Those third world countries with their primative family expansion values
will, of course, be the last to receive and benefit from longevity
treatment when it is developed.
Unless they get to be the ones experimented on. US FDA will wait till
the rest of the world gets to live 150 years old before they will okay it.
When they develop it abroad (from US) we'll come there to get regenerated.
On Wed, 15 Feb 1995, Patrick O'Neil wrote:
>>> On Wed, 15 Feb 1995, Chris Driver wrote:
>> > What is this rubbish about exponential growth? Demographers from most parts of
> > the world are agreed that the present trends are heading towards a steady
> > population size.
>> Though some countries do demonstrate either slowed growth or actual
> declines in overall population size, they are practically all in the
> developed nations with cultures that support such demographics. The
> largest reproducers are Third World nations and in spite of piddly little
> fights such as seen in Rwanda (piddly is not to say it isn't horrendous,
> just that the numbers of deaths are insignificant when measured against
> total population and reproduction rate in other countries), they continue
> to pump out the people. Part of the problem is that their centuries-old
> cultures call for large families, without regards to overall population
> size. It is unrealistic and very Western-centric to assume that all
> countries will/should adopt the developed Western nation's cultural ways,
> as though they are the only proper way to be (I have some Cultural
> Anthropologist friends who would like to skin you alive if that is what
> you indirectly or directly imply). Population density will get worse
> before it gets better and there will be much suffering in the meantime.
> These predictions, by the way, do not in any way take into account the
> affects of theoretical life-extension treatments/technologies such as are
> being discussed here. It is the theoretical problems created by the
> theoretical treatments that I argue about.
>>
