If we could extend the average lifespan to 200 years, should we do it?

Answer 1

Lots of other things to factor before answering:

If we could, it would likely be expensive and only the rich would afford it.
If we could, would it extend the quality of life? If we would just extend feebleness or a 100 year old by100 years, then no...who would want to. If a 150 year functioned like a 50 year old, perhaps yes.

It would change the world...imagine a leader like Einstein, Roosevelt, Carl Sagan living for such a time to extend their knowledge and influence the world. BUT, imagine a Hitler, Saddam Hussein or other demagog with the opportunity to live 200 years and the money to do it.

The question is irrelevant. The answer is really that if it is done, it will propogate like cloning, invitro fertilization and more. Legislation will not successful prohibit, rather it will defer. .

Answer 2

If you are meaning "US", humanity would certinly need to re-evaluate there pryoritys as functional elliments in natural systems if we lived 200 years!!!
At the moment, we out live the invironments we were born into as it is. Addolessence only lasts a short while,... relitively speeking,...and the rest of our life spans are spent perfecting skills that harmonize with our invironments,..social, civic, moral, psycic, spiritual, mental, emotional,..the list is endless.
IF we lived 200 years, i bet we would be so tired of life ,death would be a vacation.
I'ed say we havent got the skills to live that long, much less the inteligence, or the tollerance, or the acceptance, or the forgiveness, or the consideration, or the self-management, or the orchestration of intigrateing into the natural order of earth to do so.

Answer 3

Not without population controls or off-Earth emigration. The Earth is not capable of supporting a vastly increased population, which is what will occur with drastically increased lifespans. Also, how would you deal with the costs? This would create yet another divide between the rich and the poor.

Answer 4

As long as our bodies aged slower across the board.

For example - by the time people get into their eighties, their bones are brittle, they are often at risk of stroke, their joints are wracked with arthritis..etc...

If these things also came to us at a slower pace, then yes definitely! But I wouldn't want to live for 100 years in pain and misery just because I was alive. I'd want to enjoy it!

Answer 5

Sure, but lets get to 120 first, as the average life expectancy.
This might happen within the next few generations.

Answer 6

no its because the older you get the more stress you cause on the health care budget besides if there are too many 200 yrs old living it wont be pretty to see and the world will look sad and depress

Answer 7

Hell no. I've already seen more than enough **** for ten lifetimes thank you. Unless you live in a dreamworld why would you think of extending life, think about IMPROVING the time we have instead.

Answer 8

I don't think that would be a good idea because the carrying capacity of the Earth would definitely be compromised among many other reasons.

Answer 9

120years seems to be close to the theorhetical limit, and we shouldn't even try to reach that unless you want the taxes you pay to support medical care to go astronomical and the social security system to fail completely. We can't afford to live that long.

Answer 10

I think we would have to have some birth control policy to go along with it. The global population is increasing too rapidly now.