Why Is Aging Research Important

The genome project to me can be a positive and negative thing. The fact that we are now able to duplicate genes, could we someday be able to have identical clones of our selves. By having this accessible to everyone can also eliminate cancer and can help cure just about everyone that has it. They already cured at

The advancement of medical science impacted greatly on our specie and resulted in improvised life expectancy. Though progression of medical science brings cure for unlimited eternal illnesses it doesn’t however bring any remedy for the havocs caused by aging on our bodies. There

The world we live in is advancing more and more every day. We are beginning to exceed boundaries and reach new limits. Science and Technology has come a long way since Copernicus said that the sun was the center of the universe. Science fiction is slowly coming to life. We are building robots that are extremely similar to humans, modifying genes, and creating clones. Authors wrote about these abstract ideas not too long ago, but at the time they seemed far-fetched. Scientific and technological advancement may be for good or for evil. The good side is the advancements in medicine that could limit the risk of a particular disease or even cure one. The potentially bad side is the steps we may take to get there without knowing the long-term effect. In Michael Bess’s article “Blurring the Boundary Between Person and Product,” he discusses the advancement of genetic

The improvement of medicine over the course of the human successes gave great convenience to the people of today. Science has cured and prevented many illnesses from occurring and is on its way to cure some of the most dreadful and harmful illnesses. As the world modernizes due to the industrialization, so does the ways of medicine. Some cures are approached by chance, some, through intense, scientific measures.

It does not take much to look around and see how much medicine has developed over the years. Scenarios involving certain illnesses that at sometime in the past seemed to be hopeless have been studied and treatments carefully developed. Many medical discoveries have been made, and many are the lives that have been spared because of such. On the other hand, however, it is undeniable that there are many forms of physical disorder that still cannot be fully explained by medicine. Extremely knowledgeable researchers and devoted doctors have been grappling with problems such as cancer and AIDS for decades, yet nothing has been discovered or developed further enough to completely cure these and also many other forms of deadly illnesses.

The aisles at our local pharmacies are packed full of rows and rows of anti-aging products that our consumer based culture is haunted by. Over the past century, the search to extend life has blown through the roof. We’ve become so preoccupied with the fear of death that society has tackled great lengths to combat the cycle of life. Much confusion has risen as to where the line falls in regards to what is appropriate and what is unethical. Recent findings have begun to emerge which are attracting light to the many flourishing possibilities that our science and technological advances offers.

In “L'Chaim and Its Limits: Why Not Immortality?” and “Decelerating and Arresting Human Aging”, Leon Kass and Walter Glannon are both arguing against life extension, as it will bring no good to our society. Life extension is a technology that would allow a person to extend their lifespan past their expected age of death. In this paper, I will be arguing against life extension, as we will have no motivation to complete our intentions in life when we are given more time to live, and it would also do us no good when it comes to controlling the growing number of retirees when they can take advantage of life extension.

In conclusion, living forever may be a blessing for some, but inevitably it is a curse to

It is important that people decide whether or not research should be carried out to

Our medical advancements have allowed us to increase the length of the average life more and more every generation, but I believe that our pursuit of longevity should stop there. Aging is not an epidemic, nor is it a flaw in our engineering as science views it. Death is the intended natural end for every living being, and for humanity to think that could be changed without implications is hubris. A world that continued to reproduce without death would quickly become overpopulated and uninhabitable. If radical life extension proponents see this as a viable option, they would have to develop additional technology that prevents and eliminates pollution, along with establishing living options outside of Earth for the masses of people that will be still be alive. Dealing with overpopulation would be the real epidemic, not death. There is also a distinction to be made between living forever and living well. “The pursuit of perfect bodies and further life extension will deflect us from realizing more fully the aspirations to which our lives naturally point: for living well, rather than merely staying alive” (Kass). It would be hard for individuals in society to make decisions regarding their goals and desires if they had limitless time to pursue them- society could become stagnant. If we make the goal of humanity immortality, we abandon the concept of having an individual teleological end. By rejecting radical life extension, we would not only be preserving the natural tradition of death, but preserving human individuality and one’s right to live

Cell phones are a form of human enhancement since they make us more efficient as they allow us to externally store information, communicate over long distances, and access to needed data or information. In a similar vein, life extension is the belief in making the lifespan of humans as long as possible through the use of technology. The ultimate goal of life extension is for life to never end, even via aging. Organ replacements, cryonics, and supplements are all examples of life extension currently known to

Medical advances have increased the length of the average life innumerably, by prolonging death, but this involves challenging medical ethics. Keeping a large number of very ill people alive with these medical technologies, there is also a possibility of suffering; discomfort and diminished quality of life.

Today I’m going to expose the less than desirable side of eternal youth, everlasting life, radically longer human life spans, or any other terminology that you'd like to use to describe the event of seeming eternal life, because an essay published in August of 2013 by the Pew Research Center claims biomedical scientists will be able to extend the average american life span to beyond 120 years by 2050 (Liu). which is all good and well, but you really wouldn't want to live that long

The advancing technology allows the reverse of biological aging. In “BioViva Treats First Patient with Gene Therapy to Reverse Aging,” BioViva US is the very first company to try two therapies to try and reverse biological aging. Instead of providing patients with pills, the gene therapy will allow doctors to treat diseases by placing a gene into a person’s cell. In addition, it has been discovered that the main cause of death is cellular aging. Because the aging cell causes Alzheimer disease, memory loss, muscle wasting, and cancer, BioViva is trying to reverse aging and cure the aging cell. Thus, by trying many gene therapies on one person, it might allow them to avoid cellular aging. The CEO, Elizabeth Parrish, even states how this company

Biomedicine is defined as the modern western scientific knowledge of medicine which explains health in terms of biology. It studies human body – structure (anatomy) and systems (physiology) in particular reference to understanding mechanisms of the heart, arteries, nerves, brain and so on. Biomedicine has played a dynamic role in the lives of all human beings contributing successfully to better understanding and equipping ourselves towards health and against illness. Biomedicine is advocated for its great accomplishments in human lives: reduction in infant mortality, mother mortality rates, fertility rates and eradication of some of the major diseases like smallpox, TB, polio etc. However, the opponents of modern biomedicine refute the idea by arguing that such accomplishments in mortality rate have been achieved through better socio-economic plans and welfare system rather than solely achieved through mere biomedical interventions. While biomedical debate tends to focus on medical