Immortality and life extension research is heavily underfunded.
But compared to the little amount of funding it receives today the results are tremendous.
We already know that immortality is possible, what causes aging and how to treat it. What is left is to implement this knowlegde in practise.
If immortality and life extension research would receive as much funding as the USA alone spends on war (almost $600 billion in 2015), we would already be immortal.
Common medicine in middle ages was seen as work of witchcraft and something unnatural and hordes on hillbillies protested against it.
The religion told people to just pray to God and hope that they will get better, basically the same thing that is still today being told to a person who wants to live over 100 years.
Immortality is 100% natural. The proof of it are several organisms currently living on Earth that are immortal and do not age. People who oppose immortality today will be seen as fools in the future.
If you enjoy life why would you not want to life longer and experience more joy?
If you get sick do you treat yourself or accept the illness and just die? So why would you accept aging which is also only a genetic inherited disease? This doesn't make any sense!
Not exactly. Immortal is not the same as indestructible. Immortal means that a person will not die by itself from any natural cause. But he will still die from any unnatural cause such as any lethal physical damage to the body. While immortality is possible, indestructibility is not. Even if in the future a person will have bulletproof skin, reinforced skeleton and other improvements he will still be unable to resist for example a nuclear explosion like no material can and will be vaporized and die in the result of it. Therefore indestructibility of a living organism even on a theoretical level is impossible.
No. There are 3 stages in anti-aging treatment:
1. Slowing aging
2. Stopping aging
3. Reversing aging
At the final stage your body will become more healthier and younger. It may take a while until we are able to do that, but the good part is that at that point you will have time to wait.
No. First of all no one is saying that you will live foverer as of eternally. Because immortality is not same as indestructibility you may still die.
What goes to getting bored, some people are bored all the time and have nothing to do, others can't have enough of life and are always busy at something. It's all about individual perspective. Immortality has really nothing to do with it.
If work is the only source of income for you, then probably yes. However, do you hate your work so much that you would rather die? If so, why not change a career?
Since you are not in hurry anywhere why not educate yourself for something else you will truly enjoy?
Also if you want to retire earlier, why not work smarter, so that by the age of 40 you have enough money to invest it and live from the profit it generates?
No. Making people healthier and extending their life cycle can never be wrong. That is what medicine is all about. Immortality would be the final phase of medicine, the phase where medicine will become absolute.
Yes. It's not in anyone's interest to hide scientific discoveries. Even if we are talking about a selfish person he will try to sell this technology to other to maximize profit. Of course it will cost and probably quite a lot, but no medical treatment is free. The only way of making life extension treatment free to the public is if the government will sponsor it.
No. The reason for explosive population growth is not an extension of the human life cycle, but too high birth rate.
We can be saved from overpopulation only by controlling the birth rate. If the birth rate stays as high as it is now we will overpopulate no matter whether we will reach immortality or not.
Also it's important to understand that once medical immortality will become possible, all people will not become immortal overnight. As any new medical treatment, it will be scarce and rare at first. It will take decades until the majority of the human population will have access to it, and even then some will not want to be immortal.
The fact is that birth rate is dropping in every industrial country. Once every country will reach the same standard of living as we have in western countries their birth rate will start to drop. Therefore in the future human population will decrease. This is why life extension and immortality will actually solve a problem, not create one.
When you get sick, do you go to the doctor and take medication or abstain, because a lot of people cannot afford that?
Or do you at least give up your car, house and all facilities and go to live in the slums because so many people are living in terrible conditions?
You don't. Therefore why should you refuse of anti-aging or immortality treatment, just because the world is full of other problems?
Immortality and life extension is not in conflict with global well-being. We can have both.
That is your choice and we respect that. Immortality will never be mandatory, as living in general is not mandatory either. You can always refuse anti-aging treatment, like you can refuse any medical treatment and die.
Well the answer is quite simple: We should first deal with the problem that comes first.
Unless we become immortal we will all die long before the Earth will become unhabitable and we will have to colonize other planets, and therefore never even face that problem.
Thinking about how to colonize Mars when you will die before it will happen is as dumb as to trying to find food when you are bleeding out. You're not gonna be hanging around long enough to become hungry unless you fix your bleeding first.
You really need to rethink your priorities and first solve the problem that will come in few decades and only after you have solved it, think about the problem that will come in few centuries. Doing it the other way around is just stupid.