5 ms·
I've always wondered what are the implications of extending life span and curing certain diseases that kill millions every year. What happens when all the sudde
by stanmancan 12y ago
I've always wondered what are the implications of extending life span and curing certain diseases that kill millions every year. What happens when all the sudden everybody lives 20% longer and some of the major killers heart disease, cancer) aren't a problem. Things like over population, resources and such.
- morbius 12y agoIn most industrialized countries, the population has actually been declining. Low survival rates of children in Middle Eastern and African states and the lack of easily accessible contraceptives (or cultural implications of using contraceptives) have led to a dramatic upshoot in population there. With more education and the eradication of disease, this won't be as big of a problem in the future as it currently is now.
- reasonattlm 12y agohttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3192186/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3192186/ "A common objection against starting a large-scale biomedical war on aging is the fear of catastrophic population consequences (overpopulation). This fear is only exacerbated by the fact that no detailed demographic projections for radical life extension scenario have been conducted so far. This study explores different demographic scenarios and population projections, in order to clarify what could be the demographic consequences of a successful biomedical war on aging. A general conclusion of this study is that population changes are surprisingly slow in their response to a dramatic life extension. For example, we applied the cohort-component method of population projections to 2005 Swedish population for several scenarios of life extension and a fertility schedule observed in 2005. Even for very long 100-year projection horizon, with the most radical life extension scenario (assuming no aging at all after age 60), the total population increases by 22% only (from 9.1 to 11.0 million). Moreover, if some members of society reject to use new anti-aging technologies for some religious or any other reasons (inconvenience, non-compliance, fear of side effects, costs, etc.), then the total population size may even decrease over time. Thus, even in the case of the most radical life extension scenario, population growth could be relatively slow and may not necessarily lead to overpopulation. Therefore, the real concerns should be placed not on the threat of catastrophic population consequences (overpopulation), but rather on such potential obstacles to a success of biomedical war on aging, as scientific, organizational, and financial limitations."
- eveningcoffee 12y agoThis has proven to not be a problem in Europe in general and in Asia in Japan. In other continents, yes this would become a huge problem. Well, it actually is already today.
- mikeash 12y agoJapan's looming demographic crunch is thought to be a massive challenge for the country in coming decades. To say they've proven not to have this problem is like saying that falling off a building isn't a problem, because this guy is halfway down and still doing fine.
- anon4 12y agoJapan's birthrate has steadily slowed, and the population is actually shrinking now. This seems to happen any time population hits the maximum.
- getsat 12y agoThe post-WW2 baby-making bonanza is literally dying off. That's it. Japan's population is slowly returning to its equilibrium level.