Have We Reached Peak Human Life Span? (nytimes.com) 74
The oldest human on record, Jeanne Calment of France, lived to the age of 122. What are the odds that the rest of us get there, too? Not high, barring a transformative medical breakthrough, according to research published this week in the journal Nature Aging. From a report: The study looked at data on life expectancy at birth collected between 1990 and 2019 from some of the places where people typically live the longest: Australia, France, Italy, Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland. Data from the United States was also included, though the country's life expectancy is lower.
The researchers found that while average life expectancies increased during that time in all of the locations, the rates at which they rose slowed down. The one exception was Hong Kong, where life expectancy did not decelerate. The data suggests that after decades of life expectancy marching upward thanks to medical and technological advancements, humans could be closing in on the limits of what's possible for average life span. "We're basically suggesting that as long as we live now is about as long as we're going to live," said S. Jay Olshansky, a professor of epidemiology and biostatistics at the University of Illinois Chicago, who led the study. He predicted maximum life expectancy will end up around 87 years -- approximately 84 for men, and 90 for women -- an average age that several countries are already close to achieving.
The researchers found that while average life expectancies increased during that time in all of the locations, the rates at which they rose slowed down. The one exception was Hong Kong, where life expectancy did not decelerate. The data suggests that after decades of life expectancy marching upward thanks to medical and technological advancements, humans could be closing in on the limits of what's possible for average life span. "We're basically suggesting that as long as we live now is about as long as we're going to live," said S. Jay Olshansky, a professor of epidemiology and biostatistics at the University of Illinois Chicago, who led the study. He predicted maximum life expectancy will end up around 87 years -- approximately 84 for men, and 90 for women -- an average age that several countries are already close to achieving.
Re:France (Score:5, Insightful)
Japan, South Korea, and Hong Kong eat a lot of vegetables and fish in thin stock which is why they live so long.
Re:France (Score:5, Informative)
The parent and grandparent demonstrate why human life span is not increasing. Nobody knows what is a healthy diet - and this after at least 250 years of serious scientific research. Unfortunately the money for research came from those who hoped to profit from it. Thus, in the 18th and most of the 19th century the main objective was to feed workers as cheaply as possible so as to drive down wages. If they died at 40, too bad - as long as they had children.
Today diet in the West is probably significantly worse than in 19th century USA. People get too little healthy stimulation, sleep, sunshine, fresh air, exercise, clean water and red meat; and too much stress, pollution, and boring work.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
>So why was one modded to -1 and the other to +5
Because one is on the side of the slashdot groupthink and other is against it.
Re: (Score:2)
Nobody knows what is a healthy diet
That's a little too much. We do know what a healthy diet is, and that is to make sure we get all the nutrients the body needs, without overeating.
The question is whether the Mediterranean diet is better than the USDA food pyramid diet, but those are details. Either of those will be fine, but one might be a small percentage better than the other.
Today diet in the West is probably significantly worse than in 19th century USA.
No that's nonsense. They didn't know about vitamins. We are more overweight than they were, but it's better to be overweight than underweight.
Re: (Score:2)
Calorie restricted mice beg to differ.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The question is whether the Mediterranean diet is better than the USDA food pyramid diet, but those are details. Either of those will be fine, but one might be a small percentage better than the other.
How do you know there is no third alternative that is better than either? Maybe a lot better. As long as people are living unhealthily in an unhealthy environment, it's impossible to determined what foods are more or less healthy. For instance, it is possible that Vitamin C is not an essential nutrient for humans, but just an antidote to the vast amounts of over-processed grains, sugars, and seed oils that are eaten. It has repeatedly been established, beyond a shadow of doubt, that men eating only fresh fa
Re: (Score:2)
Your ideas are screwy. Whoever is feeding you information, find a better source. Don't trust those people. https://www.thenakedscientists... [thenakedscientists.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re:France (Score:5, Informative)
And as the Ignobel prize winning studied showed, the best way to have a long life is to live in a country with poor record keeping regarding birth dates. Turns out, those countries most like did NOT have longer lifespans after all.
Re: (Score:2)
Many of the records were deliberately falsified, often to avoid conscription during WW1.
Re:France (Score:4, Informative)
Also, don't forget about the widespread social security fraud occurring in many of these "long lived' countries. Either the relatives or some third parties are cashing the deceased's checks.
Re: (Score:3)
There's some evidence that Jean Calment's daughter, Yvonne, assumed Jean's identity in 1934 when Jean died. This was done to avoid some French inheritance and tax laws
They were probably not the first or last to do this.
Re: (Score:2)
She apparently forgot to assume Jean's gender too, thence the change from Jean to Jeanne.
Re: (Score:2)
And as the Ignobel prize winning studied showed, the best way to have a long life is to live in a country with poor record keeping regarding birth dates.
They showed that to be true for super-long lifespans, but not for more normal lifespans.
For example, Sweden probably does actually have longer lifespans on average than Polish people, even though the average isn't into the 90s or 100s.
Re: (Score:2)
Japan, South Korea, and Hong Kong eat a lot of vegetables and fish in thin stock which is why they live so long.
A recent study suggested that the common factor in all places with people having extraordinarily long lives is poor recordkeeping.
Re: (Score:2)
Japan, South Korea, and Hong Kong eat a lot of vegetables and fish in thin stock which is why they live so long.
A recent study suggested that the common factor in all places with people having extraordinarily long lives is poor recordkeeping.
Yes, I'm aware of that. However, you can't argue with all those 90+ year olds in Japan. Which is still further ahead than the U.S. life expectancy.
Re: (Score:2)
Japan, South Korea, and Hong Kong eat a lot of vegetables and fish in thin stock which is why they live so long.
A recent study suggested that the common factor in all places with people having extraordinarily long lives is poor recordkeeping.
Yes, I'm aware of that. However, you can't argue with all those 90+ year olds in Japan. Which is still further ahead than the U.S. life expectancy.
You most certainly can.
Re: (Score:2)
However, you can't argue with all those 90+ year olds in Japan.
You most certainly can.
Why would elderly Japanese want to fake their birth records?
Was there some event happening in the 1940s that they could avoid by appearing to be older?
Re: (Score:2)
At least for the men, was there conscription for women as well?
Re: France (Score:2)
My neighbor is in his 90's, and Caucasian. He served in the Navy during the Korean War.
He walks the neighborhood almost every day. The trick to a long life is winning the genetic lottery. Avoiding an early accidental death or easily avoidable risks, like smoking or obesity, tip you into a better statistical group as well.
He will likely remain in good health until one day an illness or accident catches up with him. Will he be around in 5 years? Maybe. In 15? Probably not. At that age avoiding pneumonia, flu,
Re: (Score:2)
If record keeping is poor, then indeed you can't argue with that 90+ year old gentleman in Japan, because maybe he's only 80 years old, but looks like shit for his age, due to an unhealthy diet.
So maybe it's poor record keeping plus looking older than actual age?
Lifestyle + family + recordkeeping, not diet (Score:3)
Japan, South Korea, and Hong Kong eat a lot of vegetables and fish in thin stock which is why they live so long.
As others have pointed out, there's little evidence that special diet makes you live abnormally long. I am a huge fan of Japanese diets, but it's not magic. Most of these "blue zone" people simply come from small villages with poor record keeping, as others have pointed out.
A lot of research says the primary reason is more that Japan and other nations give the elderly a purpose. I am a huge believer in the Kill Bill quote
"They say the number one killer of old people is retirement. People got 'em a job to do, they tend to live a little longer so they can do it."
. If your grandma just sits around her house bored all day, I don't think any he
Re: (Score:3)
I am NO FAN OF HIS, but he's old as dirt,
He's only 78. My dad is older than him and far more coherent. Not to mention my dad isn't fat.
Re: (Score:3)
He acts old (Score:2)
I am NO FAN OF HIS, but he's old as dirt,
He's only 78. My dad is older than him and far more coherent. Not to mention my dad isn't fat.
Trump is pretty senile and incoherent. Age is more than years. John Waters is the same age as Trump and I saw him in an interview last year...razor sharp...I'm not even sure he's slowed down at all. Your dad may be more like John Waters than Trump. I'm getting old...I notice some of my peers age much faster than others, both physically and cognitively.
Re: (Score:2)
a diet that should have killed him a long time ago
He has three key lifestyle characteristics that many people his age do not -
1) He doesn't drink alcohol.
2) He doesn't smoke.
3) He is a germophobe (political covid notwithstanding), so he frequently washes his hands, keeps sick people away from himself etc.
Blue zones do not exist (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
There has never been any proof that someone who lives a long time is anything special. Just the law of large numbers in practice. Places with free health care, have people more willing to go to the doctor and get proactive medical care. Which country is that? Sweden. With an 82/88 (M/F) life expectancy. The US is 74/80. YES a full 8 years less, How much of that is medical care and how much of that is gun violence, probably not taken into account. Iran and North Korea are 71/77. So the US is closer to North
Re: (Score:3)
The French are brought up by a lot of pro-saturated-fat and pro-carnivore Internet influencers as proof of their positions, but these influencers don't understand the science and, to put it bluntly, draw stupid conclusions.
It is true that the French are outliers on the relation to saturated fat consumption and cardiovascular disease, but this doesn't disprove the relationship between fat consumption and CVD. People who cite the French as disproof of the saturated fat/CVD connection want you to look at an o
90? Nah thats not peak that's a plateau (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
True, we have gotten pretty good at stopping the things that cut lives short, high blood pressure, heart disease, cancer...
We have only recently started making discoveries on a cellular level that reduce cellular degeneration, improve mitochondrial function, clear out senescent cells, etc...
These will be the discoveries that truly extend human lives, until the next step of genetic manipulation produce "humans" (Homo Sapiens Modificus?) that live spectacularly long lives and suffer from few or no ailments
The
Re: 90? Nah thats not peak that's a plateau (Score:2)
The path to extend life would be genetic modification, so it can only be done on those not yet born.
It's an interesting concept, but it would extend the retirement age too.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah probably. That's why the government got everyone to take the covid vaccine. Too many people on social security.
People were dying long before the vaccine came out. The main people hit were those with pre-existing medical conditions, the obese, the old, and the stupid. After the vaccines came out it was mainly those with pre-existing medical conditions and the [imgur.com] stupid [imgur.com] who were dying [imgur.com].
Re: (Score:3)
Why would they want to kill off republican voters?
Duplicate from yesterday (Score:3)
Rises In Life Expectancy Have Slowed Dramatically, Analysis Finds [slashdot.org]
My post in that story: https://slashdot.org/comments.... [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:3)
My mother is in her 90's, and did not do anything particularly athletic for years, even decades
She did stop smoking when her doctor told her it could be an issue, and she has recently stopped drinking since it conflicted with some medications she is on
She can't drive anymore and is starting to get issues with macular degeneration (blue eyes, desert environment), but is largely self sufficient beyond that doing her own laundry and cooking, also takes care of my sisters dogs (sister lives in attached apartmen
Re: Centennials (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
I'll let her ophthalmologist know some guy on the internet says he's wrong, it should be good for a chuckle
Re: (Score:2)
It's unlikely in this case, but retaining something in long term memory from 1, 2, 3 and 4 years ago is not a guarantee that her short term memory is also good.
Anti-aging Space Nuttery! (Score:2)
There seems to be no anti-aging nuttery like there is Space Nuttery
Why not combine the two? If you can get up to close the speed of light then from someone on Earth's point of view you can practically live forever!
Re: (Score:2)
Lol.
https://theconversation.com/th... [theconversation.com]
The life extension nuts are extra nutty. The anti- ones (the ones who use words like "nutters") are much less so. There's no particular reason we can't extend lifespans as much as we want. Once you can replace all the parts you're fine. A little bone marrow transplant with your banked or engineered cells would probably give you a nice boost, but nobody has quite had the guts and forethought to try it yet.
Re: (Score:2)
In terms of what gives the best potential for what people might consider an optimal life... I'm kind of on the fence.
I don't want to live forever, and if you really sit and have a good think about it, you won't want that either. Limits make achievements special, and it's the special things we cherish. Your brain gets bored with repeated events starts to edit them out of your memory... that's why sometimes you get to work and can't recall your commute, or why a lot of people now think 2020 was a very short
Re: (Score:2)
> at which point how is that different from a little death?
Who knows, maybe we die every night, and the morning person who inherits my memory merely believes he is me.
Re: (Score:2)
We are still extending healthy lifespan, and doing more of that is much easier than pushing back the maximum.
You may not want to live forever, but it would be nice to live (healthily) as long as you want.
Re: (Score:2)
There seems to be no anti-aging nuttery like there is Space Nuttery
Peter Thiel is one.
Re: (Score:2)
There seems to be no anti-aging nuttery
Huh? Silicon Valley is choc-a-bloc with Tech Bros obsessed with anti-aging nuttery.
https://time.com/6315607/bryan... [time.com]
Re: For all practical purposes yes (Score:1)
The expression is "chockablock". I suspect you might be Francophone. Anyway, I mean you never see people on Slashdot posting with religious fervor about how we need to extend human lifespan, in the way you regularly see nerds praise the sci-fi delusions about colonizing the Moon or "getting off this rock"...
It's weird.
Re: For all practical purposes yes (Score:2)
It's actually chock-a-block [cambridge.org], per the Cambridge English dictionary.
Re: For all practical purposes yes (Score:1)
Sure, if you skip the first three results that give you "chockablock".
Re: For all practical purposes yes (Score:2)
You could just apologise to the other person.
Re: For all practical purposes yes (Score:1)
To who for what? For being right?
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect you might be Francophone.
I'm anglo-Canadian. My username checks out.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki... [wiktionary.org]
Re: For all practical purposes yes (Score:1)
From your link, "An alteration of chockablock, perhaps influenced by bric-Ã-brac."...
Thanks for agreeing with me, that's two people now, well three with me.
"Twenty-three skidoo, yes... but which CENTURY?" (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Sure, if we continue to do nothing (Score:3)
Since ageing isn't considered a problem to solve it should not be a surprise that no progress has been made. There used to be progress in life expectancy but that was really about infant and early childhood mortality. Most children born now reach their natural lifespan. Until we actually put resources into extending lifespan it won't improve significantly.
Would you want to live that long? (Score:5, Insightful)
My dad just passed away at age 97. He was in decent shape up until age 90. He had macula degeneration in both eyes so he couldn't see much. The last several years of anyone's life are pretty dull or miserable. If you start to fall apart at 90, would you want to like 30 or more years in a degenerative state? It would be different if you could still do a lot.
Re: (Score:3)
That's the difference between life expectancy and healthy life expectancy. In the USA, the healthy life expectancy at 60 years (before COVID) was about 17 years. https://www.who.int/data/gho/d... [who.int]
Re: (Score:3)
Genetic modifications (Score:2)
We are only now getting to the point where we can reliably make genetic modifications to living people. Technologies like CRISPR have proven themselves. I wouldn't doubt that genetic researchers will start to find certain modifications that can extend human life beyond what we now think of as a "maximum."
Improving is illegal. (Score:1)
Yes but (Score:2)
Yes, but not because it couldn't theoretically be improved. Instead it's because we're not going to make it.
No. (Score:2)
A short list:
1) Genetic maintenance. (Needs more reliable CRISPER tech that can function within a living body instead of an embryo / germ cell.)
2) A desire to actually cure disease instead of profiteer from it. (The US healthcare system is a blight that keeps on killing via it's insurance company death panels. (Politically charged? Yes. Yes it is.) )
3) Proper international policy. (The forbidding of waving copyright for the COVID-19 vaccin
No, we reached the limit with this level of health (Score:1)
It's just a matter of engineering (Score:2)
If a cell, i.e. a system designed by blind evolution, can build an entire brand-new body essentially from scratch, then human technology can eventually do the same or better. There's nothing magic about how your body grew on its own. There's going to be nothing magic about how we eventually learn to repair the damage of age and rejuvenate health. It's all going to come once we've invented machines small enough and smart enough to do it. We just have to survive long enough and invest enough research and