Skip to main content

Poll: Will You Take a Pill That Adds 500 Years to Your Life?

 

Will you take a pill that adds 500 years to your life?


I have a pill that will add 500 years to your life (OK, I don't really, please don't email me asking for one).  But let's say I did.  Would you take it?  Yes or no?  You have 1 minute to decide, then answer the poll above.  If you have any conditions to your vote, post them in the comments. 

Why ask this question?  The question is - to what extent should we be focusing our research dollars on therapies that extend life.  Of course, the question is not this simple - 500 years at what quality, at what cost, where will the centenarians live?  But the basics of the question rest on this primary question, not the details.  Or maybe you want to disagree. 

It's up to you.

You still have 30 seconds.

by: Alex Smith

Comments

Lindsey Yourman said…
Among other things, it would depend on whether I had seen the natural history of anyone else who had taken the pill . . . What was their quality of life like living 500 years? Were they functionally able to contribute in meaningful ways? Was it isolating to live so much longer than other people? How many other people are likely to have access to and take this pill? Also, I'd want to be able to reverse my decision (e.g. euthanasia) if living so long turned out to be too physically or emotionally painful.
Anonymous said…
Not enough info in question. Would entirely depend on whether I have lifelong subscription to GeriPal.org
Hmmm... can I get a pill for my loved ones as well? would hate to do it alone and watch them all die when I got to live "forever". I would also want the "opt out" pill for the emotional distress I anticipate would happen after about 200 years...
Dan Matlock said…
Only on a dare... I've taken a lot of pills on a dare.
Helen Chen said…
Depends: would our 500 year trajectory be like MacLeod's (the Immortal in Highlander--swashbuckling for centuries) or more like Daruma (didn't live to be 500, but was very wise and functionally disabled at the end of life)? Would 500 be the new 30? or would 500 simply be the 500?
Sara Perry said…
No thank you. That would be way too long for me. My soul will be ready for its next exciting adventure long before then. I'm a strong proponent of quality of life over quantity. I even wrote a 5 page Addendum to my Five Wishes Advance Directive to further clarify my wishes. Its title? "Morphine, Ice Cream, and Chocolate: My End Of Life Wishes."
Eric Widera said…
Depends on what happens to the other 6 billion people on earth. Do we have the resources for all of them or will my taking this pill even further separate the haves from the have nots. I think I'm already selfish enough - can't thinkright now about even taking more especially after watching CNN tonight.
Anonymous said…
I suspect that I would give it a try only after moving to Washington, Oregon, or Montana.
Niamh said…
I'd rather take a pill to stay young.
guym said…
Sure, all the usual caveats - e.g., like Helen suggested, the years after 100 wouldn't be misery; this pill would slow down 'aging.' And, of course, I'd want others to get to take it, not just me... though, if it were offered to just me, I might well respond like my doctor did when I asked him if he'd take such a pill. His (instant) reply: "in a heartbeat!" If life is 'good' (in my view) today and the prospect is good for tomorrow, why would I not want to live another day, and yet another?
Anonymous said…
I'd say no, because I have no idea what a 500-year life cycle would be like. 80 years makes sense to me: you're born, learn basic senses, go to school, try to figure out who you are, get married, have kids, maybe become more comfortable in who you are, work on your career, enjoy yourself, travel, retire, reflect on your life.

What would the life cycle be if we lived for 500 years? Would we reflect for 400+ more years? I don't know how the natural evolution of a life would occur if it stretched out that long. I think I'd be confused.. or bored.
Joanne Seifert said…
If my husband could take the pill, too, and I could have 500 more years with him you bet I would.

Popular posts from this blog

The Dangers of Fleet Enemas

The dangers of oral sodium phosphate preparations are fairly well known in the medical community. In 2006 the FDA issued it’s first warning that patients taking oral sodium phosphate preparations are at risk for potential for acute kidney injury. Two years later, over-the-counter preparations of these drugs were voluntarily withdrawn by the manufacturers.  Those agents still available by prescription were given black box warnings mainly due to acute phosphate nephropathy that can result in renal failure, especially in older adults. Despite all this talk of oral preparations, little was mentioned about a sodium phosphate preparation that is still available over-the-counter – the Fleet enema.

Why Oral Sodium Phosphate Preparations Are Dangerous 

Before we go into the risks of Fleet enemas, lets spend just a couple sentences on why oral sodium phosphate preparations carry significant risks. First, oral sodium phosphate preparations can cause significant fluid shifts within the colon …

Dying without Dialysis

There is a terrific article in this weeks Journal of Pain and Symptom Management by Fliss Murtagh of King's College in London about the epidemiology of symptoms for patients with advanced renal failure who die without dialysis.  This study is important because while we know that patients with advanced renal failure have a limited life expectancy and the average age of initiation of hemodialysis is increasing, we know little about the alternatives to hemodialysis.  Specifically, we know nothing about symptoms affecting quality of life among patients who elect not to start dialysis (so called "conservative management" - is this the best label?).  This article provides a terrific counterpoint to the article in last years NEJM showing that nursing home residents who initiated hemodialysis tended to die and decline in function (see GeriPal write up here). 

The study authors followed patients with the most advanced form of chronic kidney disease (the new name for renal failu…

Survival from severe sepsis: The infection is cured but all is not well

Severe sepsis is a syndrome marked by a severe infection that results in the failure of at least one major organ system: For example, pneumonia complicated by kidney failure. It is the most common non-cardiac cause of critical illness and is associated with a high mortality rate.

But what happens to those who survive their hospitalization for severe sepsis? An important study published in JAMA from Iwashyna and colleagues provides answers and tells us all is not well. When the patient leaves the hospital, the infection may be cured, but the patient and family will need to contend with a host of major new functional and cognitive deficits.

Iwashyna examined disability and cognitive outcomes among 516 survivors of severe sepsis. These subjects were Medicare enrollees who were participants in the Health and Retirement Study. The average age of patients was 77 years.

When interviewed after discharge, most survivors were left with major new deficits in their ability to live independently. …