Lifespan extension and the doctrine of double effect

A humanist approach to ageing, 2009

Journal of Medical Ethics, 2023

The technical possibilities of biomedicine open up the opportunity to intervene in ageing itself with the aim of mitigating, reducing, or eliminating it. However, before undertaking these changes or rejecting them outright, it is necessary to ask ourselves if what would be lost by doing so really has much value. This article will analyse the desirability of ageing from an individual point of view, without circumscribing this question to the desirability or undesirability of death. First, we will present the three most widely used arguments to reject biomedical interventions against ageing. We will argue that only the last of these arguments provides a consistent answer to the question of the desirability of ageing. Second, we will show that the third argument falls prey to a conceptual confusion that we will call the paradox of ageing: although ageing entails negative health effects, it leads to a life stage with valuable goods. Both valuations, one positive and the other negative, refer to two different dimensions of ageing: the chronological and the biological. We will defend that, by not adequately distinguishing these two types of ageing, it does not become apparent that all the valuable goods exclusive to ageing derive only from its chronological dimension. Third, we will argue that, if we just conceive ageing biologically, it is undesirable. We will elaborate on the two kinds of undesirable effects biological ageing has: direct and indirect. Finally, we will respond to potential objections by adducing that these are insufficient to weaken our argument.

EMBO reports, 2005

Bioethica Forum, 2011

Social Philosophy and Policy, 2013

The world's aging populations face novel health challenges never experienced before in human history. The moral landscape thus needs to adapt to reflect this novel empirical reality. In this paper I take for granted one basic moral principle advanced by Peter Singer — a principle of preventing bad occurrences — and explore the implications that empirical considerations from demography, evolutionary biology, and biogerontology have for the way we conceive of fulfilling this principle at the operational level. After bringing to the fore a number of considerations that Singer ignores, such as the probability that nonintervention will result in harm and the likelihood that different kinds of extrinsic and intrinsic harms can be prevented, I argue that the aspiration to extend the human biological warranty period (by retarding the rate of aging) is a pressing moral imperative for the twenty-first century. In the final sections I briefly address some standard objections raised against...

AGING MEDICINE, 2019

Worldwide populations are aging with economic development as a result of public health initiatives and advances in therapeutic discoveries. Since 1850, life expectancy has advanced by 1 year for every four. 1 Accompanying this change is the rapid development of anti-aging science. There are three schools of thought in the field of aging science. One perspective is the life course approach, which considers that aging is a good and natural process to be embraced as a necessary and positive aspect of life, where the aim is to improve the quality of existing lifespan and "compress" morbidity. Another view is that aging is undesirable, and that rejuvenation and indeed immortality are possible since the biological basis of aging is understood, and therefore, strategies are possible for engineering negligible senescence. Finally, a hybrid approach is that life span can be extended by anti-aging medicines but with uncertain effects on health. While these advances offer much promise, the ethical perspectives are seldom discussed in cross-disciplinary settings. This article discusses some of the key ethical issues arising from recent advances in biogerontology.

2013

Over the last few years, ethical issues related to considerable life extension have gathered much attention among philosophers. This has largely been inspired by the development of emerging medical technologies such as regenerative medicine, stem cell research, and telomere manipulation. The idea of an extremely long life immediately raises many serious questions about the desirability of such a life and its meaning to our understanding of us as humans and of our mortality. 1 In this paper I will introduce some central arguments that have been presented in the debate on the ethics of considerable life extension. By way of reviewing the debate I will aim to show that the idea that there is a single, unified debate on the topic is quite questionable.

The questions we address are the following: Are we entitled to access life extension therapies? Must we draw the line at some point (say 120 years, the maximum life span so far, or maybe even earlier) and decide that that’s that and now we must die? Are there considerations that might make either living or making it possible to live after a certain ages immoral? Does justice require foregoing life extension therapies or does it require the development and application of these therapies?

Journal of Medical Ehics, 2024

When biological ageing is desirable? A Reply to García-Barranquero et al. García-Barranquero et al. explore the desirability of human ageing. They differentiate between chronological and biological views of ageing and contend that the positive aspects of ageing are solely linked to chronological ageing. Consequently, the authors embrace the potential for technological interventions in biological ageing. Contrary to their stance, I argue that there are sometimes desirable aspects associated with biological ageing. Therefore, proposals aiming to eliminate, mitigate, or diminish biological ageing are not without problems.

Res Cogitans - Journal of Philosophy