An argument for why no one should live past 75

home jumbo

[Physician Ezekiel] Emanuel vowed to refuse not only heroic medical interventions once he turned 75, but also antibiotics and vaccinations. His argument: older Americans live too long in a diminished state, raising the question of, as he put it, “whether our consumption is worth our contribution.”

Emanuel, now 62, talked with me about the social implications of longevity research and why he isn’t a fan of extending life spans.

Q: Are the anti-aging drugs in development just a bid for immortality by the back door?

A: Certainly. You listen to these people and their lingo is not “We’re just trying to get rid of problems.” Right? It’s “We want to live longer.” 

Q: You have described the “American immortal”—people interested in life extension and immortality.

A: There is this view that longevity, living forever—and if not forever, 250 or 1,000 years—is really what we ought to be aiming at. And once you’ve got cultural leaders, or opinion leaders, saying this, people glom onto it. And it feeds into a whole situation of “Yes, dying is a bad thing.”

I do fear death. But I think I fear being sort of decrepit and falling apart more.

Read full, original post: A doctor and medical ethicist argues life after 75 is not worth living

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

wuhan institute of virology main entrance
​​COVID lab leak? Making a case that the Wuhan market origins theory is wrong
Screenshot-2026-06-17-at-9.44.03-AM
Viewpoint: Embryos are becoming the newest battleground of love, loss, and legal uncertainty
Screenshot-2026-06-18-at-11.41.51-AM
Viewpoint—Protecting baloney science: Far right senators move to protect the phony homeopathy industry
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-9-2026-01_11_37-PM
Turmeric supplements: More risks than benefits
ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
Screenshot-2026-06-18-at-2.52.05-PM
Activist organization accuses Trump of protecting methane-generating stripper wells to benefit billionaire and donor Jeffrey Hildebrand 
Screenshot-2026-06-17-at-11.57.12-AM
Viewpoint: Raw milk and the myth of safety—ProPublica exposes the growing anti-homogenization movement
Screenshot-2026-06-16-at-10.02.22-PM
Viewpoint: ‘Industrial food’ primer—Challenging the dangerous delusions of the alternative food movement
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-18-2026-02_32_04-PM
Can illegal social media content be stopped before it goes viral? UK is going to try.
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-16-2026-10_01_45-AM-2
Viewpoint—Recursive self-improvement: AI leader Anthropic calls for AI slowdown
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-4-2026-03_07_27-PM
AAP v. Kennedy: While a court challenge grinds on, RFK Jr. quietly advances his anti-vaccine conspiracy agenda
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.