Anti-aging drugs would not be beneficial to society

You have made citation points but forgotten to put references in, so I'm not sure what you are referring to, either way, thank you. 1.New laws 2.Overpopulation 3.Harder job opportunities 4.Economic divide 5.Environmental factors 6.Conclusions 7.References NEW LAWS References are needed because you are making an assumption that it slows down the rate you mature as a person, rather than what this would do which would be to keep cells younger, had you seen the reference I posted in my previous argument, it stated "Instead of growing quickly and showing signs of ageing, the organisms became resilient to damage and were better able to repair the genetic defects that build up with age."[1] At no point did it say that maturity was lost, but this is irrelevant anyway because again, why would this drug be used on children? A drug as drastic as this would have guidelines for use, there might be cases where it's broken but those would be minimal and there would be contingency plans in place. Those who are 1 or 2 years away would be unaffected, again, anyone below a certain age would most likely not be allowed access to such a drug, so there would be no inconvenience for a start and if they could prove they were going to take their test, then exceptions can be made, but it's irrelevant. OVERPOPULATION You're right in saying no one lives there as a home, but they can live there for a while, as it is at the moment though, it is used for research and operates like an oil-rig or military base though there is nothing to suggest that it can't be used as a place of residence. As for temperatures, people who work out there most likely use a layered method of insulation [2] and this is what will be done if anyone lived there and in summer, sun cream is needed on exposed parts [3] but these can all be dealt with and with time, technology advances. The Earth can possibly support 9 billion people, what's also worth mentioning is that the UN states that the median age will be about 50 by 2300, from 26 [4] when the statement was made, this is a natural rise in human lifespan, which doesn't show a drastic increase, it's also a long time away so things can change and anti-ageing drugs may well just speed up the process, triggering a cultural shift. In many countries, there are properties that are left empty, which could be used as housing but aren't always available for social housing as councils have to ask for unused homes to be rented out [5], so the problem isn't housing or space in some countries, overpopulation is an issue on a national scale for some countries but not an international issue. HARDER JOB OPPORTUNITIES 50 billion social networking jobs would be making an assumption that the population is far greater than it is at the moment, in fact more so than the levels the UN report suggested of 9 billion. If we say 500 companies want a social networking presence and hire 5 people each to do this, so that would be 2,500 jobs and if we make an assumption that because these aren't full time jobs and work at home and 1/3 of those are overlapping, that is still about 1,667 unique jobs, more companies mean more jobs as well. But cancer treatment still has an effect on the number of people who can look for a job; also as mentioned in my previous argument, anti-aging would reduce age related cases of cancer as well, so if it was already in circulation, this point would be irrelevant, but as it stands, cancer treatments see people living where they wouldn't otherwise. ECONOMIC DIVIDE You couldn't help everyone in any country anyway, it's just not logistically possibly, as much as many people would like to. Regardless of this, one of the problems you mentioned was AIDS but this is already on the decrease [6], other problems may also be changing. What anti-aging drugs could do however is force a cultural shift away from large families. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS The greater the shift, the less of the impact and as we progress, the shift will become greater so it will mean that it will eventually balance out in the future. As for plastics, some are biodegradable now however there are problems with these and they aren't perfect but the idea is there and it now means that it can be refined. CONCLUSION For maturity, you gave speculation and a definition, nothing to back up your claims. As for it being sold as a street drug, that is a possibility but not on the same scale as drugs like marijuana because it would be harder to access if it was only administered at a clinic and I believe it would be hard to recreate. As for the final round of this debate, I would suggest closing statements rather than new arguments but I will follow you lead. REFERENCES [1] http://www.guardian.co.uk... [2] http://www.coolantarctica.com... [3] http://www.coolantarctica.com... [4] http://www.un.org... [5] http://www.thisistamworth.co.uk... [6] http://www.un.org...