Science could help people live up to 100 or even 200 years. Would that be a good or bad development? Discuss both views and give your opinions

In the era of the healthcare development, life expectancy of human beings is believed to be lengthen up to 100 or more. Some people argue that greater longevity offers certain benefits, while others contend that this trend may be detrimental to society as well as individuals. Each of views have its own merit.

There are plausible reason for people in favour of longer life cycle. First, having a longer life span gives people more time to do their favourite. In other words, these people are allowed to play, study, and travel as much as they want. For example, some well-known scientist like Issac Newton or Albert Einstein might dedicate themselves and devote more invention for our life if they lived longer. Furthermore, a 200 year-old person would definitely lay better foundation for his family due to a great deal of experiences which he obtains during his life as well as serve as a locomotive for social economic development.

However, this change could be detrimental in terms of ageing population. For one thing, younger generation will be under immense pressure to provide sufficient financial support to the dependents, especially their parents. To make matter worse, cost of medication soars year by year. Moreover, with a booming number of the old people in the future, government would be under great constraint to build more hospitals, nursing homes, train more doctors, and provide more pensions.

In conclusion, while both approaches have benefits and drawbacks in our ever-changing world, I would concede that this trend is a negative development because it may result in ageing population.