Public Policies Intended to Influence Adult Mortality

Abstract

In the late 1970s, Dr. Bernice Neugarten and Dr. Robert Havighurst from the Department of Human Development at the University of Chicago organized a scientific conference around a single question: is it appropriate to focus government resources on a concerted effort to use our expanding knowledge of basic biology to extend the longevity of the human species? The views expressed by those attending the conference ranged from the idea that we organize a Manhattan-type project with life extension as the primary goal, to the recommendation that an effort focused exclusively on extending life is ill advised because limited resources would better be used to reduce existing inequalities in health and longevity. Since then, the scientific study of aging has advanced so far that some scientists believe that modulating our basic biology for the purpose of extending the period of healthy life is plausible and inevitable. Some even suggest that extreme life extension is on the horizon. Others still believe it would be unethical to pursue life extension for some while others are struggling to live to the statistical average. Is it premature to initiate a concerted effort to extend human longevity without knowing in advance whether it is technically feasible, and what the social, economic, and ethical consequences might be? In this chapter we examine the range of viewpoints on this issue from the time of the Neugarten/Havighurst conference to the present.