The longevity matrix
After an interesting comment from longevity researcher Aubrey de Grey on Twitter I started sketching on the following matrix (see image below).
If we look at Peter Attia then I would not say he is over pessimistic around radical longevity intervention discoveries in the near future. He is just skeptical that we will make any big discoveries in the near future (within ~2 decades) that will be both safe for us to use and on top of this also validated that they really work. The interesting thing is that another physician and great entrepreneur Peter Diamandis has a more optimistic view around this. Another interesting thing is that both Attia and Diamandis self-experiment with things like Rapamycin. This compound can be summarized as currently one of the most promising longevity interventions beyond basic lifestyle interventions.
If we now look at Andrew Steele and Aubrey de Grey, both of them have a deep scientific background and they do not self-experiment with cutting-edge interventions like Rapamycin. Aubrey is more optimistic than Andrew around that big discoveries will be made in the near future. But both are more optimistic than Peter Attia around this topic but I think Peter Diamandis is a little bit more optimistic.
The big question is who has predicted the future best. No one knows but I think the one thing that all four of these people share in common is that they all have a hope that a big discovery will be made in the near future. It’s just the likeliness if it will happen or not that differs them apart. Because Peter Attia is more skeptical, my guess is that he therefore feels the need to take the risk of self-experimenting and by that increase the odds for being alive if the big discovery is not going to come in the near future. The feeling that I have around why Andrew and Aubrey is not self-experimenting is because they see a big risk that it can backfire and lead to detrimental longevity effects.
I see a value in all of these four people’s views. They help me in challenging, questioning and balancing my own standpoint in the topic. If I would try to put my own current standpoint in the matrix then I would put it a bit above the center. I’m optimistic about future near discoveries but I also see a personal need for some cautious self-experimentation such as taking Rapamycin to increase the odds for achieving my longevity goals.
Curious question, where would you put your own standpoint in this longevity matrix?
Personally I think I have a reasonably good understanding as to the mechanisms that drive aging and am doing self-experimentation in accordance with this. So a sort of top right of your chart.
I think Multiple N=1 experimentation is a more rapid route towards getting results and that is the basis of the biohacking team entry for the Xprize.
I accept that the research to date in model organisms is helpful, but I think we need multiple interventions to hit the key two pathways that drive protein production.
I’m on the right side for sure, but fluctuate up and down with the news and my mood. I can’t believe it’s as simple as E5, but am often wrong. Can’t believe beta cyclodextrin is as good as they say and it’s mechanical and therefore this should not change. I’m concerned about the synthetic LL-37. If bacteria are continuously exposed to this will LL-37 stop working? This could kill a lot of people. A few years ago they said Roundup would work forever. It didn’t take that long for a few of the weeds to find a way around. The future is uncertain.
I likely have another 70-80 years ahead of me with my current (experimental) intervention. If neither CRISPR nor any of the other medical technologies pan out until then I guess it will take us hundreds to thousends of years to solve aging.
I’m on the right side as well. I’m not convinced we’ll solve aging, although we might extend consciousness at some point. My own theory is we all have an individual expiry date, which is dependent on genetics and physiology. That expiry date is shortened or lengthened by environment, nutrition’ illnesses or injury. I think we’re probably very close to finding ways to push our lives closer to those dates, and in fact I think some of them might be available now. It’s just impossible to test. I’m hoping that I might make it to 100 in good health. Beyond at least for now it’s sadly science fiction. Im also aware that we’re at a technological inflection point and humans aren’t very good at making sense of exponential change. It’s possible we may see that science fiction sooner than we think.
I’m optimistic on the science front in the (very) long run. I see no reason why science can’t figure out how aging works at the molecular level and halt or reverse it.
I’m pessimistic on the human behaviour front. Observing individuals of my cohort, aged 62, I see a global escalation of obesity and decreasing physical fitness.
I am now 63 and although I have been using a home exercise frame for a while I am now going to the gym with my son (30).
One interesting test is what heart rate I can maintain on the cross trainer. I think I can do better than when I was in my 40s. I was easily managing 140-150 and the peak rate was 169. This is, however, only my third visit to a gym since I stopped being a member of the UK parliament in 2015. (There is a parliamentary gym I used to attend).
I don’t think I belong on your matrix lol, or maybe I belong in all places of your matrix. I see antiaging a bit different. I happened to believe it will be impossible (for what we know at this point) to extend human life say over 130 years old. However, I am almost certain that with the help of few carefully selected supplements and/or meds, plus certain lifestyle adjustments paired with some healthy eating and certain exercises, most if not all humans can live to about 120 or even a bit longer. In summary we already know what we need to do/take to reach 120, but there is ZERO out there that makes me believe humans will live say past150.
I guess I belong in more than one place in your matrix.
BTW, for me 120 is plenty. However, what is more promising to me is the fact that I think we are at a point where we know exactly how to prevent common diseases (i.e. cancer, diabetes, dementia, CVD etc.) which means for those reaching 120 they will enjoy their long life in relatively good health.
@John_Hemming Nice work. You can improve your fitness (measured as power / speed per heart beat) by working on the low end (base training, zone 2 training, talking pace training) most of the time and a bit of high end, max heart rate work every so often. Work out a little too hard will slow your improvement, so be careful to stay at a talking pace. Your resting HR will also come down over time. Some physiological changes come quickly while others take a long time:
Quick: co2 tolerance, increased blood volume, muscle “conditioning” (getting used to being used), etc.
Long: heart remodeling, capillary growth, tendon & muscle growth, etc.
I believe HRV will also increase but measurement can be tricky.
Some weeks ago I started sketching on the “longevity matrix” and I got some great feedback on it So here is an improved second version of the matrix. I have added some more names to it as well.
To be able to add in the future even more names to it I will create a third version of this matrix with profile icons instead. Maybe also some kind of border around the profile icon if the plot is just a guess.
If there is any longevity leader who you think should be added to the matrix just write a comment or send me a direct message and I will add it to the next version.
If humans can avoid destroying all of civilization over the next 30 years, we’ll enter into one of the wildest most interesting periods in history l.
With great power comes great risk. So far we’ve managed many advancements without wiping out. Let’s see if it can continue!
would be interesting to know what you really mean by this. I tend to agree the last part of your sentence, but don’t know how we would destroy civilization though? Don’t forget humans have been in this planet for millions of years (according to science) and somehow have managed to not only survive but actually thrive. Clearly, we are way more resilient that we get credit for, so any notion that we somehow will just disappear may be a bit short sighted. We do however do a good job at screwing things up every now and then, but we still somehow manage to come back with a vengeance. So no i don’t think that civilization will end. I do however think that within 100 billion years (at some point) earth might become inhabitable or cease to exist, but it will have nothing to do with us little midgets. No matter how hard we try to convince ourselves that we are capable of destroying planets, and humanity and this and that, I think we are way too irrelevant and miniscule to be able to realize such feat.
So here is an improved second version of the matrix. I have added some more names to it as well.