Scientist's predict that future generations will be able to live well past 100 years, some people believe this is a good thing while others believe this development will bring about serious problems for the planet. Discuss both views and your opinion
The idea that humans can live beyond 100 years of age
due to
scientific advancements
has generated both enthusiasm and concern. In the following passages, I will discuss both viewpoints before presenting my own opinion.
On one hand, biotechnology is advancing at an unprecedented pace. With progress in genetic science and pharmaceuticals, healthcare providers are optimistic about the potential to extend human lifespan. This
optimism is grounded in the ability to cure diseases with newly developed medicines and advanced procedures. Moreover
, advancements
in pathology allow for the early detection of genetic diseases, enabling timely interventions that can significantly decrease mortality rates. Prolonging life
in this
way can enhance the quality of life
for many people
and provide emotional support to their families, as the loss of loved ones can lead to psychological distress. For example
, a survey conducted by Harvard Medical School found that out of 100 women tested for breast cancer, 78 were found to carry the BRCA-1 gene. Thanks to advancements
in X-ray technology, doctors were able to treat these women early, helping them live longer lives.
On the other hand
, some argue that extending human
lifespan could cause significant societal issues. Many Correct article usage
the human
people
who face terminal health conditions might endure further
physical decline if subjected to rigorous medical procedures aimed at prolonging life
. Additionally
, if people
live beyond a certain age, governments might need to provide financial support for those unable to work due to
physical limitations. This
could divert resources from other critical areas such
as infrastructure, education, and healthcare facilities, which are essential for economic growth. For instance
, in Japan, where the average lifespan is around 90 years, the government does not cover health expenses for those beyond this
age. Instead
, individuals must pay out of pocket, allowing the government to allocate funds to other important sectors.
In conclusion, my opinion is neutral as each perspective has its merits and drawbacks. While
death is inevitable, investing resources to prolong life
without meaningful outcomes may seem futile. However
, continuous advancements
in medical technology are essential as they can reduce preventable deaths and enable people
to enjoy longer, healthier lives with their families, providing essential support to their loved ones.Submitted by u.umayal92 on
Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Writing9 with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.
task achievement
Overall, the essay presents a balanced view on the topic and offers relevant examples to support its arguments. However, the conclusion can be slightly more definitive in expressing the writer's opinion. The essay provides a neutral stance but could benefit from a clearer position to strengthen the task achievement score.
coherence cohesion
Remember to consistently link ideas between the paragraphs to enhance coherence. While the transitions between viewpoints are generally smooth, incorporating more linking words and phrases can help the essay flow better.
task achievement
The essay offers strong, specific examples, such as the Harvard Medical School survey and the situation in Japan, to support its points. These examples add credibility and relevance to the arguments.
coherence cohesion
Both viewpoints are discussed thoroughly, and the essay maintains a logical structure throughout. The introduction and conclusion effectively frame the debate, making the essay more cohesive.