Will a cure for diseases ironically end the human race?
  • TheQuestioner
    20
    In 1900, the life expectancy was 46 years. It is currently 72 years,

    In 1900, the average age for a woman to bear a child was 22. It is currently 29.9 years,

    The most common causes of death in the U.S. are now heart disease (23%) and cancer (21%),

    Public funding for cardiovascular research has topped $2 billion annually, and $4.9 billion is spent on cancer research annually.

    When a cure is found for heart disease and cancer, it is possible that people will live twice as long. Global warming will increase more rapidly, and the planet's resources will diminish quicker, which will cause more conflict between nations.

    A new medical procedure could delay menopause by 20 years
    This would cause a lot more babies to be born.

    Is this a reason to reduce the funding to find a cure for heart disease and cancer? Should the money instead be spent to improve the lives of healthy people?
    Should we be happy with 72 years of life, and not try to keep extending it?
    If cures are found for diseases, would the U.S. have to implement China's 2-child policy, and is Soylent Green in our future?
    TheQuestioner Options
  • 8livesleft
    127
    I expect that life expectancy to reset itself because, no matter what we do, climate change will continue to cause massive deaths worldwide and mankind is supposedly causing a 6th mass extinction event, or some asteroid will come for a visit, which means that possibly 90% of all life will die off.

    However, the planet will reset itself and life will again flourish.

    The question is what form "mankind" would take at that point:

    Will mankind learn to coexist with one another as a productive part of this planet's ecosystem or will mankind be as it is now - eating, drinking and burning everything in sight?

    If it's the former then yes, we should continue with all of the ways to extend our life. If not, then it doesn't matter because we'll just make the same mistakes and cause our own demise anyway.
    8livesleft Options
  • TheQuestioner
    20
    ↪8livesleft
    I don't think the majority agrees with you, because if they did they would divert all the cancer and heart disease research funds to prevent global warming, which they would never do.
    TheQuestioner Options
  • 8livesleft
    127
    Well, it's too late for that anyway. All we can do at this point is try to survive what's coming and cancer and heart disease will likely be secondary issues to basic survival needs - as it is already now for huge populations worldwide.
    8livesleft Options
  • TheQuestioner
    20
    ↪8livesleft
    People will spend money to prevent something that may happen in 20 years, before they spend money to prevent something that may happen in 50 years.
    TheQuestioner Options
  • 8livesleft
    127
    Indeed. And we're talking about G7 powerful countries here.

    What of the rest of the world, who are far more and growing exponentially, who don't give a damn what they do to themselves and the planet?
    8livesleft Options
  • Jack Cummins
    5.1k
    ↪TheQuestioner

    We live in a world where death is seen as the enemy and belief that life should be extended to the maximum.

    Perhaps Covid_19 is nature's vengeance for overpopulation and destroying other life forms for our benefits. Certainly, death is creeping in a way we are not used to and scientists are struggling. There is hope of a vaccine but will it be successful and even new viruses could occur.

    I think that we, the people of today, have become almost complacent. People have been living much longer and we are expecting this to increase, but nature may put obstacles in our way, showing that mankind is not entitled to reign as the master of the world.
    Jack Cummins Options
  • Ciceronianus
    2.9k
    Well, I don't know that we can say it will do so ironically.
    Ciceronianus Options
  • Restitutor
    47
    Massive Climate change probably wouldn't wipe humanity out unless the whole of the earth become uninhabitable, which i think the wight of scientific opinion says could happen.

    Any which way humanist will become extinct, one way or another, does it matter when or how?
    Restitutor Options
  • Jack Cummins
    5.1k
    ↪Restitutor

    Do you really believe that it does not matter how or when humanity becomes extinct. I am wondering why you take this view.
    Jack Cummins Options
  • Restitutor
    47
    What we consider reality is just a an evolutionary driven model generated by our brains, and us persevering that our continued existence as impotent is just part of that model. Us, generating in our brain the perception that we are some version of impotent is very easy to explain from an evolutionary standpoint.

    Take a picture of earth taken from Voyager 1 "The pale blue dot" picture. This encapsulates my thoughts on the matter more eloquently than any words. The pale blue dot that is the earth could get swallowed by the sun, now, tomorrow or in a billion years, what does it matter, who is going to miss us?

    This is just the truth isn't it?

    https://theconversation.com/the-pale-blue-dot-and-other-selfies-of-earth-39118
    Restitutor Options
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.

Sign In Create Account

Categories