So many bad arguments against anti-aging research. The article basically claims that rich people will, more than usual, harm poor people. (“The rich and powerful will be looking to do away with rules that they perceive as denying them millennial life spans.”) Other arguments from the comments section are the traditional sour grapes argument (“not many people, even when healthy, want to live to be 100”), environmental argument (“one wonders why people would dedicate their lives to making the problem even worse.”), and spiritual platitudes (“scoff at the possibility of metempsychosis or rebirth, but then undertake a quixotic search for an immortal physical body”).
The man who discovered fire probably caught worse flack. (“Why bring fire inside? Burn down cave! Women and minorities hit hardest! Ughn!”)
So many bad arguments against anti-aging research. The article basically claims that rich people will, more than usual, harm poor people. (“The rich and powerful will be looking to do away with rules that they perceive as denying them millennial life spans.”) Other arguments from the comments section are the traditional sour grapes argument (“not many people, even when healthy, want to live to be 100”), environmental argument (“one wonders why people would dedicate their lives to making the problem even worse.”), and spiritual platitudes (“scoff at the possibility of metempsychosis or rebirth, but then undertake a quixotic search for an immortal physical body”).
The man who discovered fire probably caught worse flack. (“Why bring fire inside? Burn down cave! Women and minorities hit hardest! Ughn!”)