No Viagra for Oldsters

First, I am completely against the Bush Prescription Drug Entitlement. But the debate over whether or not Viagra should be covered by it has revealed some interesting ideas that certain people have about older people and sex.

For example, in today's New York Times, Iowa Democratic Representative Steve King (age 55), says handing out blue pills to oldsters is "unconscionable." Virginia Democrat Jim Moran (age 60) denounces the plan as "scandalous." Bioethicist Daniel Callahan (age 75) declares: "These are essentially lifestyle drugs…In many men, impotence is simply a function of age…."

Cancer and heart disease are functions of age, too. OK, erectile dysfunction may not be life-threatening, but most people will agree that sexual intimacy is a pretty important part of their lives.

Callahan seems to be implying that old folks should just sit their rocking chairs fondly recalling their friskier younger days. He apparently believes that medicine should be restricted to managing some kind of gentle decline into senility and decrepitude.

However, modern medicine increasingly regards aging as an illness. For now physicians can treat symptoms like impotence, but research over the next couple of decades will lead to treatments aimed directly at the underlying causes of aging. In the meantime, there is nothing immoral about trying to stave off the effects of aging as long as possible so that people can maintain their mental and physical powers and enjoy longer, healthier and yes, sexier lives.