Re: Exowombs & AGING: a few billion too many

>11/2/2002 Anders Sandberg wrote:

>Men redundant? Now we don't need women either
>Scientists have developed an artificial womb that allows embryos to grow
>outside the body
>http://www.observer.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,648024,00.html

The above article opens:
<<Doctors are developing artificial wombs in which embryos can grow outside a woman's body. The work has been hailed as a breakthrough in treating the childless.>>

The article focuses specificly on infertility & the development of exowombs.Most of the replies posted so far also share this focus, but I'm not quite sure why. I think exowombs are a remarkable scientific achievement, but I wonder about some much more interesting possibilities for this technology (ie- possible applications in space colonization?) I'm not too scientifically knowledgable, so perhaps you all can help me out: Why is this fertility issue being pushed? Why does the development of this technology have to be contextualized, so limited only to the area of fertility? Is it because science can make money out of it this way? Is it all about the money? Or are scientists aware that the only way they can make any real progress with this controversial technology IS to have a market for it? Is the fertility thing just a cover, a means to an end? I'd be really interested to hear some fresh ideas from others on the list.

I guess my whole gripe with the fertility issue goes back to a global population concern. Well okay maybe it really goes back even further to a local population concern. I returned to the city where I was raised this week to visit my family. Even though I've only been in the "country" (rural NW Mass.) for 2 months, I was shell shocked when I returned to Providence. Its not that its a big city by any means - its actually very tiny (size, buildings, etc.) but there are just SO many people everywhere, its suffocating. RI is the 2nd most densely populated state in the US and also the smallest geographically (*not a good combination). I remember it being pretty bad before, which is why I left. But you don't realize or you forget how crowded it is when you live there because you simply get used to it. And its only gotten worse. Going back after 5 years, I realized that it is NOT something I want to have to "get used to."

Here's a link from a quick google that comes from the US census bureau - "Total Midyear Population for the World: 1950-2050"  http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/worldpop.html

This says the current world population is 6.2 billion. While the growth rate is projected to decrease steadily, the total population is nevertheless expected to reach 7 billion by the year 2013, 8 billion by 2028, and 9 billion by 2048. I don't know what the planet's maximum capacity is (maybe we already passed it?) but even still, to me these figures look rather... yuckie.

I don't know much about population trends but I'm really curious & (as with everything else) I have lots of questions: How do they formulate global population projections? What variables do they consider? Does this take into account the rapid progress of technology & its possible implications for humanity? For these reasons, I cannot speak to the validity of this source - I simply do not know. I haven't had time to really research this yet. So if anyone can provide some good information or statistics I would really appreciate it.

Also: