technology

Has the First 200-Year-Old Already Been Born?

Newcastle University
University of Illinois at Chicago
Genesis
Response
Penultimate
Finale

S. Jay Olshansky

University of Illinois at Chicago

January 14th, 2021
Twenty-one years ago, Steven Austad and I initiated a wager — would anyone alive in the year 2000 still be alive in the year 2150. I said no; Steven said yes. This wager made its way through aging circles and subsequently led to the launch of Longbets. Neither Steven nor I will be alive in 2150 to collect the $1 billion winnings. We will both be long gone, and we know it.
Why are we certain we won’t be alive in 2150? The answer is simple. Living things like mice, dogs, fruit flies, sharks, elephants, and yes, humans, exhibit unique but highly consistent patterns of death that map perfectly with age. I call this a “species-specific mortality signature”. These signatures do not change, even when the age-specific risk of death declines across time, as is the case with humans.
The 'signature' is a byproduct of fixed genetic programs for growth, development, and reproduction that evolved under the direct force of natural selection; and these genetic programs, in turn, are byproducts of the level of hostility in the environment when each species arose. As Dr. Kirkwood noted, aging and death cannot be programmed into our genome because such programs would be exhibited in age windows late in life when the force of selection is at or near zero. Aging and death are therefore inadvertent byproducts of fixed genetic programs that exist for another purpose — reproduction.
The disposable soma theory of senescence devised by Dr. Kirkwood explains why it would be a waste of energy to favor immortality — or a 200-year lifespan for humans — so lifespans are inherently limited. Steven Austad, Tom Kirkwood, and I all know this.
Under current conditions, the answer to the question raised here is a definitive no!
The only pinpoint of light that makes a 200-year lifespan remotely possible is the absence of aging and death programs. This means aging is inherently modifiable; it has already been experimentally modified in other species; and there is reason to expect aging will eventually be slowed in humans.
The problem with speculation that someone alive today will live to 200 is that the number itself is made up — we might as well be contemplating lifespans of 1,000 years, 5,000 years, or immortality for that matter. Even if an aging intervention was developed, there would be no scientific way to verify its effect on maximum or average lifespan in humans. This would require an experiment that would take longer than the lifespan of those doing the research.
In short, there is no historical or current mortality record suggesting 200 is plausible; there are no medical or other interventions available today documented to dramatically extend maximum lifespan by multiple decades; there is no biological basis for concluding a 200-year lifespan is even conceivable; and most importantly, there is no empirical way of testing the hypothesis that an aging intervention — even if developed — would yield a maximum lifespan of 200.
3 Comments
I am 599 and turning 600 tomorrow.
Jan 20
(Edited)
I did it. I might die soon, My name is June, and I turned 200 yesterday. Thank you, Lord, for letting me do it. Also, May I rest in peace when I die.
I’ll probably be the one to do it…