Baby boomers are notorious for feeling psychologically younger than their chronological years. Far from being content to age gracefully, they spend billions of dollars on cosmetics, drugs, supplements, surgery, and anything else that will delay the onset of "old age."

The boomers are hardly unique, of course, in their lust for eternal beauty and vitality. In the 1500s, Juan Ponce de Leon famously explored the Florida peninsula in his pursuit of the "fountain of youth."

What makes boomers different from preceding generations is that their bodies and minds are failing them just as scientists have deciphered the human genome. The revolution in genomics and proteomics is yielding extraordinary breakthroughs in the understanding of the metabolic pathways that keep the human organism functioning at peak efficiency and hold out the promise of increasing longevity.

Drugs like Viagra, Cialis, and Levitra, which provide sexual performance in a pill, are only the first wave of a coming crescendo of biotech-engineered products that promise to dial back the aging process. In July, researchers with the Salk Institute announced the discovery of a synthetic chemical, AMPK, which improved the physical stamina of laboratory mice on a treadmill by 44 percent over that of their un-doped buddies. It may take years before the drug is proven efficacious for human use, but the day is surely coming when AMPK, or some compound like it, is widely available.

THE IDEALISTIC Salk scientists regard drugs that mimic the effects of exercise as offering therapeutic potential for muscle disorders such as wasting and frailty as well as obesity and a number of metabolic disorders. They also acknowledge that the drug would have allure for endurance athletes.

But why wouldn't everyone want to take AMPK? Although many boomers have incorporated exercise into their lifestyles more passionately than previous generations have, that commitment requires a tremendous effort. Who wouldn't like to spend less time on the treadmill and more time playing Sudoku or snoozing in the hammock?

Consider: Viagra and competing pharmaceuticals aren't used only by those suffering from sexual dysfunction -- they're widely used as performance enhancers for sexually healthy males. It's human nature. If people can improve their physical endurance simply by popping an "exercise pill," they will.

Meanwhile, scientists are working on drugs to treat Alzheimer's and other forms of dementia. Such research could well lead to drugs that enhance memory, mental focus, learning and retention, even mental processing speed. While the impetus for the R&D may be to help the afflicted, if "brains in a pill" can improve mental performance generally, everyone will crave them.

Not only will baby boomers be the first age cohort to avail themselves of these age-altering drugs in large numbers, they will be the first to wrestle with the ethical implications of those drugs.

"Performance in a pill" will challenge the traditional virtues of self-restraint and self-discipline. Why not be a Cheetos-munching couch potato if a pill packs the same punch as five hours of exercise every week? Why not eat anything you want if "weight loss in a pill" can slim you down in time for beach season?

THE ISSUES get even more profound. Will the drugs of the genomic revolution create a generation of biological haves and have-nots? Assuming that the companies inventing and commercializing these drugs charge a pretty penny for them, will only the affluent be able to afford them? Will the United States become a nation of the literally strong and the weak, the quick-witted and the dim, divided by socio-economic status? Will the affluent use performance-enhancing drugs to reinforce their dominance in the competition for wealth?

Alternatively, if we as a society decide on the grounds of equality or meritocracy that the benefits of "performance in a pill" should be available to everyone, who will pay for it all? Medicare is already on the path to financial insolvency. Can society afford to pay for a whole slew of performance-enhancing drugs for 300 million Americans?

For that matter, can we afford not to? Americans compete in a global economy. While we may have moral qualms about altering the "natural" order with drugs and genetic engineering, Asian societies do not, notes Ramez Naam, author of More Than Human: Embracing the Promise of Biological Enhancement. How will we respond if the Chinese embrace drugs to give themselves a cognitive edge in the Knowledge Economy? What if the North Koreans endeavor to engineer a race of super-humans?

In his 1932 novel, Brave New World, Aldous Huxley envisioned a society that used reproductive technology and biological engineering to create social harmony devoid of the traits we consider intrinsic to being human. He set it in the year 2540. Baby boomers may match his dystopia 500 years ahead of schedule.
John Martin is president and CEO of the Southeastern Institute of Research, home of the Boomer Project. Contact him at (804) 358-8981 or jwm@sirresearch.com.