] Wandering through the quadrangles and medieval bastions
] of learning at the University of Cambridge one overcast
] Sunday afternoon a few months ago, I found myself
] ruminating on how this venerable place had been a
] crucible for the scientific revolution that changed
] humankind%u2019s perceptions of itself and of the world.
] The notion of Cambridge as a source of grand
] transformative concepts was very much on my mind that
] day, because I had traveled to England to meet a
] contemporary Cantabrigian who aspires to a historical
] role similar to those enjoyed by Francis Bacon, Isaac
] Newton, and William Harvey. Aubrey David Nicholas Jasper
] de Grey is convinced that he has formulated the
] theoretical means by which human beings might live
] thousands of years%u2014indefinitely, in fact.

[ This is sort of a long article, and made longer by superfluous adjectives, but worth a skim, if not a detailed read.

The issue of immortality has always been interesting to me on a lot of levels, and this cuts right along that line. Pragmatically, I think there are a lot of issues, such as basic medicine and improved social conditions in much of the world, which might take precedence over a crusade for immortality. It seems certain that even were the goal achieved, it would benefit, at least for a time, only a selected elite class. I'm not convinced of the premise that living as long as possible is the most fundamental human right. I might say that providing a society in which basic needs (health, nutrition, housing) are universal, and in which everyone gets to have a life with opportunity and choices, is more fundamental. Even with the best of intentions, to offer immortality to a factory worker in a dismal slum hardly seems useful.

That being said, perhaps driving hard for this goal will advance technology enough to achieve some of those other goals. At any rate, it's interesting to think about the issues here... -k]