By Katherine Yaremko
Resveratrol, a chemical recently found to have potential promising effects for health and longevity, is in the developmental stages of being converted into a pill suitable for human use. If it passes human trials, it appears the substance will mark a major milestone in modern medicine, allowing individuals an opportunity to extend their lives, perhaps by a couple decades, and decrease the risk for developing chronic illnesses associated with aging, such as heart disease and cancer.
The implications of such a drug would mean that many in their eighties or nineties might not be confided to painful, bedridden existences during the last years of life. So far, positive results have been noted in laboratory monkeys and mice; and it appears, albeit with caution, that the chemical could improve human life as well.
Supposing the drug does pass trial runs and becomes accessible to the public, what implications would this have for our society? Scientists have discovered, through research, that the pill imitates dieting and exercise in animals and significantly improves physical performance, even in overweight cases. If these results transfer to human physiology, it could mean that individuals would no longer have to spend time at the gym or maintain strict diet regimens, or at the least, could reduce the amount of effort expelled into such efforts.
A more optimistic view of the subject might purport that with less time spent on exercise and diet plans, humanity could further devote itself to the pursuance of all of its goals and ideals.
But if such a pill was made available, would time conservation really be the main reason behind taking it? Most individuals would be happy to know they could live longer, healthier lives. And perhaps the sweetest surprise would be that this could be accomplished without a huge amount of effort. Yet it is difficult to believe that a pill could offer the benefits Resveratrol claims to, or if so, what the potential side effects might be.
Inventions and technological progress have always been concerned with making life more convenient and comfortable. Is there a point, however, at which humanity becomes too dependent upon the technology it has created for survival? Our lives are already modernized to such an extent that for many, including myself, it is almost unconceivable to imagine a society void of the digital instruments we rely on daily. While it can be argued that advancements in the medical community improve the quality of life more significantly than those in the digital community, that one’s health is more important than owning a Blackberry, for example, is the development of such a pill truly necessary? Or is its presence merely indicative of a society seeking to make life so cushy that it constantly turns to technology to alleviate its woes? Shouldn’t society and the medical community be placing greater emphasis on decreasing disease through prevention methods such as diet and exercise?
Katherine Yaremko is a sophomore political science student. You may e-mail her at