Should there be extensive funding into trying to delay, or end, old-age death?

[GM Team Member and Deputy PPT WB]

After re-watching some CGP Grey videos, I found myself asking this question.

I also thought about it when playing a sci-fi-esque game recently, where some characters live to several hundreds of years old.

I don't like the idea of you being through a fourth of your life when you've only just reached adulthood.

So, what are your thoughts on this? Do you believe it would just be a waste of money/too expensive?



Also, I was thinking of putting this in IP, but I thought it would fit better here. If it doesn't, please move it.

Also, pretty sure this is my first post on this section of the forum. Pretty interesting it took me this long.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Option 5, honestly.

I believe the current human lifespan in Western countries of around 80 years is the right lifespan for us. I wouldn't have a problem to extending it to 90 or 100, but going beyond that would fundamentally transform our society in a probably unhealthy way (especially since such a life-extending technology will likely get monopolized by the rich, increasing the already-existing death gap across classes, whereas our energy should be focused on bridging it).

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Option 6, Ferengi Rule of Acquisition #3: "Never spend more for an acquisition than you have to. "

There's no reason to believe we know enough to know what approaches are needed to be followed to extend life. So hasty spending is unlikely to improve life expectancy faster.

[Blue3]

There is no such thing as "old-age death." Death by old age often means heart disease/failure, stroke, etc. The more we've understood human biology, the more we've realized "died of old age" is just a myth.

[dead0man]

no, it should be paid for by rich people directly for their own (and eventually, the rest of us) gain.  Just like (nearly) every other cool thing we have.

[Stranger in a strange land]

Why would someone want to be geriatric for hundreds of years?

[Epaminondas]

Why would someone want to be geriatric for hundreds of years?

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Of course not. That's absolutely ridiculous.

[Blue3]

Why would someone want to be geriatric for hundreds of years?

That's not what this means. The symptoms of old age are actually symptoms of disorders.

[dead0man]

Why would someone want to be geriatric for hundreds of years?

1.different strokes for different folks
2.that's (kind of obviously) not the end goal

[Kingpoleon]

Yes, but I’m not going to go into detail so that way I don’t have a mortality/existential crisis.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Yes, the Y2K generation, will outlive the Baby Boom Generation, there is a death date certainly, but some of us can live to the end of the century, now.

[The Mikado]

There's no reason why, as healthier living options become available (less environmental lead, fewer smokers, etc.) that more and more people shouldn't make it to 90 or 100. This can even happen as overall average life expectancy stays stagnant or even goes slightly down.