an examination by: GF Willmetts. With the recent announcement of the increased size of human population in the next decade in the UK let alone the world, this is compounded by how much longer people are living. In past centuries, it was often disease and wars that did the most for decreasing population but as we’ve become more peaceful (even recent wars haven’t caused general population reduction compared to the two world wars) and also resolved cures for major infections, the more likely more of us are going to live reasonably healthy to a greater age.

In that respect, it does make some sense that those who wish to work beyond a standard ‘retirement’ age should have the choice to do so. After all, there are some careers like in the media and politics where age isn’t an objection to carry on into dotage. There are some jobs, especially those requiring extreme physical activity and good sensory perception where there will have to be an age limit but even that might change in the years to come but these people should be entitled to taking it easy or at least teaching youngsters entering said professions. It is, after all, well known that the more active we remain the more we can keep the aging process under control. For some, knowing that they are going to retire has a tendency to shorten their life span than have an extended retirement and that, too, is also unfair. Even so, all that means is the population will grow simply because fewer people are going to die in their seventies or eighties and I can see the ‘Guinness Book Of Records’ constantly being updated as to who has lived the longest. I suspect people of my own age are going to reach our century of age without too much effort.



With the understanding of how the length of the ends of DNA strands determines the number of safe cellular regeneration and other knowledge determined by understanding the human genome, it can’t be long before it is possible to ensure people have really long lives. I stop short of calling it immortality, mostly because you would need proof that such individuals could live way beyond, say, a thousand years to start qualifying the term ‘forever’. You would also need proof that there would be no impairment to mental facilities and physique. Who wants to live for extended periods if you’re not reasonably fit or you’ve lost your ability to think? Quite rightly then, many would regard this as more hell than worthwhile.

Should that happen and no control of population growth, then we have a real problem of what to do with all the people, let alone what are they are going to eat. Now this is an area where Science Fiction has examined and the most common choice is to go for sterilisation, voluntary or otherwise. It has also been speculated that nature would limit fertility would be the body’s own reaction to extended life. Fewer have thought about the possibility that more will turn to war and fighting as happens with too many rodents pushed together in a box. War was a pastime that the mythological pantheons carried out so maybe that was Man’s own nature warning of such dangers. However, the nature of evolution is for a species as individuals to live, propagate and die or end up in a cul-de-sac when something comes along that they cannot fight. Saying that, a taste of immortality could get you beyond that problem but there’s no guarantee that it would last forever and we could be back to the impairment issue.

Of course, as Science Fiction tales are invariably set in the distant future and humans are spread across the galaxy and then long life comes into its own. One of the real problems of space travel, apart from surviving stellar radiation, is the time spent travelling. Even with hibernation and other techniques, you want to arrive relatively young which prolonged life would give. Being long-lived would remove that obstacle. You might have a problem of boredom but hopefully you would also develop people who would be creative enough to keep their minds occupied than just twiddling their thumbs hoping their space voyage would come to an end.

If longer life was purely a genetic trait, then there would be a dividing line between the two sorts of people. We might well have a situation like Heinlein’s Howard Families, from ‘Methuselah’s Children’ and ‘Time Enough For Love’, where those with long life-spans are kept going until science caught up and extended their lives even longer and hide their longevity until it was socially acceptable. You would still have short-lived people but would we treat the long-lifers as being anything other than that. I doubt if such people would want to become megalomaniacs with a desire to rule. Being long-lived doesn’t mean you can’t be killed and it would be sure way to end a long life, as would any serious injury. Besides, there are a lot of other safer occupations available to ensure you have sufficient wealth to keep yourself in a style to which you would become accustomed to.

However, if you were long-lived and not sterile and had an active sexual life, eventually whatever genes that made you that way would spread across the entire population. The same would happen had you populated other star systems. If anything, you can see scientists trying to remove or at least curb the long-life gene or at least limit family growth. However, with longer live, you might not want to breed while young any more, unless it was determined that was a problem.

If it’s not wise for humans to be long-lived, what about other species? This would have to be on the level of sentience. After all, there are a number of species on Earth already that live longer than humans. As pointed out already, a space-faring race might find long-life an asset and the likelihood of them visiting the Earth isn’t likely to be statistically impossible. If they decide to leave a colony, we would also have the problem of not being able to contain such a population. If some were invited to travel with them then knowing we could turn on a long-life gene wouldn’t be a bad idea. We would also have to hope that their colony would have the sense to choose such an option themselves and not be a burden to host planet.

In many respects, longer life can be both helpful and a burden. As it is going to happen, based purely on exercise and correct diet for many, then it looks like the choice will be random and not given to people who think they deserve or have the money to afford such a treatment. That way would be elitist and chaotic to say the least.

Considering the range of humans we already have on this planet, it is also highly possible that there may already be some really long lifers already amongst us. I doubt if they’d reveal themselves, though. Better to be a under the radar than a potential guinea pig to see why it is so with them.

The real question is would you want to have an extended life and what would you do with all that time?

© GF Willmetts 2011

All rights reserved
Ask before borrowing