English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Projects of radical life extension have been discussed amongst scientists for years. Some bioethicists express reservations about this endeavor. A common objection appeals to demography: if the human lifespan is dramatically expanded, humanity would face an overpopulation problem. In this essay, the authors reply to this objection. They posit that radical life extension is unlikely to lead to overpopulation because overpopulation is determined more by fertility rates than by longevity, and as a result of the advanced phases of industrialization, fertility rates are likely to be reduced, and therefore, population size would become stable. However, they argue that although overpopulation is not a concern for the foreseeable future, it is still important to acknowledge its potential harms. Finally, they argue that even if overpopulation becomes a problem caused by radical life extension, there are plausible ways to solve it.

Is Concern With Overpopulation a Good Argument Against Radical Life Extension?