Jeremy Charles

Composition II

Mr. Graham

4/18/2017

Argue a Position
Finding the cure for aging is something that human beings have strived to

achieve. Myths and legends have been created by people about individuals who have

achieved immortality or about place that basically halt the aging process. The most

common of these myths is the fountain of youth that was thought to be in America.

However, many believe that with our advancement in technology, aging can be cured

just like any disease. In fact, many scientists have a strong belief that aging is nothing

more than a disease that should be cured. But some people feel that aging and death is

natural process that must occur and curing it would being bad and/or unethical. For this

essay, I will take the side for curing aging and giving reasons and evidence of why it

should be pursued. The cure for aging should be pursued, and people should have the

option to stop their aging or not.

What are the benefits to curing aging? First off, death would not happen as often

as if would. Not to say that death will never happen; plenty of other environmental and

accident events can kill as well as new diseases popping up. Curing aging can stop

some age related diseases from appearing. Second off, people could see their families

alive for a lot longer. Many would not have to worry about their family members dying,

and becoming alone for the rest of their lives. Third off, it could (and should) be optional

for humanity. Nobody should be forced into life longevity, so it needs to be made

optional. That way future generations will have a choice. Fourth off, People can have

more time to see the completion of lifetime projects. Finally, with certain diseases not

being an issue, many people could save a lot of money. I hear a lot about how those

with cancer have to fork over plenty of money to pay for treatments such as

1
chemotherapy and radiation therapy. Not only that, but people would not have to suffer

through it. These are a few of the benefits to curing aging; know that there are other

benefits not stated here. However, those are some off the top of my head.

One has to wonder, what really is aging? This issue is debated plenty of times.

Some feel that aging is nothing more than a disease that needs curing. Gunnar De

Winter states in his journal what makes a disease a disease. He says that a disease is

when something leads to a reduction of one or more functional abilities below typical

levels, either caused by internal processes or environmental agents, as well as to a

reduced capacity of coping with changes in, or aspects of, the environment, when

comparing the individual under consideration to a sufficiently broad reference class.

(De Winter) Interestingly enough, when you age your body starts to lose certain abilities.

Examples are weakness of bones, the lack of sustainable energy, the ability to walk or

the ability to walk without aid, loss of sight, loss of hearing, loss of memory, and many

others. So what can cause aging? Basically your cells will divide over and over again,

and as they do this the DNA in the cells get shorter and shorter as time goes on which

eventually leads to the cells becoming odd, the cells not dividing, and you getting odd.

(Cell division) Ronald Bailey gives a basic reason of why people age by saying it is bad

chemistry. (Bailey) This seems to be an internal cause for the lack of certain abilities at

older age. Not only that, but certain disease can be associated with age, such as

cancer, heart disease, stroke, osteoporosis, and diabetes which are all internal

processes. We look to cure all of this but not aging itself. Finally when you compare a

person who has any of the things listed above to someone doesnt have any of that, you

can see that something is way off.

2
 What are some counter arguments to curing aging? Obviously there is another

side to this argument. Joo Pedro de Magalhes lists some counter arguments on his

website. The arguments include but are not limited to aging is natural and so we should

not fight it, overpopulation would lead to a global catastrophe, overall, curing aging is

ethically wrong, and a few others. (Magalhes) Aging and dying has existed since living

things existed. It would make sense that living things would evolve to avoid aging if such

a thing was bad. The population of the Earth has been increasing every year. Curing

aging could cause a lack of resources and overcrowding in cities, which may lead to the

thinning of the population. Many religions believe that death is ethical and was placed

on people by a divining being and/or beings, or we caused it to ourselves. So curing

aging could be seen as immoral and an insult to the divining being and/or beings. Joel

Achenbach makes an interesting claim in his article on the Washington Post. He says

that nature has feedback systems and there are microbes that adapt to our every

move. (Achenbach) This is completely true; viruses and bacteria are known to evolve

into stronger diseases. They can eventually resist the latest of medicines that are

created to cure the diseases. The diseases that evolve are known to change to stronger

symptoms. So there are strong cases against the idea of an age cure.

When it comes to the idea of aging being natural, Joo Pedro de Magalhess

counter argument is my favorite. He says not all living things age; certain animals such

as lobsters and tortoises dont show aging signs so aging is not universal.(Magalhes)

Also species can take lots of years to evolve and favor a certain trait. Is it possible that

we actually have been evolving to resist aging all these years? Human beings certainly

have been extending their lifespans over the past decades. Overpopulation may not be

3
very much a thing as some may seem. People will still be able to die through extreme

weather, war, evolving diseases, and people who chose not to cure aging. China is

country with a high population, and is known to have crowding in their cities. However,

they are still surviving. What really is hurting the country is its lack of laws regarding

pollution. If a person believes that curing aging is unethical then they should have the

right to chose not to cure. It is only fair to everyone that such a technology be optional to

anyone. To Joel Achenbach I say he is absolutely right. But curing aging should still be

achieved. The evolving diseases are something to keep doctors and pharmaceutical

companies employed.

The cure for aging should be pursued, and people should have the option to stop their

aging or not is my claim that I maintained throughout this paper. I managed to discuss

some benefits to curing aging, make some connections to aging being a disease, some

counter arguments to curing aging, and I countered those arguments against aging.

Hopefully this has shedded some light on the subject. Maybe one day the answer to

immortality for people can be achieved for those that want it.

4
Bibliography
Achenbach, Joel. "A Harvard professor says he can cure aging, but is that a good idea?" 2
December 2015. The Washington Post. Article. 11 April 2017.
Bailey, Ronald. "Aging Is a Disease and It's Time to Cure It." 2 December 2016. Reason.com.
Article. 11 April 2017.
"Cell division." 18 March 2017. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Encyclopedia. 25 April 2017.
De Winter, Gunnar. "Aging as disease." Medicine, Health Care & Philosophy (2015): 237-243.
Academic Journal.
Grey, Aubrey de. A roadmap to end aging. July 2005. Speech. 11 April 2017.
Magalhes, Joo Pedro de. "Should We Cure Aging?" 2014. Senescence.info. Essay. 11 April
2017.