Many civilisations have myths about the elixir of life: a magical substance that can make those who drink it immortal. The first Chinese emperor, Qin Shi Huang, supposedly sent an expedition across the sea to find it. It did not find the elixir, but did discover Japan. Mediaeval Europeans believed they could create the elixir through alchemyA science used in the Middle Ages. The aim was to turn things into gold. .

Today, we have given up the search for the elixir of life. But we do have the next best thing: medicines that can prolong our lives to a point our ancestors could never have hoped for.

This week saw the arrival of a new drug that many scientists are calling a turning point in the struggle against Alzheimer's, the most common kind of dementiaA syndrome associated with memory loss and other declining brain functions. .

Alzheimer's affects the brain, especially memory. Sufferers often forget names and faces, have mood swings, and struggle to control their behaviour. Their decline is often slow and causes great distress to them and their families. The disease is always fatal.

We still have no way of stopping or reversing Alzheimer'sA disease which affects the brain and causes confusion and memory loss. once it has set in. But the new medicine, called donanemab, has been proved to slow down the process. And researchers are hopeful that it provides the key to curing the disease altogether.

For many, it is a great leap forward. But some are not so pleased. They say we have become too obsessed with trying to cure all the world's diseases.

Diseases, they say, are actually very useful things. Researchers have found that they play a vital role in our ecosystems. When a single species becomes too abundant, pathogensAn organism that causes disease to its host. reduce their number, restoring balance.

We have even used some diseases against others. A common pathogen called GB virus C has been found to slow the progression of Aids in people who are HIV-positive. Doing away with diseases would prevent this kind of research.

Some argue that disease is a great leveller. The older generation is currently the richest. The baby boomerA person born just after World War Two. There was an increase in the birth rate at the time. generation owns more than half of all the UK's wealth.¹ When they die, this wealth is redistributed to younger generations. But if we cured all diseases, older people would live much longer and hoard even more riches.

Some philosophers also believe our obsession with cures is bad for the spirit. Italian thinker Giorgio Agamben argues that modern societies have become too fixated on managing people's health. This means we focus too much on prolonging mere existence, or "bare life", and not enough on what it really means to live.

But others are not convinced. They point out that disease is very expensive. In total, the world spends $9 trillion each year on healthcare, around 11% of global GDPShort for Gross Domestic Product, the measure of all the goods and services produced inside a country..² Yet it is estimated that just $1 trillion would be needed to eliminate disease altogether.

And disease hardly redistributes wealth, they say. In reality, poor people are worse affected than rich people by diseases. Poverty makes people more likely to contract infections, and prevents them from getting treatment. Eliminating disease would create a level playing field.

Yes: Human beings have always dreamt of doing away with disease. This new miracle drug is proof there is nothing we cannot accomplish. Even immortality could be just around the corner.

No: The idea of a wonder cure is nothing but hype. We can never get rid of all the world's millions of diseases, nor should we want to. No good will come of trying to separate ourselves from our nature.

Or... We should not aim to get rid of death: human beings have to die. But we should let them do it on their own terms, instead of letting disease do it at random, and often with great suffering.