• Fallibilist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    Who would’ve thought that the notion of extending human lifespan would receive this level of cynicism and opposition.

    • boonhet@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 days ago

      Old people already own everything (rich old people in particular, but even the median old person has much more in assets than the median young person). If they live longer, they stay retired longer and therefore need more people slaving away to keep their assets growing in their retirement.

      According to statistics from the US, people over 55 own 73.7% of all assets. Imagine all those people get 10 or 15 extra years to accumulate assets. Of course if this therapy is expensive then it’s just the rich ones so all of the drawbacks of people living longer with none of the advantages for everyone else.

      • Fallibilist@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 days ago

        Ofcourse they own more when they’ve had more time to accumulate wealth.

        I still want to live longer and I find it quite insane to oppose technology that could achieve this.

    • Carl [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 days ago

      In the same way that AI bros have poisoned the well of “interact with your computer using natural language”, I think that the longevity research well is thoroughly poisoned for a lot of people by the realities of healthcare in the US, toxic intergenerational dynamics, and specific people like Bryan Johnson publicly using his son as a blood bag.

      That said I hope that cell rejuvenation works and ends up cheap as hell.