10 ms·
Childbearing age may also be increased though. SO if you can have a kid at 200 who's perfectly healthy, why would you necessarily spurt one out at 20?
by gte910h 16y ago
Childbearing age may also be increased though. SO if you can have a kid at 200 who's perfectly healthy, why would you necessarily spurt one out at 20?
- pixelbath 16y agoI don't think the parent post was talking about childbearing age; I interpreted it as being more of a society-imposed restriction based on the practicality of having a population that can be up to 1000 years old.
- gte910h 16y agoI'd say that's not really going to be an issue. Children, as is, are already encouraged by tax subsidies. You'd at worse have to take those away; people the world over are already limiting the birth rate (even places where birth control and a nice standard of living are unavailable). Additionally, the SENS plan isn't about a magical 1000yr life expectancy treatment, it's about increasing the rate of life expectancy gain up to an excess of 10 years per decade (for non-violent/non-accident deaths). If you can live to 1k, and give birth for most if not all of your life, I think many people would think "being a parent" is something that could be put off a couple decades/centuries. Birth is not a pleasant process, and women aren't usually eager to have 10 kids.