←back to thread

215 points XzetaU8 | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
lemoncookiechip ◴[] No.45083139[source]
I find it a tough sell to add another 20 years to life expectancy, considering that by the time you reach 70, most people are already in decline (some worse than others), and the drop from 70 to 80 tends to be steep for many. Those who make it past 80 into their 90s or even 100s often aren’t living particularly fulfilling lives, if you can even call it living at that point.

Losing your vision, your hearing, your mobility, and worst of all, your mind, doesn’t sound very appealing to me.

So unless we find a way to both live longer and to decliner slower, I just don't see the point for the majority of people who will unfortunately live lonely worse lives.

replies(6): >>45083261 #>>45083279 #>>45083330 #>>45083467 #>>45083571 #>>45083730 #
boredemployee ◴[] No.45083279[source]
Exactly. I'm the youngest in my family many aunts and uncles are already dead. those who still live are in a huge decline or completely lonely (sometimes both). Mom is in her late 70s and is in good shape, but she complains a lot about loneliness (even though I and my brothers visit her almost daily for a coffee or lunch). I think the joy of living ends with people around you dying.
replies(1): >>45083291 #
1. meeks ◴[] No.45083291[source]
Wouldn't the people around you also benefit from these advances so in theory they wouldn't be dead in this scenario?
replies(1): >>45084275 #
2. boredemployee ◴[] No.45084275[source]
in theory yes, but in practice will the majority of people get the benefits?