Aging is now being recognised by the FDA as a ‘disorder’ that can be treated. Instead of treating age-related diseases, such as diabetes, cancer, dementia, a broader ‘anti-aging’ protocol will better serve the population. Now, whilst I am a great advocate of antiaging approaches; there are serious considerations into how far we ‘should’ extend our lifespan.

A recent fascinating debate into the ethical and social consequences of radically increasing human lifespan adds dimension to that concern.

According to the debate, most people have a very idealised view of how technology will change human nature and society for the better, however there is no evidence of that. On the contrary, it is proposed that longer lives will more likely not make the world a better, kinder place. Some of the key considerations are:

• Lifespans are already getting longer – increasing around 1 year in every 4; however health is not improving at the same rate. 19% GDP on healthcare is used in the last 6 months of a person’s life. Should we just let things continue as they are?
• Societal changes – youth are full of exuberant ideas and optimism; then as people get older, they often become more conservative. Will older generations working longer slow down innovation and progress?
• Economies – we already have major economic concerns and challenges of older age populations across all nations? Who will pay for the continued living expenses of older generations, when around 40% cannot support themselves finaincially to 80 years today?
• Quality of life – with science – is it slowing down the aging process or just delaying the dying process? Are we getting the quality of life in the extended ‘old age’ years?
• Socioeconomic consequences – not everyone will be able to afford life-extending treatments; will it be limited to the top 1%; contributing to even greater wealth inequality.
• Life satisfaction and management – with longer lifetimes, will we put off important life decisions indefinitely; impacting other people?

As you can see, this debate raises some very complex and provocative issues. However, it is worthy of consideration by everyone, as we continue to push our existence and mode of living along the technology continuum. I think the important thing to realise in all of this is that technology advancement does not happen in a vacuum. It impacts humans in both positive and potentially negative ways. And this leads me to the big question:

Are we as leaders considering the human impact of our choices in terms of technology design?

Author: Gail La Grouw. Insight Mastery Program Director, and Strategic Performance Consultant for Coded Vision Ltd.