|
|
|
THE WORLD’S AGING POPULATION AND SCIENTIFIC ATTEMPTS TO MAKE IT AN EVEN GREATER PROBLEM (August 2003) Think of this: The number of persons over age 60 will almost triple by the year 2050 - to about two billion people, more than 20 percent of the total world population. Those over age 80 will grow fivefold, from the current 70 million to 350 million people. More than two million people will be over 100 years of age. In the year 2050, there will be more people over age 60 than under age 15 - an extraordinary change in world population patterns. As older people become numerically an ever more dominant component of the global society, that change in the age distribution could create a host of critical problems. Faced with a potential societal crisis caused by the aging of our world society, what is the scientific community doing that, unfortunately, could make the problems worse - a lot worse? For the entire 20th century, longer life expectancy occurred because of a marked reduction in infant deaths and increasingly successful prevention of or treatment of a variety of often fatal diseases, such as heart disease and stroke. But, recently, there has developed greater scientific interest in the potential to literally change the boundaries of aging so that people can live extraordinarily long lives - 120 to 180 years or even longer. Underlying these scientific endeavors are two assumptions: - Aging is equivalent to a disease and should not be viewed as a "normal" event. Therefore, we should discover its mechanisms and attempt to intervene, just as we would with heart disease or cancer. - If we create people able to live to 120, 140, or 180 years, good health will accompany that longevity. Although this assumption is glibly trumpeted by a variety of scientists, entrepreneurs, and others, it is nothing more than a hope, and over-reliance on some animal studies. What the public does not realize is that, in a variety of species (mice, rats, fruit flies, earthworms, fish), marked increase in life spans have already been achieved by a variety of techniques. The most exciting are those studies that are focused on gene mutations or manipulations, or on reduced caloric intake. The point is that these scientific advances are taking place at breakneck speed, making it ever more likely that we will, in the foreseeable future, be able to forestall the aging process, potentially allowing people to live very long lives with life expectancies at birth of at least 100 to 110 years, and maybe 120 years and beyond. One consequence will be an increase in world population. Life expectancy world wide is now about 70 years (80 years in more developed countries). Worldwide every ten-year increase in average life expectancy at birth expands the eventual world population by at least 1.3 billion people. If life expectancy increases from 80 years to 120 years, the eventual world population size would be greater by 5.2 billion people - about 16 billion instead of the currently predicted 10 to 11 billion. At present, the 6 billion humans on Earth are doing a good job of messing up the planet. The problems created by 10 to 11 billion people will be even greater. Think what will likely happen if there is almost a tripling of world population. The following are ten important questions that highlight critical problems we could be facing as our society ages (these are taken from an essay titled "Creating Very Old People: Are We Ready For the Consequences?" You can find it under the essay icon on the home page of this website.) 1. At what point is the number of people so large that it exceeds the carrying capacity of the planet, thus sowing the seeds for our own destruction? 2. At what point does the crush of human numbers make life miserable for the vast majority of humans and impossible for many other species? 3. What will the quality of life be for very old people? 4. Will changing the boundaries of aging be accompanied by health or will certain tissues and organs deteriorate even as life span is markedly prolonged? If you live 120 years, what will happen to your hearing, sight, mental function, musculoskeletal function? 5. Will we be expected to work, support ourselves, and pay taxes until age 80, or 90, or 100 or older? 6. What percentage of us will outlive our resources and spend our extended years living in poverty? 7. Will not having huge numbers of people over age 60, with limited and often inadequate incomes if they stop working, create intense adversarial relations between younger and older persons as they compete for limited jobs and resources? 8. In the United States, at present, 13 percent of the population (over age 65) consume more than 30 percent of health care dollars. What happens when the majority is over age 65? Over age 80? 9. What happens to a nation when more than one-half of its people are more than 80 or 100 years old? Is it able to compete with nations with much younger populations that presumably will have greater per person productivity. 10. Above all, the overriding question - where is the research on aging going, where do we want it to go, and what limitations, if any, do we want to impose on it? Yet, there has been virtually no public debate. This is not to disparage the scientific achievements. The science of aging and aging prevention is marvelous - and very exciting. But, the potential for gargantuan problems resulting from changing the boundaries of aging is so great that public discussion about where we are going and where we want to go is obligatory if we wish to avoid a societal catastrophe. This article is a brief introduction to a critical issue. I urge you to read the essay in full, think about the issues, and then help start public discussions. If we do not do that, the scientific advances relating to aging will dominate and will control where we as a society are going - and we may not like it when we get there.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
UMDNJ Home Healthful Life Home Top |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
