they seem to be figuring out how to reverse aging, edit genes, treat cancer, etc.
i heard david sinclair and another immunologist doctor mention that we should try to stay alive for 5-10y more because all the current cutting edge of biology is eventually going to bear results 10 years later.
Rather not, unless funding will increase
For now, even in mice, the best we’ve got is Rapamycin and Acarbose: +30% (and even this is only in 1 strain in mice, nobody bothered to replicate this in other animals)
Robust Mouse Rejuvenation by Aubrey De Gray tested 4 “lifespan extending interventions” and he discovered that only thing that worked was Rapamycin
err thats not true…we have discovered many compounds that can extend lifespan in mice
in this forum alone, there was the t-cells treatment (DOS (Disruptors of sestrin-MAPK interactions) ) recently mentioned that did like 200% extension of mouse lifespan here: New World record lifespan achieved in mice by Rejuvenating T Cells
then david sinclair’s OSK now in human trials, having proven itself in primates and mouse models
then SB1000 or whatever genes stuff
i think in the next decade among all these, some will be applied in humans for sure.
For someone to be 150 by 2035 they would have to be 141 now. Hence the answer is no.
120-150 is a huge range in relation to human life span. 150 is essentially double the current average. Can’t see that happening.
we used to live till 40yo on average like around 1930s…
today it is 80-90
so 150 isn’t exactly that far fetched
given we just decoded the dna 20 years ago which led to all the incredbile progress in science recently
But to what age were the oldest people living and has that changed?
Also keep in mind that almost all the significant increases in average lifespan has been due to preventing young healthy people from dying, not from keeping the elderly alive longer.
Maximum lifespan iswhat it is even if no one lived that long. For example, even if the longest lived person was under 120 at death, the max lifespan would still be 120. Btw I read max lifespan is now 125 according to the WHO.
Not to be nitpicking, but the definition of maximum lifespan: the maximum chronological age achieved by the oldest validated individual within a species.
I’m hopeful for the following reasons:
Rapamycin Longevity Lab just secured a huge amount of donations to fund the second half of their mTOR inhibitor/modulator screening of 301 different molecules to be performed by Ora Biomedical.
Aubrey de Grey diligently is working at securing funding for his 2nd RMR experiment.
X Prize Healthspan has over 100 different groups working to create the greatest longevity/healthspan breakthroughs with a massive cash prize incentive. Surely at least one of these will provide a breakthrough but realistically many will and the best of these can be used combinatorially to create even greater results. This is all coming out by 2030 which is fast approaching.
Sinclair has genetic partial reprogramming being tested in humans RIGHT NOW.
And honestly there is so much more to be hopeful for.
I think the question more was are breakthroughs that will allow such an age to be reached going to be achieved by 2035. The answer is we don’t know but we’ve never been in a better position to reach it. See my above post for reasons why I think so.
It really depends on what you mean by the question you are asking. I do believe there will be many, many people alive in 2035 who will go on to live to be in the 120-150 age range later on in life.
The postponement of the most frequent age-related diseases stimulated speculations of the possibility of “dying of old age”. The selective decline of individual physiological functions-aging in spare-parts-indicates however the potential limitation of the life-span by the rapid decline of some of the vital parameters. We explored a possibility of such a limitation of maximal life-span by the age-related alteration of elastin, consisting in Ca-accumulation, lipid deposition and elastolytic degradation. The quantitative evaluation of these processes suggests an approximative upper limit for the elastic properties of the cardio-respiratory system of about 100-120 years, at least, as far as elastin is involved. This process, age-related alterations of elastic fibers, is however not the only one limiting the functional value of the cardiovascular system. Crosslinking of collagen fibers by advanced glycation end-products certainly contributes also to the age-dependent rigidification of the cardiovascular system. Therefore the answer to the initial question, can age-dependent alterations of a single matrix macromolecule be limiting such vital functions as the cardio-respiratory system-is a cautious yes, with however the caveat that other, independent mechanisms, such as the Maillard reaction, can also interfere with and limit further the functional value of such vital physiological functions.
We probably won’t be able to fix this for quite a while…