What is the prospect of a healthy disease-free adult breaking through the existing 122 year human age limit and going on to live to 150, 200 or 300 years by constantly follows the latest and best anti-aging program? This is a matter of speculation and speculation on this topic is what I share here. I, for one, expect to break through the limit.
First of all, let me state my opinion on the current stage of anti-aging knowledge and interventions. These are laid out in detail in my Anti-Aging Firewalls Treatise. My best guess (and it is only a guess) is, that if you are less than 80 years old, in excellent health, physical and mental condition, and seriously following the lifestyle and supplement firewalls as they are now laid out now, March 26, 2009, you will have a good shot at living to 100 years, perhaps even beyond that point. Of course time of death will be a stochastic variable depending on numerous personal and environmental factors. The effects of taking some of the supplements like resveratrol, the alpha lipoic acid–acytl-l-carnitine combination and astragaloside IV will not be known for decades and could possibly buy you a number of additional years.
Second, I believe that if you carefully follow research related to aging over the coming years and simultaneously evolve your personal anti-aging firewalls to reflect new research findings as they emerge, you will have a real possibility to go on living and transcend the 122-year age limit and keep living healthily. And, after that, you can continue to keep living healthily for perhaps hundreds of years. This assumes, of course, a context of a healthy and safe society.
Let me put this in very personal terms. My anti-aging supplement regimen is considerably more sophisticated now at age 79 than it was three years ago and I am observing anti-aging lifestyle protocols like regular exercise more rigorously. I look the same in photos taken then and now. I feel as good and have comparable physical, mental and sexual energy. I might even have a bit more hair on the top of my head, energy and mental acuity. In other words, I don’t think I have aged much during that time. But I have evolved and focused my anti-aging defenses significantly. What I know about aging, its causes and possible anti-aging interventions has grown enormously during those 3 years. How about the coming three years? I seem to be able to keep going without slowing doing what I am doing now, assuming I am not hit by a bus or killed in a car accident. But according to all indications the progress in anti-aging research in the coming 3 years should be much greater than that in the last 3 years. And it will continue to accelerate thereafter. I am talking about all the kinds of research that shed light on aging, whether that research is motivated by a desire to find a cure for cancer, AIDS or other diseases or by a desire to comprehend cell-cycle topics like apoptosis or cell-cycle arrest better or by a desire to characterize DNA methylation patterns in the human epigenome. And along with that progress I expect will be identification of ever-more sophisticated practical science-based anti-aging interventions which I will adopt as soon as they are available. That is the way it has been. That is the way it will be even more.
In fact I suggest Giuliano’s Law of Anti-Aging, a counterpart to Moore’s law that has characterized the growth in cost-effectiveness of microprocessors since the 1960s:
· Starting now, every seven years will see the emergence of practical age-extension interventions (ones that have a potential of leading to extraordinary longevity) that double the power of the interventions available at the start of the 7 year period. That is, on an average basis, the practical anti-aging interventions available at the end of a seven-year period will enable twice the number of years of life extension than did the interventions available at the start of the period. Life extension is measured in years of life expectancy beyond those actuarially predicted for a given population..
Of course, validation of this law will take many decades. Objective measurements relating anti-aging interventions to extraordinary longevity are yet to be established.
So, for example, if I assume that today’s anti-aging firewalls confer an average of only 7 years of life expectancy beyond the normal actuarial projection for me, a 79 year-old, then in 2016 I will have 14 years of additional life expectancy beyond the actuarial projection for my age at that time, 86. The 2004 actuarial table for adult males gives me 8.11 additional years now. So if I assume 7 additional years due to my anti-aging regimen I now have 15 years of life expectancy to play with, e.g I can expect to live till 94 (which I think is far too low given that my mother lived to 93 without anti-aging interventions). According to Giuliano’s law, in 2016 I will have the actuarial expectancy for that age, 5.1 years, plus a number of years due to the anti-aging interventions available then. That number will be twice the 2009 number for 79 year old or 14 years. Why still 79 instead of 86? Because I have adjusted my 2016 chronicle age downward to reflect my firewall-adjusted age which remains at 79. So my adjusted life expectancy will have gone up from 15 years to 19 years by the end of the 7 year period. By 2023 my life expectancy will have gone up to 31 years. I therefore suspect that with each additional year I manage to keep living in good health, if I keep up my anti-aging research program my probability of living another year in good health goes up instead of down despite my advancing chronicle age. If you are significantly younger than me, your odds of breaking the 122 age limit barrier are much better.