Whereas talk of anti aging medicine would have constituted the stuff of science fiction even a few short years ago, it is now a topic that is most assuredly on the table. It is an issue that is rife with conflict, with people on both sides arguing either for or against the moral efficacy of taking such drugs. There are also social and political implications inherent in the discussion. It is no surprise that an issue such as this, with the individual human life at its very core, should spark such controversy and heated debate. Academics, lobbyists, politicians, and average citizens line up on all sides of the debate, with some arguing that to extend the human life is to degrade or dehumanize that life, while others contend that the extension of life, where possible, constitutes a moral imperative. There are many more points of view that fall somewhere in between, into the gray area into which opinions, convictions, and moral, social, and political leanings are tossed for public debate. The questions that are inherent to this debate go far beyond whether or not it is morally justifiable (and this is highly subjective terrain) to artificially extend the human life. They also include how this type of decision would impact future generations and society as a whole. Before taking up a position on one side or the other it is important to at least have a working knowledge of what efforts have been made to date in the arena of combating both physical and mental deterioration.