Evolution

[soon2bepro]

[ QUOTE ]
Hypothetically, if all humans cooperated, we could increase our average/maximum lifespan, assuming we had enough time on an evolutionary scale. All you have to do is set a minimum age before being allowed to reproduce. Starting at 20 would already be pretty high. Gradually, after a few (hundred?) generations, start raising the bar to 21, 22, and upwards all the way to 50 if you like. Genes that were advantageous for long individual lifespans would quickly come to dominate. I'm guessing the ceiling could be raised pretty high...

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you really consider us ignorant and powerless enough to have to depend on natural evolution?

[Siegmund]

I consider us ignorant enough, and obsessed enough with our own power, to think we can do whatever the heck we want and completely ignore the consequences of natural evolution. It does still operate, and it will come around to bite us in the ass from time to time.

For instance - bringing into general use drugs which are moderately effective against a virus, is a great way to create a more powerful virus, not a great way to tame a disease. Might be better to wait until an efficient sledgehammer is developed.

For a couple more instances that operate on longer time scales - going so far out of our way to help infertile couples conceive and help sickly/premature babies survive may or may not have some interesting consequences in the future.
One thing that I AM sure is going to have severe consequences in the future is the popularity of c-sections. There are all sorts of survival advantages to having large babies, and average birth weight has already risen rapidly in the past hundred years... I think we could VERY easily get ourselves into a situation within a thousand years where it's virtually impossible for women to survive natural childbirth. "Give birth by surgery only" strikes me as a pretty serious evolutionary mis-step.