Titleless...

Haha I guess I don't know what to put for this post. Felt kind of random today. I finished my test on Organic Chemistry earlier today. I was kind of glad that it's over because it is not so easy to study for it. In Form 6, we used almost 3/4 of the year to cover the chapters in Organic Chemistry. Here, we only used around 3 and half months? =_=' It rather torturing actually to stuff all those reagents and reaction for different class of compounds. That's why felt abit stressed yesterday. I relieved it by chatting on MSN and watching anime. It's abit unbearable to not do anything with that amount of stress. Well, it is not over with another test coming up on next Friday. However, I would like to take a short break for one or two days perhaps?

To tell you the truth, I used to think that university life is much simpler and not that burdensome but experience here at NUS for past 2 and half months proved me wrong! It began rather slowly but as it gets to the mid-term, things tends to be harder with much heavier workloads. As it get to the final exams, I think it will be worse. Can you imagine that with only one test per week, I am already like that. The final itself covered everything we learned for the whole semester. I guess I gonna die young? Well, there is a story (which I don't know true or not) about people who used their brain alot tend to die at younger age. Apparently, it is said because their brain cells died more when they used it too much. Whether fiction or not, I think stress the one that is killing us. Despite stress is important (a little stress is healthy and important as a drive of life and progression in life), I guess no one will actually like it.

I think I never tell you about one English debate assignment that I have last week. In this assignment, you suppose to prepare for a debate and also write an essay of around 800 words. I kind of rush through it as I was having other stuffs along that week. Well, it is actually about radical life extension. I just submitted online earlier. This is my essay on it... (read on if interested)

Why We Should Not Extend Our Lives Radically?

In today’s context, radical life extension involves the extreme lengthening of one’s maximum lifespan through various applications of science and technology. In the past, this may be impossible. However, now, with more discoveries being made every day in biological science, biotechnology and nanotechnology, it is no longer an unattainable goal but within the reach of our hands. Despite the benefits that it can bring to various individuals, I believe it will negatively impact our society as whole from the different aspects. Thus, I would like to oppose active promotions of radical life extension to the public due to ethical concerns, and its effects towards society from social and economic point of view.

The ethical concerns surrounding radical life extension can be viewed from two different perspectives which are its implication towards humanity and bioethics regarding the techniques used in extending life. Firstly, the implication of radical life extension towards human can be seen in the changes of their mindset. For example, there will be perception that immortality is achieved through radical life extension which is false. “An individual committed to the scientific struggle against aging and decline may be the least prepared for death and the least willing to acknowledge its inevitability” (President’s Council of Bioethics, 2003, para. 23). Radical life extension cannot insure death due to accidents and incurable diseases. Although some argued that radical life extension will help an individual to spend more quality time with their loved ones, death is not inevitable for their loved ones. This will cause that particular individual to be devastated psychologically due to his or her unrealistic expectations. Other concerns regarding the techniques of radical life extension are not of without proof. Caloric restriction is “process of limiting caloric intake with the intention of slowing down aging.” (every diet.org, 2008). Although this may be true to a certain extent, there is also a high price to pay. With caloric restriction, we tend to be more vulnerable towards infectious diseases. It was noted that “CR decreased survival, increased virus titers, and reduced natural killer cell activity in lungs of aged mice after primary influenza infection” (Gardner, 2005, para. 2). With these two ethical concerns, the need for promotion of radical life extension should be reconsidered.

In addition, there is a social concern that through radical life extension, there will be overpopulation on earth. With the decrease in mortality rate and an increase in population densities around the globe, the phenomenon of overpopulation is unavoidable. Ray Kurzweil, an optimist regarding radical life extension said that overpopulation is not an issue with the use of nanotechnology to solve various problems caused by it (Hamilton, 2005). However, overpopulation causes the depletion of natural resources and destruction of natural habitats at an even faster pace than now (Nahle, 2003). Besides that, there would be a “problem of generational dominance” (Dvorsky, 2008, para. 19). With the older generation holding on to key positions in the office, the younger ones are hindered from moving up the positions and their creativity and skills will be laid to waste. This will affect the confidence in the younger generation as they will be prevented from expressing themselves and be inferior to the older ones. With higher consumption of resources and changes to the global social system especially in the developed countries, have gerontologist even thought of addressing such issues due to the therapies they have created for their own selfish desires?

Finally, radical life extension will affect the economy negatively. This is due to unequal distribution of wealth between the rich and the poor, with the rich owning the technology of radical life extension. With this ownership, the income gap between the rich and poor will widen. Some argued that the wealthy people are the ones who drive the economy of a country, thereby concluding that there is no issue on this. However, take note that this is not healthy for that particular country. An example of this will be India. With highest growth of 22.7% in the number of millionaires in the world (Reuters, 2008) and emergence as one of the upcoming developing country, India remained underdeveloped at most parts of the country. This is because, in India, the poorer people make up the majority of the population and hence, is the majority of the consumers in the country. In the presence of such economic gap, the purchasing power of the consumers will be lowered, thus, lowering the economic drive and growth of that country.

In conclusion, the negative consequences of radical life extension such as ethical issues, social instability and hindrance towards economic growth should convince us that radical life extension is not healthy towards the society and individuals indirectly. Therefore, I would like to once again reaffirm my stance against the promotion of radical life extension to the public.

This is basically an academic essay lar... I am actually quite neutral on this topic in real life. I have nothing against it nor supporting it. Although I believe each person has its own lifespan, we shouldn't really restrict ourselves to it. I mean its important to life healthily and in that process, we are indirectly extending our life, I think? But, I am against any unnatural ways to really extend our lives. It seems that we are hanging and clinging on our lives very tightly, which is not healthy to our minds. Well, its up to you to give a thought or don't even bother it. It is rather a controversial issue after all.

Enjoy your day! I hope no people go google my essay or anything. I give a lot of thoughts on this essay. I surely don't appreciate them stealing it!!! Haha *perasan*