Researchers are constantly making their say on the possibility of “biological immortality” often referred to as super-longevity. The reality of having an indefinite life span is nearing a possibility. As a surprise, the most common responses are “What should we do with all that time?” and “death is fate”. These are all questions that conjure us a socio-economic standpoint of overpopulation.
In recent years, there are signs of discontinuity in the population growth as an aging population is becoming common in at least the developed world. This has since the 1960’s been a trend. In a well known book “The Population Bomb, by Paul Ehrlich’s 1968” the view on population growth was described as pandemic towards massive famine, that would affect around 50 percent of the world’s population. This is certainly something annoying to longevity researchers. These types of provocative non-based facts can shred longevity research into the pigeonhole of new legislations and crunch in finance support.
The fear of overpopulation has been slightly down played during the year as facts have proven that the earth has more than enough resources to supply our population with food if well distributed. However, in reverberating convenient response to the fears of overpopulation, facts have been brought forward.
Population growth isn’t something that should be feared with or without super-longevity. Foremost, longevity research is mainly improvement in medical advancement. It is as simply as this: if ever you would have a child enduring pneumonia, would you refuse the cure him or her because of overpopulation. Longevity is much about health care; it is what has brought life expectancy up during these recent years.
Death isn’t the Right Solution for Overpopulation
Amidst many super-longevity researchers, population growth is properly advocated. However, in no way has death been regarded as a solution to cure overpopulation. It is definitely a precarious way to address population growth. Moreover, if this perspective was taken seriously, government would reduce access to medical treatment; assuring a high death rate to control population. It is radically illogical.
Overpopulation Caused by Short-lifespan
Abandoning life extension research would not only go against ethical and pragmatic test; it would be unjustified by human rights. Maintaining death rate is not the right solution. In general, population growth is far more reliable on the number of children per family and not the longevity of these people. Viewing it in the form of an equation, living longer will not affect the rate at which population increases, it will only be a constant. The variable factor is the number of children we reproduce, and living longer afterward does not affect exponential growth of population.
It is apparent in societies. Where life expectancy is lower, the number of children born is more. This means that a lower lifespan will trigger higher population growth. The birth rate is the real determinant of population growth. People living longer, will simply be substituted by a lower reproduction level, cancelling out the burden of overpopulation, as longevity is a constant in the population equation.
In developed countries, children are usually born at the age of 30 or above. Research has made it possible to extend fertility period of women and this has made this even more feasible. Having children at a later age enables parents to pursue a career, which can be both financially and psychologically fundamental for proper development of these children. These are some early signs of how extending life span is contributing to human development.
Super-longevity will be a Gift, Not a Threat
Extending longevity will not have a substantial influence on global population. Most of the developed countries with highest life expectancy have a population growth, which is around zero. The developed nations have experienced a fall in population representation since the 1950’s to 20 from 32 percent. It is forecast that it will account for only 13 percent by 2050 of the world’s population.
Europe accounted for 22 percent of the world’s population in 1950. Now it is estimated to 13 percent while in 2050, they might only account for 7 percent. Per UN Figures, there are 749 million inhabitants in Africa whereas in Europe there are only 729 million. The population growth in Europe is 0.03 percent. The population size of Europe will be much less than in Africa in the coming years. The population growth in most eastern European countries is at a decline. Currently and up to 2050, the population is expected to decrease in many countries:
1. Germany and Japan by 14 percent
2. Italy and Hungary by 25 percent
3. Russia Federation, Ukraine and Georgia by around 30 percent
However, in the United State the population growth is higher than in Europe. Yet, life extension being met with lower fertility would significantly restructure the demographics. As population growth is falling, developed countries are increasingly dependent on migration.
It is visible that as countries are becoming more developed and able to accommodate aging, overpopulation is no longer a threat. Life extension research can in a best scenario, become a cheap solution making it a global possibility. This would alter the whole world and make overpopulation a forgotten threat in the eyes of longevity researchers.
References
1. Max More, Ph,D. (2004) The scientific conquest of Death, Imminst.org
2. Un Statistics
Anti Aging, Anti Aging Theories, Gerontology, Health And Aging, Immortality, Longevity
Sat, Jan 30, 2010
Anti Aging, Anti Aging Theories, Gerontology, Health And Aging, Immortality, Longevity