A world in which anti-aging technology exists is strictly superior to a world in which anti-aging technology does not exist, regardless of who has access to it.
Of course, universal access is far better, and we should keep that in mind, but if it takes profit-motivated corporations to bring the technology into existence in the first place, then so be it.
Serious question: what makes such a world inherently better if that's limited only to people in the position to exploit others? Because I personally think that's the likely scenario.
Giving the rich the tools to exploit the rest of us even further seems pretty foolish. Likely, even inevitable--but no less foolish.
Of course, universal access is far better, and we should keep that in mind, but if it takes profit-motivated corporations to bring the technology into existence in the first place, then so be it.