Serious Immortality/Indefinite Life Extension

[oversway]

You completely missed my point. Of course people want to live, but forever? Everyone dies at some point, maybe it's involuntary, maybe it's not, but you're just refusing to accept the truth. You're 'planning' to do something that hasn't ever come close to being done before in the history of the human race, probably in the history of the world.
Eternal life won't affect life insurance that much, people would still die from non-natural causes and I'm not sure if you're aware, but it happens alot. Eternal life also can't affect crime in any way but make it worse, you'd be giving people more incentive to commit crimes and completely invalidate the point of a life sentence. So you might as well execute them, in some cases for relatively minor things such as drug dealing.

What other points? You didn't say anything about human nature in your original post, nor did I. People will still commit atrocities, but I don't see why that would be a reason not to move forward with this technology once we have it? I never said that this technology would create the perfect human being. All you addressed are 1) some weird grandstanding about the "exploitation of nature", as if the human race hasn't been exploiting nature for the entirety of its existence, and 2) the potential practical issues, which is little more than conjecture since we have no idea what the world will look like in 40 years or whatever the timeline for this hypothetical is. All I'm saying is that if, in this hypothetical scenario, we have the technology and knowledge to alter our own DNA to reverse aging, which is something most people even now believe will never happen for all eternity, it's hardly out of the question that we would be able to simply accelerate a process of extracting resources that humans have undergone for as long as we've been around. I wouldn't call that a huge assumption; in fact, I'd call it inevitable.

So you'd just distribute this to everyone? You say it's inevitible, are you a scientist who has any experience with this subject? I understand your inability to see a bigger picture, but please elaborate.

 

[STEELDRAGON]

You completely missed my point. Of course people want to live, but forever? Everyone dies at some point, maybe it's involuntary, maybe it's not, but you're just refusing to accept the truth. You're 'planning' to do something that hasn't ever come close to being done before in the history of the human race, probably in the history of the world.
Eternal life won't affect life insurance that much, people would still die from non-natural causes and I'm not sure if you're aware, but it happens alot. Eternal life also can't affect crime in any way but make it worse, you'd be giving people more incentive to commit crimes and completely invalidate the point of a life sentence. So you might as well execute them, in some cases for relatively minor things such as drug dealing.

Why die if your loving life, have a great spouse, have a rewarding career, etc. Death is a great robber of knowledge, memories, etc. In my opinion, there is literally nothing that is positive about not existing anymore and negatively affecting/impacting your loved ones lives. Sure your physical body may be in tact in some scenarios but if your consciousness is gone then its doesn't really mean anything. Once we revive people who are currently cryopreserved we may have more insight on this. With future technology we will have mind uploading and be able to transfer consciousness so even if your primary body gets destroyed you will be up in the cloud and be able to comeback. Eventually we will get to a point where the only death will be caused by humans/cyborgs as we will have so much control over our surroundings.

I am not the only one who is planning on living forever there is a growing movement of people who are in the same boat as me. Some of the smartest people in the world are also working on it such Ray Kurzweil, Aubrey De Grey, Peter Thiel and Larry Elision. Google is now working on it with its Calico. Biological Immortality is something that has existed in nature for sometime now and we are currently figuring out how to transfer it to humans.

Life insurance would eventually fall out of fashion or have to change to adapt to the times. Crime sentences would also change to fit the times. If a person goes into a bank and steals a ton of money and gets caught instead of getting 30 years in prison they would get another punishment or their sentence would get a lot longer .

 

[oversway]

This'll be my last post here since I originally just intended to post my 2c but some people aren't capable of reading comprehension. You say reversing aging is the same thing as harvesting the planet's resouces, but the two are completely unrelated and you can offer no evidence to back up your claim. Drug dealing can carry a life sentence even today, so changing all the life sentences to executions suddenly raises many more ethical issues, especially with how contriversial the death penality currently is. With more people on the planet people will naturally be apprehensive about overpopulation, so they might use this as justification for murder or worse. It's not like there's no precedent for this, it's happened before, multiple times.

Why die if your loving life, have a great spouse, have a rewarding career, etc. Death is a great robber of knowledge, memories, etc. In my opinion, there is literally nothing that is positive about not existing anymore and negatively affecting/impacting your loved ones lives. Sure your physical body may be in tact in some scenarios but if your consciousness is gone then its doesn't really mean anything. Once we revive people who are currently cryopreserved we may have more insight on this. With future technology we will have mind uploading and be able to transfer consciousness so even if your primary body gets destroyed you will be up in the cloud and be able to comeback. Eventually we will get to a point where the only death will be caused by humans/cyborgs as we will have so much control over our surroundings.

I am not the only one who is planning on living forever there is a growing movement of people who are in the same boat as me. Some of the smartest people in the world are also working on it such Ray Kurzweil, Aubrey De Grey, Peter Thiel and Larry Elision. Google is now working on it with its Calico. Biological Immortality is something that has existed in nature for sometime now and we are currently figuring out how to transfer it to humans.

Life insurance would eventually fall out of fashion or have to change to adapt to the times. Crime sentences would also change to fit the times. If a person goes into a bank and steals a ton of money and gets caught instead of getting 30 years in prison they would get another punishment or their sentence would get a lot longer .

Unless you're actively researching this issue, planning to live forever with no knowledge of how developements in this field are proceeding is atrociously close-minded.

 

[STEELDRAGON]

Unless you're actively researching this issue, planning to live forever with no knowledge of how developements in this field are proceeding is atrociously close-minded.

I have been interested in immortality/living forever since I was very young around 2 and half years old back in 1994. Of course back then I didn't understand what exactly it was. I began researching technology/regiments/etc. later on when I hit my teens. I have been keeping track of the worlds oldest people since around 2006, about a decade now. I got my first significant experience with death when I was almost 18, my grandfather passed at 88. Unfortunately, he wasn't aware about cryonics. I have been keeping track of technology trends and the rate of progress we are making today is astounding and its just going speed up from here.

If someone goes away for something awful like serial homicide, I'm sure the 50 years + execution would be agreeable for most people. If those that have a problem with the death penalty prevail and we abolish it, then that would potentially be problematic, but this could probably be fixed just by putting the prisoners to work in some way so that they're not an even greater leech on communities. To be honest, though, I think most people who face this dilemma would end up wanting to be executed. An eternity spent in a cell could easily be perceived as worse than death; just conjecture, though. For some 3 strikes drug dealing thing, the increased aversion to handing out the death penalty would probably end up forcing courts to give out extremely long sentences rather than life-long ones for these minor crimes (maybe in the neighborhood of 60-70 years?).

I do think in the future that the death penalty will get abolished completely. Over 100 countries have already gotten rid of it and the support against it has been growing. The cost of the death penalty is much more expensive than keeping a person in prison. That might be a different story if we are keeping people behind bars for hundreds of years. The justice system will have to adapt to the rapidly changing future. I think a normal sentence for a murderer might turn into hundreds of years behind bar without the possibility of parole. Could you imagine being in prison for a 1,000 years? That would probably drive almost everyone insane. Granted those kinds of sentences probably won't be commonplace until the justice system figures out what they want to do with immortal people which is probably won't happen till later this century.

 

[Mowtom]

I am strongly on the side of the OP, while I don't have enough information to feel comfortable saying we can abolish death in the next (insert number here) years, I do absolutely think that it is worth doing and it doesn't make sense to me that life would be meaningless otherwise. A fable that illustrates my point that I don't think anyone brought up:

http://www.nickbostrom.com/fable/dragon.html

If this is TL;DR for you, basically there is a kingdom that lives in fear of a dragon who demands thousands of sacrifices a day. A few people want to destroy the dragon but the majority has accepted it as a natural part of life. Only when people start to believe destroying the dragon is possible does time and money get thrown at the problem, and when it is eventually killed the reaction is "Oh my god so many people were eaten needlessly how could we have not done this earlier???"

 

[KM]

real life is not a dystopian fantasy novel
real life is not a dystopian fantasy novel
real life is not a dystopian fantasy novel

stop sourcing your worldviews by literalizing ayn rand and aldous huxley and then maybe we can have a serious discussion. fuck all this bullshit about humans not 'naturally' living for a hella long time - by that logic we're 'naturally' supposed to die at like 24 on average because of lack of access to vaccines and medicine and technology and life-saving procedures.

anti-aging and cell immortality are not mystical fantasy concepts. extending life and improving life are two very worthy goals, and yes, like pretty much every existing method to extend and improve lives they would absolutely be classist, at least initially. these are not new concepts. there are still many places in the world without adequate access to medical procedures and medicines that could easily increase the avg life expectancy by 5-10 years. it's shitty, yes, but to say that research into anti-aging and immortality is inherently unethical because it will be classist is to say that all medicine and procedural progress that has already occurred is unethical too.

 

[JES]

I don't know if this would be applicable in real life, but in Peter F. Hamilton's Pandora's Star, those convicted of a crime are given "Life Suspension" sentences, in which I guess they are frozen until their sentences have expired. Of course, we don't know how to revive people from being chyrogenically frozen currently, do we?

But it is funny that Peter F. Hamilton has a world similar to what you describe, where death isn't a problem, and people receive de-aging treatments. Should they go through a "body death", as long as their implants survive, they can be revived in a clone body, complete with memories up to the point of death. They can also upload memories in safe storage just in case. Long life sentences were considered as punishment, because one could wake up in a completely different world. One of the characters even wondered if he would wake up in a world where humans were still humans. Not that I know that the fear of waking up in a completely different world (or at all, should humanity be wiped out for whatever reason, and there is nobody left to revive convicts in cryosleep) would be a deterrent in real life. I know fiction doesn't always work like real life.

It is possible, however unlikely, that new punishments will be adapted from the minds of those who wrote of a future in which immortality was not only a reality, but the norm.

 

[STEELDRAGON]

I don't know if this would be applicable in real life, but in Peter F. Hamilton's Pandora's Star, those convicted of a crime are given "Life Suspension" sentences, in which I guess they are frozen until their sentences have expired. Of course, we don't know how to revive people from being chyrogenically frozen currently, do we?

But it is funny that Peter F. Hamilton has a world similar to what you describe, where death isn't a problem, and people receive de-aging treatments. Should they go through a "body death", as long as their implants survive, they can be revived in a clone body, complete with memories up to the point of death. They can also upload memories in safe storage just in case. Long life sentences were considered as punishment, because one could wake up in a completely different world. One of the characters even wondered if he would wake up in a world where humans were still humans. Not that I know that the fear of waking up in a completely different world (or at all, should humanity be wiped out for whatever reason, and there is nobody left to revive convicts in cryosleep) would be a deterrent in real life. I know fiction doesn't always work like real life.

It is possible, however unlikely, that new punishments will be adapted from the minds of those who wrote of a future in which immortality was not only a reality, but the norm.

At the current moment we dont have the technology to revive people. That is likely at least 30 years from now probably more like 50+ but before 2100. Frogs are are able to get frozen and when it warms back up continue there lives. We have been able to freeze organs and human embryos and bring them back to a functional state. Waterbears have been frozen for 30 years and once defrosted successfully reproduced. We had a breakthrough in cryopreservation this and showed that a rabbit brain was thoroughly preserved.

I dont really see how that kind of sentence would be a deterrent to crime. Lets say you got sentenced a 100 years in cryopreservation. You wouldnt be aware of anything so it wouldnt be too much different than being in a coma or even sleeping.

 

[Martin]

I dont really see how that kind of sentence would be a deterrent to crime. Lets say you got sentenced a 100 years in cryopreservation. You wouldnt be aware of anything so it wouldnt be too much different than being in a coma or even sleeping.

I think it's less about the impact of the actual preservation and more about the impact of waking up in a completely unfamiliar world. Like, for a small sentence of >10 years then yeah it would hardly be like punishment 'cause the world likely be mostly the same as it was when you went in barring some technological developments and maybe a friend or relative who's died of illness or crime if you get unlucky (assuming everyone has access to this theoretical life extension technology), but if you were cryogenically frozen for a long sentence such as 100 years or maybe even 500 years then you would be waking up in a world which is dramatically different from the one which you were frozen in. This would be punishment enough in itself because everything would be completely unfamiliar to you, everyone who you know will likely not be there to greet you--hell, you can only physically know 150-500 people at any given time so they could have even forgotten about you all together--and a whole host of other things to deal with such as potential overpopulation, (potentially nuclear) wars that you slept through/wake up during etc.

Of course this then brings up ethical issues such as whether it is morally right to let someone revive hundreds of years later as opposed to punishing them by death, depending on the dynamics of a world with infinite life extension, and I think that this will always be the issue with a solution like that.

 

[JES]

I think it's less about the impact of the actual preservation and more about the impact of waking up in a completely unfamiliar world. Like, for a small sentence of >10 years then yeah it would hardly be like punishment 'cause the world likely be mostly the same as it was when you went in barring some technological developments and maybe a friend or relative who's died of illness or crime if you get unlucky (assuming everyone has access to this theoretical life extension technology), but if you were cryogenically frozen for a long sentence such as 100 years or maybe even 500 years then you would be waking up in a world which is dramatically different from the one which you were frozen in. This would be punishment enough in itself because everything would be completely unfamiliar to you, everyone who you know will likely not be there to greet you--hell, you can only physically know 150-500 people at any given time so they could have even forgotten about you all together--and a whole host of other things to deal with such as potential overpopulation, (potentially nuclear) wars that you slept through/wake up during etc.

Of course this then brings up ethical issues such as whether it is morally right to let someone revive hundreds of years later as opposed to punishing them by death, depending on the dynamics of a world with infinite life extension, and I think that this will always be the issue with a solution like that.

That is exactly the reasoning behind the Life Suspension, as explained somewhere in the novel "Judas Unchained".

Though honestly, thinking about it, it could fall under the category of "cruel and unusual punishment", which is prohibited under the U.S. Constitution. Proponents would have a very difficult time selling it even if it were possible.

 

[JesusGod]

Now, this is an interesting topic. Initial reaction for me is, existence is for pussies anyways. On that, what is the point of existence, if non-existence ceases to be as reasonable of a threat? If we could live for as long as we can recieve de-aging treatments, why should anyone do anything remotely productive, or anything for the rest of the species, your biological imperative is literally nullified the moment you have access to immortality. You would have no need to pass on your genetic material to spawn, because your genetic material exists indefinitely within yourself. Now, what I would theorize would happen if immortality were to exist, and be possibly distributed amongst the population, we would have no need to progress any further as a species. Death has become beaten, the only constant in the universe is null to you.

Humanity, as a conglomerate, really wouldn't exist anymore. The only use humans would have of each other is really just the doctor who keeps you young. But if those treatments came to the point where one just administered it to themselves, then nobody would truly need someone else. Everyone would be capable of being a purely solitary being. But humans don't like being solitary. So naturally groups would form, but these groups wouldn't need to be very large, or anything like a governing body. These groups would just essentially be little tribes of immortals, infinitely contemplating or whatever you do waiting for 5 billion years to pass when the Sun dies.

So in short, I think that immortality just leads to anarcho-tribalism lol.

 

[Mova]

If people can remain immortal by age due to de-aging factors, would it still be possible for someone to be killed by another? I'm not saying it's a good thing, but I am suggesting a hypothetical scenario.

 

[STEELDRAGON]

That is exactly the reasoning behind the Life Suspension, as explained somewhere in the novel "Judas Unchained".

Though honestly, thinking about it, it could fall under the category of "cruel and unusual punishment", which is prohibited under the U.S. Constitution. Proponents would have a very difficult time selling it even if it were possible.

Under current law a person have to be legally dead for the person to be cryopreserved. Also keep in mind that legal death and complete brain death are different thing. So it would have to involving killing the person via lethal injection or some other means. I dont think people would allow this to happen though. A more human way would be to be them in a induced coma for the sentence but I still dont think that would because it would be very expensive compared to just keeping them in prison.


As times goes on it is still possible for a person to get murdered but the farther in the future we go the blurrier it gets as we have mind uploads and a whole lot of other technologies out there that will conplicate that question.

 

[STEELDRAGON]

As far as technology has come, and it has come far, it won't ever reach the point where it is able to circumvent death. Death is a part of life, one that you have to accept, whether you want to or not. It's good that that you're optimistic about being immortal, but there is a fine line between an optimist and a realist, don't cross-contaminate the two. We'll all eventually die, the question just is, when? Perhaps instead of devising methods of how you're going to live forever, you should focus on expanding your horizons and spend whatever time you may have left doing something that you enjoy. As the saying goes, don't count the days, make the days count.

Please do yourself a favor, and don't delude yourself into thinking you can flee from the inevitable. Thinking about immortality is a cool fantasy and all that, but at the end of the day, it's just that, a fantasy, one which won't ever come to fruition.

I agree with some of what you said like everyone should every day we should make the most of it so we can make the world a better place.

Death is not inevitable, it is just another challenge for humanity to overcome. We are fortunate of being alive and well when we overcome it. We are among the first generation of people who have a choice of having to die or not. I am a optimist, I am also a realist to. I can't ever say that I have lived forever because that would imply that I came before everything else, I think indefinite life extension/immortality. People for thousands of years have rationalized death through the idea of relgion and that their is a afterlife/reincarnation/etc but there is no evidence of that and it appears it will be very difficult to prove. People now are beginning to realize that they have a choice instead of relying on giving in and saying yeah theres nothing I can do about it.

 

[Taistelu]

What bugs me about your points STEELDRAGON is that your taking immortality to be a fact. You assume that we will have it but its horribly naive to think it will definitely happen, let alone entertaining the possibility.

We are among the first generation of people who have a choice of having to die or not. I am a optimist, I am also a realist to.

I personally plan on living forever

Most of my generation will have the choice to live indefinitely as 25 year old or whatever age they chose,.

death will be obliterated in the near future

To me it sounds like you're struggling to accept that you are going to die one day. You will probably die. You yourself said that you're plan to live on a theoretical non existant technology. There are so many factors that could halt the development of such technology. It would be foolish to plan around a non existant technology.

 

[STEELDRAGON]

What bugs me about your points STEELDRAGON is that your taking immortality to be a fact. You assume that we will have it but its horribly naive to think it will definitely happen, let alone entertaining the possibility.





To me it sounds like you're struggling to accept that you are going to die one day. You will probably die. You yourself said that you're plan to live on a theoretical non existant technology. There are so many factors that could halt the development of such technology. It would be foolish to plan around a non existant technology.

Indefinite life extension/biological immortality will happen its just a matter of time and its a lot sooner than many people realize.

Many of the technologies I have talked about already exist but there are in the beggining stages right now and will progress exponentially. One such thing is nanobots.

A study just came out earlier this month and their results we have already reached our maxium life span with a average of about 115 years, and that even outliers won't get past 125. I agree with study as I have been tracking the worlds oldest people for over 10 years. What I want people to realize though is that it doesn't factor in future advancements that will truly revolutionize how we look at society.

Yeah there are a lot of things that could halt the rate of growth like a depression. I am only 24 though and I have upto a century to expect to live if all progress stopped today. My life expectancy is around another 50 years but that based on people who are just living there life and not concerned with living as long as possible. There is always cryonics so there is very good chance. A lot people easily reach there 90s and beyond it is among the fastest growing populations. Centenarians numbers are doubling in short periods of time. You largely have great control over your health. Heart disease which is the top killer is largely dependent on lifestyle and diet as is Cancer. If you dont have any risk factors for it then you only have like a 5% of having of it by age 95. Heart disease is also reversible as proven by Dr. Dean ornish.

Sure they are things like car accidents and natural disasters but you can reduce the likelyhood of those. For example the leading cause of death for people my age are Car Accidents and I have made a effort not to own a car at 24 when most of my friends got their cars at 15 or 16.

I will never accept death and if you ask most peoole if they wanted to die almost all of them would say no. I don't find anything positive comes from death and it negatively affects other people and it can be costly.

 

[Taistelu]

Indefinite life extension/biological immortality will happen its just a matter of time and its a lot sooner than many people realize.

Many of the technologies I have talked about already exist but there are in the beggining stages right now and will progress exponentially. One such thing is nanobots.

A study just came out earlier this month and their results we have already reached our maxium life span with a average of about 115 years, and that even outliers won't get past 125. I agree with study as I have been tracking the worlds oldest people for over 10 years. What I want people to realize though is that it doesn't factor in future advancements that will truly revolutionize how we look at society.

Yeah there are a lot of things that could halt the rate of growth like a depression. I am only 24 though and I have upto a century to expect to live if all progress stopped today. My life expectancy is around another 50 years but that based on people who are just living there life and not concerned with living as long as possible. There is always cryonics so there is very good chance. A lot people easily reach there 90s and beyond it is among the fastest growing populations. Centenarians numbers are doubling in short periods of time. You largely have great control over your health. Heart disease which is the top killer is largely dependent on lifestyle and diet as is Cancer. If you dont have any risk factors for it then you only have like a 5% of having of it by age 95. Heart disease is also reversible as proven by Dr. Dean ornish.

Sure they are things like car accidents and natural disasters but you can reduce the likelyhood of those. For example the leading cause of death for people my age are Car Accidents and I have made a effort not to own a car at 24 when most of my friends got their cars at 15 or 16.

I will never accept death and if you ask most peoole if they wanted to die almost all of them would say no. I don't find anything positive comes from death and it negatively affects other people and it can be costly.

"Indefinite life extension/biological immortality will happen" THIS IS NOT A CERTAINTY. YOU ARE NOT A PSYCHIC. YOU CAN NOT SEE THE FUTURE. NOTHING IS CERTAIN.

Think I read that study but idr where, life will probably be extended, yes, but immortality seems foolish. You can expect X technology to come around, but you cannot guarantee it. Accepting death is hard, but its a natural part of life. I wouldn't really take an issue with your points if you acknowledged there is a very real chance that immortality may not happen within your life time/at all (and more than just throwing around the word "expect" a few times. Also, death cannot be eradicated. Say what you will about immortality, but we're never going to wipe out death. Accidents, disasters, disease, shortages and war seem like the major cause now but even if immortality and your nano-bot technology comes into play, how can we guarantee that they themselves won't bring in new issues. They could be hacked, for example. A lot of things simply can't keep up with hacking, look at Pacemakers, a lot of these are really easy to hack as has been demonstrated a few times.

Whatever technology comes around for immortality to become a thing (if it happens) will most likely bring a new set of issues with regards to death and old ones most likely won't stop anytime soon (do you see a time where there are no wars at all and no prospect of a war?). (Also I'm terrible at these sorts of posts)

 

[Ortheore]

I can't prove there aren't fairies living in my garden, but that doesn't mean I can't say with certainty that they aren't there. Although that example is a tad extreme, the principle applies here. There are sooo many indications that aging is something we'll be able to treat that it's hard not to see it becoming a reality. Like, the odds of it not being done are miniscule. As I see it the whole "you can't be certain" thing is largely semantics that hinges on the definition of certainty and comes pretty close to wandering into a discussion on the limits of human knowledge which is a pretty big tangent.

 

[STEELDRAGON]

"Indefinite life extension/biological immortality will happen" THIS IS NOT A CERTAINTY. YOU ARE NOT A PSYCHIC. YOU CAN NOT SEE THE FUTURE. NOTHING IS CERTAIN.

Think I read that study but idr where, life will probably be extended, yes, but immortality seems foolish. You can expect X technology to come around, but you cannot guarantee it. Accepting death is hard, but its a natural part of life. I wouldn't really take an issue with your points if you acknowledged there is a very real chance that immortality may not happen within your life time/at all (and more than just throwing around the word "expect" a few times. Also, death cannot be eradicated. Say what you will about immortality, but we're never going to wipe out death. Accidents, disasters, disease, shortages and war seem like the major cause now but even if immortality and your nano-bot technology comes into play, how can we guarantee that they themselves won't bring in new issues. They could be hacked, for example. A lot of things simply can't keep up with hacking, look at Pacemakers, a lot of these are really easy to hack as has been demonstrated a few times.

Whatever technology comes around for immortality to become a thing (if it happens) will most likely bring a new set of issues with regards to death and old ones most likely won't stop anytime soon (do you see a time where there are no wars at all and no prospect of a war?). (Also I'm terrible at these sorts of posts)

Okay I would say there is just under a infinite percent chance of it occuring in the longterm and a 99% by 2100. You could also death isnt certain either. In the far future I believe we will have godlike capabilities and we will pretty much be able to do/create anything. Around mid century we will go way beyond our own human intelligence with machines and be augmenting our brains to be smarter. There is not a very real chance that immortality will not exist by the end of the century as the rate of exponential growth will mean that we will make more progress this century in the last 1,000 years. The chances of it not existing very low. I dont know if you can guarantee anything. By that logic there is a chance that aliens could colonize earth today. There is a chance for pretty much anything to happen but is it likely definitely not. The alien scenario is probably something like 1 in trillions or even longer odds.

There are a lot of other things to that are natural but we definitely dont accept them. Its natural for some people to die within a very short period of being born because of a disease/malformation but when we have to option to save them we do. We as humans dont accept limitations when some one says that will never do something or thats impossible we will eventually prove everytime.

All causes of death will be elimated in the far future. That includes accidents etc it will just take longer for us to get rid of them or they will happen once a century. I expect the amount of human deaths to be increasing for at least til 2050 because of the aging babyboomers and population increase. There will be a point in time we will be cutting that number drastically. The proportion of people dieing from human causes like war or sucide will go way up and dominate the statistics. We will first elimate deaths, from aging/disease, then accidents, etc.

I agree with some of your last points that technology is a double-edged sword and that there will be new sets of issues. One of the first technologies we employed was fire it can help you cook things but if you arent careful it has the potential to incinerate a whole city.