Longevity Escape Velocity By 2036?

over 3 years ago (Edited)

Aubrey de Grey is one of the leading researchers in the field of longevity. This was a field that was basically nothing about 15 years ago has seen a massive explosion of late. Leading the push is the technology billionaires who are pouring a ton of money into the research of human longevity.

Humanity has always had an interest in immortality. Throughout our historic writings, they are parables of people finding the fountain of youth. It is an obsession with us, something we have not achieved up to this point.

The last couple hundred years saw amazing advancements due to technology. This has extended into the arena of healthcare and medicine. Will this help us to achieve immortality?

Some researchers are not focused upon that. de Grey is not seeking to make humans immortal. Instead, his goal is to eliminate disease. The one that is at the top of his list is aging.

In his view, aging should be classified as a disease, something that we approach as treatable.

Because of this outlook, de Grey feels that things are going to be radically different within the next couple of decades.

Here is a tweet he sent out:

This places a time frame and odds to what he sees for Longevity Escape Velocity.

What is Longevity Escape Velocity?

This is part of the life extension movement.

It is a hypothetical time when the life expectancy gains at a rate faster than the time passing. Most typically frame it in terms of a year. Thus, one will receive an increased life expectancy that grows as he or she ages.

This is an analogy to escape velocity, a term used in physics which deals with the gravitational force placed on a body.

Proponents of this concept believe that technology will keep advancing to the point where this is possible. The breakthroughs will continue at a rate that outpaces aging.

Ray Kurzweil is a long time advocate of this, believing we will achieve it around 2030.

de Grey's Prediction

It is important to note that de Grey's prediction amounts to basically a coin toss. He is not even saying that is when it will be, just there is a 50% chance that it will happen by that date.

Either way, for someone who is heading up fundamental research for disease eradication, it is a positive outlook.

This is something that is not receiving a great deal of attention. As we progress through this decade, and into the next, the idea of longevity could become a mainstream conversation.

We already are seeing the population around the world aging. Many of the developed countries are to the point where their population peaked and is on the way down. Japan, Germany, Italy, and, in a few years, China are in this category.

Keeping people alive longer is not necessarily a goal. Doing so only builds up the need for more nursing homes and healthcare aids. This is not what is sought.

To be able to keep people alive AND active longer, i.e. disease free, is the target. If this can be accomplished, many might sign up for it.

The question is whether it will become a reality or not? To many, it will happen, it is just a question of when. If de Grey is off by a decade, in the grand scheme, that means little. The impact will be the same on humanity.

Source

A topic like this could have enormous implications upon society. We are already seeing the impact of an aging population on society. This is causing enormous strain in many countries.

Naturally, this is happening under present conditions. While people are living longer, are they really living healthier and is their productive life years increasing? That is debatable. Sure we can help people get older but they spend the remaining years in assisted facilities, often under the influence of drugs.

We also see other questions arising. One of the biggest ones is whether those with wealth will live forever since they can afford the treatments while the rest of us are literally left to die.

This seems unlikely know the track of technology. At the start, the technology is indeed expensive appealing to only a small class of people. However, companies quickly run out of people to sell to since that pool is not wide. Also, each new generation of that technology becomes less expensive.

It is likely we see something similar here.

Another consideration is ethical. When dealing with therapies of the nature that de Grey is forecasting, what other implications are there. Can we tailor then to generate certain characteristics? If so, what is to stop "designer babies" once we have the technology for gene modification?

What will it mean for society in general? Will the power stay in charge forever? Does this mean despots, who will never die, will always terrorize their population?

Economic Implications

Japan is an example of what happens to a country when an aging population causes an imbalance.

Our present economic models depend upon people repopulating the country. Younger people are required fill the jobs that produce the goods and services. This is what allows society to function.

We also have the support structure. Employment means taxes are paid, generating revenue for governments. These are used to facilitate the care of the retirees. Since people require more social services as they age, the financial burden falls to the working class.

Growth also becomes very difficult. Japan is an economy that struggled as the population aged. This is a situation that will be mirrored in other developed nations over the years to come.

The idea of longevity creates more questions than it answers. While it might be terrific to get another few healthy decades before we die, it does present a lot of challenges to society.

What are your thoughts? Let us know in the comment section.

If you found this article informative, please give an upvote and rehive.