Interventions In Aging

The first law of thermodynamics states that energy can neither be created nor destroyed, only altered in form.

Philosophers throughout history often have a pessimistic outlook on life. Socrates, Lucretius and Epicurus are just some of a number of philosophers that argue against the liberal view of life. Daniel Callahan is a contemporary philosopher that explores the role of medicine in modern society. Callahan argues against the liberal view of life by saying that people should focus on living full and fitting lives. In the first section, titled The Fallacies of Callahan’s Arguments, I explore the problems with his ideas and show that his argument does not justify setting a limit to human lives. In The Argument for the Continuation of Life, I argue for the liberal view of life and support it with Christine Overall’s views. Human beings should be able to extend their lives as they see fit and setting limits based on anti-life extension ideas would go against the individual’s right to choose.

If life extension were to be possible, then we would have the possibility to live past the age of one hundred. Doing so, it would create a lot of free time in our lives, which could have been used to complete our life intensions. For example, we would be using the time to play video games all day at home, when we have the opportunity to get a college education. If life extension is possible, then we will put off all our life intentions for activities that we see as being fun and entertaining. In this case, it would not be reasonable to attend college after graduating from high school when we have the opportunity to travel around the world. The longer we wait to complete our life intentions, the less motivation we will have to in completing them. We encounter meaningless activities in our world every day, which distracts us from our intentions in life. If life extension were not to exist, then it would create awareness to everyone that we will eventually die at some point and would also bring awareness on why we should make the best of our lives. Even if we have life extension, doing meaningless activities can put us at risk to unpreventable cases death. For example, we risk getting killed in a car accident when we choose to drink and drive. Instead of drinking alcohol, we could have used our time wisely in activities such as getting schoolwork done. We

What would happen if one were in constant fear of a deadly disease? Or if one cannot find new jobs to support their family? These are the certain results if humans prolong their life. Firstly, extending the human life will lead to overpopulation. Secondly, the prolonged lifespan will cause people to become selfish, bored, and change their beliefs. Lastly, experimenting with human genetics as well as with modifying other species will result in new diseases, extinction of certain species, and the creation of invasive species. Therefore, enhancing the human life must be ceased since it puts too much of a risk on the future generations.

The justice argument regarding extending the human lifespan looks at the dilemma morally; the moral dilemma being: is it fair for one person to extend their life over another. There is a distinct struggle

In this case, I would have to stand with Davis’ support in delaying life extension, as it will take a long period of time to develop and allocate life extension around the world equally. Being able to take advantage of life extension would lead us into to the inability to repay the efforts that were put into researching and developing life extension. For example, if we were able to take out a loan for life extension, then the time in life we have to repay for life extension would also increase. Life extension would also worsen our death, then it would better our death, as we are harmed comparatively on impending death. When you anticipate your future death to be in your early nineties, it may not sound as bad when there is no life extension available, but when you see a wealthy person live into their hundreds with life extension, it will make your death sound worse off if you died in your nineties. We have to delay the development and access to life extension until we can find a way to distribute life extension evenly between the have and have-nots in our society. For example, the cost of technology in our world becomes cheaper overtime when there are competitors who developing the same technology. The Apple iPhone and

The fountain of youth has so far remained elusive to humanity, but modern scientific innovations have opened the door for realistic immortality, or at least a far extended lifespan. However, the means to create immortal people is burdened with moral and ethical controversy - do we want to be immortal? Humanity has much to gain from researching the extension of human life, but should work under limitations because although it offers people the chance to live healthier lives, the boundaries of social morality begin to fracture once immortality becomes possible.

In the good old days if you wanted to get rich as an investor, you looked for a great publicly traded company with a great product or service...

While many people today many not use the term “quest for immortality”, as a society we try and extend our lives. A movie I have watched in the past that can relate to this idea is I Am Legend. In this movie a scientist develops what is believed to be a cure for cancer, which is an example of trying to avoid a deadly disease that leads to death throughout the world. The movie brings up a big consequence of trying to search for something related to immortality, even if it is not as extreme, could cause something much worse. They

Since ancient times there has always been a debate in the field of philosophy of whether individuals continue to live after death. Although many religions believe in the concept of “immortality”. I believe that immortality could exist, because of cloning, cryonics, and Calorie Restriction. For hundreds of years people have been attempting to preserve and prolong life, and essentially become immortal. There are many new technologies in this time of scientific exploration and advancement that claim to do these things. There are many methods that are currently being studied as ways to either prolong life or to become immortal. All of these aspects take a different approach to man’s constant search for immortality. Immortality has primarily been

Secondly, aging research is bigger than we think and could increase injustices in the field of health and one of the main reasons is that this project is too expensive and only the rich people could afford it. The poor people could not have the same treatments and there will be social disparities. Also, extension of life could eventually lead to overcrowding and would need generation cleansing to stabilize the population. It is why I think it is better to not create problems and let people live as old as they can without the help of new process to live longer but I think that finding cure for diseases will be helpful in every aspect.

While taking the course biology of aging, the main focus was on how the organs and other body parts develop and die as we age. I am a firm believer in the idea that, we cant live forever, our human bodies aren’t made that way. Eventually, our organs stop functioning and our cells stop reproducing. However, I do believe that there is certain circumstances where one should preserve life and I see a lot of family members of older adults opting for this because they want more time with them or they just don’t want to say goodbye. My idea in short is, death is inevitable, but we have the ability to live long quality lives granted we don’t develop a life threatening disease that’s out of our control. I’ve seen first hand a very healthy 90 year old ambulating just fine, and I’ve also seen the complete opposite. This difference could just be coincidental, or it could be due to personal habits that lead to their illness; in the hospital you see both sides. Interning at CMC has made me realize there are many ways to prevent the process of dying, but not prevent the process of aging. Biologically we all age, everyday, and every second of our lives starting at

The movie GATTACA revealed that through genetic engineering the life expectancy does, in fact, increase. Genome.gov states that “it is possible that eventually enhancements using techniques initially intended to restore deficiencies could be redirected to improve memory and problem-solving, reduce the need for sleep, increase musical capacity, attain desirable personality traits, protect against cardiovascular disease or cancer, or increase longevity.” With genetic engineering scientist would discover a solution to cease the telomere, which would, therefore, slow down the aging process and allowing homo sapiens to live

The first law of thermodynamics states that heat energy can not be created or destroyed. It can be just transformed into other forms or transferred into another location. Rudolf Clausius and William Rankine were the first physics that made a full statement of the first law of thermodynamics in 1850. It is also known as "another version of the law of conservation of energy."

The four fundamental laws of thermodynamics are used to define how physical quantities behave under various circumstances, these include energy, entropy, and temperature. The First Law of Thermodynamics states that energy in the universe is always conserved, therefore it cannot be created or destroyed, and it can only be transformed from one form to another. The second law of thermodynamics states that entropy of isolated systems always increases, this means that in all processes of energy exchange, if no energy is introduced to or leaves a system, the sum of potential energy will be less than initial condition. The third law of thermodynamics states that the entropy of a system is maintained as the temperature decreases to absolute zero. The fourth law of thermodynamics defines temperature equilibrium between systems.