Living Forever Extending Life Expectancy to Millennia

Question: Discuss about theLiving Foreverfor Extending Life Expectancy to Millennia. Answer: Introduction: "I don't want to achieve immortality through my work. I want to achieve it by not dying." So said American director Woody Allen. We all have been taught since childhood that death is inevitable, so we must always focus on what all we need to leave behind. But what will happen if we have enough time to live and do not have to worry about what needs to be left behind? The thought of living for longer seems as one in fairy tales, and this specially applies if we were born in the era of 1800 when the average life expectancy was 35 years. But now, if we compare with men the life expectancy is 75 years and women are 80 years. If life expectancy gets double in 200 years, then it may be doubled in years ahead? As per US Social security data the probability of a 27years old dying before his 28th birthday is 0.1%. If we consider the risk of rising with the age-related disease constant then average men can live up to 1000 years. Joon Yun a hedge fund manager believes that it is not impossible to solve age related problems, we can easily let people live a healthier life. Peoples society and lives are affected by increase in relatives who lost their lives due to age-related disease. Extending Life Expectancy to Millennia: Many corporate are concerned about what they can achieve by introducing different ways of increasing life expectancy. In September 2013 one of the biggest corporate announced the launch of Calico, in short, the California Life Company whose goal is to interchange the biology process which controls the lifespan and by doing interventions that will lead people to live longer and healthier lives. Many other companies are also planning to develop many anti-age drugs which will affect human lives by way of increase in life expectancy ratio. Nowadays researchers are trying hard to increase the life span of a human as per them when it can be done in the case of a mouse then why can't it be done for human beings. The reason for such optimism approach is some of the promising results which few researchers have got. For example, diabetes drug metformin has turned out to be the age to defy drug, few other drugs which are in process to live lab animals longer by restricting their diets (van Solinge and Henkens, 2009). In totality, there are different companies who are actually doing researches to find the drugs which can control the life expectancy of human beings. James Kirkland a researcher says that by now he knows about 20 drugs which can increase the life expectancy ratio among human beings. With every passing year, the infants live for about three months longer as compared to infants who were born a year before. 1416 For millennia anthropology always tried to push back the era of human origin that is the life expectancy in earlier times were short if any individual lived for long people use to say that he has been gifted by God. The average life of an individual was 40 years. But in the beginning of 19th-century things changed, the expectancy of life at birth gradually increased to three months every passing year. For example in Sweden in 1840 the life expectancy of a woman was 45 years but today it is 83 years, which is about three months added every year till today (Brettingham, 2005). Viewed globally, the increase in lifespan does not accelerate much due to the life span drugs availability in common. It is actually a graph in which accelerator rises gradually and it is a trend which does not depend on rich or poor if it happens then happens in all. In California, there is a research centre in which scientists are finding different ways to increase the lifespan of an organism and they have to s ome extent succeeded in finding ways for organisms to live longer with better health and in a normal way. Researchers should find a way of breaking through the life-span , the part of the crowd which is considered to be elderfated to rise anyway. If we consider the decrease in fertility rates, then this continuing upliftment of the escalatormay reach on top (Golobich, 2005). Long life is obviously seems appealing to others but it carries societal risks. Private pensions and social securitys can be a burden for others. If longer life expectancy is there then it can be troublesome for an old generation as they totally depend on their pensions but it is not sufficient enough for them to meet their expensive health expenses which can result in a burden for their near and dear ones and they may not be ready to bear those expenses. Vaupel concluded that decrease in mortality must not always be considered as a non- uniform sequence of irregular revolutions but rather can be seen as the regular process of a progress. this means that there is no such specific discovery or development has caused a rise in life expectancy it is all because of the good nutrition, good health, and good medications which helped in raising the life span. This is called reasonable scenario under which this increase in life expectancy will continue till the average age crosses 100 years. His views are still not changed as per data we can see that every year it is increasing at a fixed rate and if this goes on then it will one day cross 100 years (Golobich, 2005). In today's time the main causes of death are due to cancer, heart disease, and age-related conditions and if people improve their standard of living time to time then the expectancy will improve. On the different face of the coin according to Olshansky The process of increase in life expectancy will one or the other day effect the human beings if it has not done till now. Mostly gains of the 20th-century in terms of longer life spans have arrived from reduced infant mortality, and these are the gains which were for a single time he says that in order to save the entire span of life of an individual will depend on the reduction in infant mortality whereas the improvement in change in lifestyle and medications leading to increasing in life of old age person will not affect the average lifespan (Yang, 2008). Conclusion: The debate on this life expectancy will never end up as every researcher has different viewpoints, some says that increasing life expectancy will be an advantage for a human being and some says that it will only result in burden. In older people, there is a better and improved knowledge of well-being as compared to youth and mid-age people. In older age the person's desires, feelings have been attained or either given up and there is a huge pile of memories. What is there in their heads affects more as compared to what you already have and regardless of this old people are more sensible. In order to raise the overall well-being of the family large number of people must enjoy the life in a decent and a healthy way. If we see the other side of the coin then the increase in life expectancy will also lead to some disadvantages like now people will no longer be occupied in looking after their child for longer and they will rather be more active in social activities which will end up in nu clear families (Robert, Robert and Flp, 2008). So there are two sides of coins and this will always be debatable. References Bergh, A. and Nilsson, T. (2010). Good for Living? On the Relationship between Globalization and Life Expectancy.World Development, 38(9), pp.1191-1203. Brettingham, M. (2005). Men's life expectancy is catching up with women's.BMJ, 331(7518), pp.656-656. Golobich, L. (2005). Eliminate Stress From Your Life Forever: A Simple Program for Better Living.AORN Journal, 81(5), p.1089. Robert, L., Robert, A. and Flp, T. (2008). Rapid increase in human life expectancy: will it soon be limited by the aging of elastin?.Biogerontology, 9(2), pp.119-133. van Solinge, H. and Henkens, K. (2009). Living longer, working longer? The impact of subjective life expectancy on retirement intentions and behaviour.The European Journal of Public Health, 20(1), pp.47-51. Yang, Y. (2008). Long and happy living: Trends and patterns of happy life expectancy in the U.S., 19702000.Social Science Research, 37(4), pp.1235-1252.