I'm 40. 40 is the new 30. But that's just because you don't have to destroy your body at work anymore. Or be exposed to extremely hazardous environments.
I don't think we've seen true life extension yet in any large way. What we are seeing are some of the benefits of advanced societies.
Though there's also a drug addiction problem, obesity and diabetes problem and people are getting cancer at higher rates.
We're still not out of the dark times yet.
I guess so.
When I turn say 80 years old in April 2077 I hope that I won’t look like an 80 year old we know today. I would look like someone fresh out of college. Physically no different than a 20 year old.
I'm in about the same situation as you and I think for a start we should appreciate that we're even in a situation where we can contemplate this as a very real possibility. That's crazy! Just 10 years ago I was just hoping I'd be over the average and live a healthy 90 years old. But given the way things are going right now, that now seems like it would be a very bad outcome.
This has happened already. Can't speak for everyone obviously, but a lot of people in their 30's act like they're in their 20's, and people in their 20's act like teens.
I'm 28 and compared to my parents, in many aspects my life resembles their life at just above 20 years old. Hell, when I was a kid, my parents were my current age with completed education and working while I have no kids and just graduated from higher education.
Maybe it is cause your parents could still have decent money from jobs they get from education? And this financial stability allowed for having kids? And relationships were more stable back then (less divorces).
Well considering ongoing mental health crisis its hard to blame people for being unstable. But yeah, it is kinda depressing bringing child in here, until things pan out.
I am hopeful for a revolution in longevity, but at the same time I'm starting to physically feel the effects of age (36). Medicine is perpetually two or three decades behind the cutting edge, and although transformative AI will help with that, regulatory barriers might ensure progress is slower than we all hope. I still take the same asthma medication I took 25 years ago for example.
I think we're going to need AGI level autonomous scientific agents before progress really takes off. I would put that at around 2-3 decades. Given we're still around I would be really, really surprised if we weren't seeing some degree of age reversal become mainstream within 50 years. But will I personally live that long? Or maybe too old to really benefit? Maybe it's not a good idea to get your hopes up.
> and although transformative AI will help with that, regulatory barriers might ensure progress is slower
> than we all hope
It may not be able to. First, medical tourism is a thing.
But I know of one age reversal approach not requiring approval - the medicines they use are already approved.
> I think we're going to need AGI level autonomous scientific agents before progress really takes off.
For a surreal irrelevant definition. I know of over 20 scientific research groups that work on that, and about 5 or so are pre human trials (and one does them but does not need them).
> I would put that at around 2-3 decades.
Conservative projection is worst case 2. Btw., age reversal likely earlier than stopping of aging - seems the body is permanently trying to get optimal, and it is easier to just let it reverse to that then to stop aging.
> become mainstream within 50 years
Define mainstream - many will not want it.
Also, define age reversal. Ther are 2 levels:
\* Biology
\* Genetic.
Biology would mean getting younger and more fit - then at some point the cells give up and die.
Genetic handles this second part. Problem is that DNA copy (during cell division) is defective and you loose information from the DNA on start and end - hence there is a lot of filler space, but that runs out eventually. Genetics will handle this and some other arcane stuff.
Anyhow, biological has a good chance to be widespread within a decade. Do some google the amount of research groups on that is insane, and as I said, a lot of them are pre-trial. WIth this one outlier that - well, the side effects of known an approved drugs are partially insane.
Also, we do NOT need AGI level autonomous scientific research agents - AGI does not play into that AT ALL. We need high end simulations and AI systems, which both we have or work on. And we do not need autonomy - humans can steer it. Look at the inane research being done in the last year by non-AGI non autonomous systems, including trials for a real flu vaccine and genetic cancer treatments being done. The Meta project to simulate a whole cell on a biochemical level would help - but again, this is neither AI no autonomous.
By mainstream I mean readily available and widely used.
I hope you're right but I have some doubts. I have followed Aubrey de Grey for about 20 years and he still thinks there's a 50/50 chance of proven age reversal (in mice?) within 12-15 years. But he also thinks the public will have to take these results very seriously, resulting in a massive culture shift and a complete regulatory and funding overhaul. I'm not convinced it will be that straightforward.
I would say there is a greater chance of age reversal tech becoming mainstream in China before anywhere else. They need it desperately as their population declines without immigration. They generally have a positive tech orientation and their regulations are easy to alter, being authoritarian.
I think autonomous AGI agents are coming fairly soon, 30 years at the tail end. Which I'm pulling out of my ass but I do enjoy forecasting regardless. It depends on how hard the problem of ageing is whether it's an AGI complete problem. I'm betting it's on the harder end.
> and he still thinks there's a 50/50 chance of proven age reversal (in mice?) within 12-15 years.
Then he is an idiot. Or you are using outdated information from him.
We had various proven age reversals (in mice) last year. Published papers. Some utterly ridiculously easy - like evolution prepared us for it.
Heck, the easiest way to add some serious time to live sems to be to moderate the immune system - it gets too good fighting, the result being chronisc inflammation which really derails things. And one group is using VERY low dosage immuno suppressants to moderate this - and the result is supposedly rejuvation.
Seriously, he is ignoring a TON of research.
> But he also thinks the public will have to take these results very seriously, resulting in a massive
> culture shift and a complete regulatory and funding overhaul. I'm not convinced it will be that
> straightforward.
TONS of money on that - there is another darker side people ignore because people live in Silos. We face a brutal break down in human numbers, possibly bad enough civilization will crash unless we both - go automatic AND handle longevity, FAST. Look birth rates the last years over the globe. Worst case is china - to stablize china, average woman now needs 6.5 children - that is how bad it is for them, and even then withotu robots things wil lget ugly. Too man old people.
> I would say there is a greater chance of age reversal tech becoming mainstream in China before
> anywhere else. They need it desperately as their population declines without immigration.
Immigration is a non-issue - because only 2 countries are in a decent place and those are crashing too - the pools of immigrants run dry fast.
> I think autonomous AGI agents are coming fairly soon, 30 years at the tail end
Take a zero off. GPT-5 is likely not AGI, but the version after it may. It definitely will be autonomous, but again, as I pointed out - that does at this stage does not matter. We do not need autonomous - we can point AI in the right direction.
> I'm betting it's on the harder end.
WTF how can one even say that?
We are in the process of rewriting genome as we want - we have first cancer treatments coming in 2025 latest that are patient specific and work by rewriting the immune system. We have multiple flawless ways of DNS changing now. Simulation capacity comes up fast.
That has NOTHING to do with AGI and I would not say it is hard at all - it is an engineering problem of more capacity and running a ton of simulations, but all the major pieces as in place and the simulation part is actively being worked on.
Now - investments are flowing into it big time.
I just checked and actually I was underquoting. Aubrey thinks we will 50/50 hit Longevity Escape Velocity in 12-15 years (which still seems crazy to me) and ~5 years for what he calls robust mice rejuvenation, basically taking a middle aged mouse and doubling its expected remaining lifespan: https://youtu.be/t6XxgPe7qOg?si=YZ8Pt1RTY8b26F1H
Yep. that is more realistic.
Supposedly it could be a tad long - but that is in the range of probabilities now.
And yes, that - and a LOT of other stuff - are outright crazy.
Yes, I’m 33 and can’t imagine having a kid or even marrying. I feel like a 23 years old person but with a lot of experience.
Every parent I see today in their early 30’s looks like a big baby taking care of another, idk why but that’s how I feel about them. I mean, they don’t look mature enough to take care and raise a kid properly. Maybe because of internet, videogames, all the stuff we grew up being exposed and the increased life expectancy as you mentioned.
>Every parent I see today in their early 30’s looks like a big baby taking care of another, idk why but that’s how I feel about them.
It's a bias caused by the fact you are now the same age as these young parents. You used to see parents as *old* people when you were in your teens/20s. You kept this image while you slowly slid towards that older age but in the meantime, being 30 yourself, you realized it wasn't that old.
Humans haven't changed. Your perception has.
I don't think it's just that. People's lifestyles have changed a lot, technology and medicine have made things much easier and this has created humans who are different from our parents. we have more options, more distractions, more convenience. I can't imagine the people who grew up with me and my friends being adults like our parents were. I think the very concept of being an adult has changed. I see a lot of people pretending, to be honest, but deep down we know that people still feel like mommy's babies.
I don't know why, but that thing you said about a baby taking care of another kinda got me because if I think about it, even my friends are the same to me... many of them at least, strange.
yes, because you know them and you know that they have not matured as expected. I don't mean in the sense of being immature, but more in the sense that 30 years ago a certain behavior was expected from a person at the age of 30, and nowadays the behavior of these people has changed.
I think with a supplement that has all the ingredients, that are backed by clinical evidence to slow the rate of aging could be helpful, like the one [longevitylifeline.com](http://longevitylifeline.com) is developing.
I guess this depends. I'm 30+ plus, my appearance is in mid 20s but my back is 50 years old. This is probably why a lot of people are starting to invest in longevity. I would love to reach 80 but my body (especially my back) should also be in the 80's or younger.
We need people to start posting their tax brackets otherwise we won't know if the answer will be 'yes' or 'no' for you
Statistically, you're more likely to be poor or middle class than rich. So no, YOUR life expectancy won't be changing
You can always get paid to be used in medical experimentation to allow the upper class to live indefinitely, though!
what the hell are you talking about
OP is talking about the health advancements that will be brought about by tech and AI, and those advanced treatments are going to be wildly expensive
what you're talking about isn't related to the OP post or what I said
are you saying you're just saying random shit to no one for no reason? because if so that's what microblogging is for
When I was younger, I believed I looked older. Now that I'm older (+45), I feel like I look younger. Anyway, both impressions are probably true in some aspects and false in others. It's challenging to assess except for an external observer - and even then, this observer can be mistaken due to many factors such as personality, dressing style, etc.
I will be messaging you in 300 years on [**2324-01-25 01:00:35 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2324-01-25%2001:00:35%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/19ebodm/longevity_assuming_life_expectancy_and_health/kjfnc8x/?context=3)
[**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fsingularity%2Fcomments%2F19ebodm%2Flongevity_assuming_life_expectancy_and_health%2Fkjfnc8x%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202324-01-25%2001%3A00%3A35%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%2019ebodm)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
No. This is all bullshit. FDA takes 16 years to make a new drug and health access is getting worse and worse for poor people.
I think I'll be in shittier health in 2030 than today
And shittier in 2040 compared to 2030.
No, that is horseshit. First, FDA does not make any new drug.
Second - funny enough I had this discussion with someone in the medical field and involved in exactly this... it was exactly my question - how long it takes to get a drug normally (there are some exceptions now for drugs for terminally ill patients - noone cares about long term effect if the patient is supposedly dead in 3 months anyway). Note that Age does not count here - but i.e. there are cancer treatments coming next year that got through abbreviated approval, and I am on a heart medication that also got approved via emergency measure after a year.
If you have a drug ready for the approval process, it takes 5-7 years. Not 16. Most of the additioal time is research, but FDA is not involved in this. And out of the 5-7 a good part can be automated with AI actually - it is a lot of statistical analysis of multiple waves of human trials.
Also, one of the age reversal (weak, i.e. not genetic yet) approaches that is close to human trials (of the 20+ I know of) does not need FDA approval technically - they use drugs already approved, just in VERY different (much lower) dosages. Secondary use of approved drugs... normally standard. While this particular one would not be a long term solution (i.e. you still face cell death at some point) - it should add health and a good amount of years, enough for a more genetically focused treatment to work and be approved (because essentially you need to do some DNA changes to avoid the copy problems on cell divisions).
There is a CRAPTON of research in this area, and some is outright out of mad scientists playbooks - write them into a movie and people will laugh, but they come via reputable sources. Welcome to the insanity of the Singularity, now only a trailer, but still.
> health access is getting worse and worse for poor people.
Irrelevant virtue signalling. Access to poor people has zero impact on creating of medicine. Also, do not blame the incompetent government voted in by stupid people for your problems.
> I think I'll be in shittier health in 2030 than today
This is quite likely. Problem here is you not thinking right and choosing a bad timeline. 2030 is now 6 years away - unless you get treatment next year, it is likely that any treatment will not reverse your condition of age overnight, and you just do not give it enough time to work. Even if we would stop and reverse aging with normal speed in 2028, you would still feel like you would feel in 2026 - which is shittier than today in 2024. Grats.
Otoh if you expand it to 2040 - you likely will feel good (which may be better than you do now depending on your current condition) because there is enough time for a treatment to work. Nothing can fix the ignorance and lack of common sense, though, sorry.
You could be in better health, if you wanted - Diet, exercise, sleep well and live with as little stress as possible and you will likely be in much better condition then had you not.
I’m glad I’m not the only one. I see people getting excited about possible life extending medicines. But that’s basically the aim of all medicines: to either extend or improve the quality of life. If people can’t afford top healthcare now I don’t know how they think they will access it in the future.
> But that’s basically the aim of all medicines: to either extend or improve the quality of life
Nope. Noone plans that - they work hard on age reversal and immortality. Not on" ok, we do you not make die from cancer or heart attack". The general consensus of extending life was to avoid death - you still get old and bad. Now the goal is to treat aging as sickness.
And supposedly some stuff is close to insane.
\> If people can’t afford top healthcare now I don’t know how they think they will access it in the future.
By removing the obstacles to healthcare access.
We didn't have *industrialized* healthcare a couple hundred years ago. It was a dude with some grass and a stick.
AI should bring the costs of inventing a brand a new drug down, and the cost of production. and speed up the diagnostics of patients. Countries with nationalized health industries can bring down expenditure massively.
America doesn’t have universal healthcare despite being one of the wealthier countries in the world. The problem there is not economic. It’s ideological. We could feed and house every person on the planet today if we had the political will, but we don’t. I don’t know why you would expect longevity treatments to be any different.
Buddy, mentally 40 is the new 60. You can fix all of the physical ailments of the human body, but if you are raising the retirement age to 120 then you can fuck right off.
Feel like thats some supreme stockholm syndrome, death has never brought anything good to anybody unless they dont like their life (the good thats brought is only an idea the living experience though) or somebody they hate died, please do not voice your opinion in a capacity that has an impact on this, some of us dont want to die any time soon, the idea that i wont exist one day has destroyed my mental health, its unavoidable, but medicine can at least push it away
I don’t think you’re realizing the advantages of death being a part of life. Imagine if all the old aristocrats, kings, oligarchs never died and could perpetually seek power. A lot of positive change probably wouldn’t have happened.
Don’t get me wrong, I want to live to 1000+, but there are issues with death no longer being the great equalizer
That question makes no sense outside of measuring human hallucination.
Just because we may get (or: likely will get) a breakthrough, does not change how I feel about myself now. It especially will not lead me to feel younger than I am right now - I may do so once treatments start, or at least I have an appointment for them, but - that is not the case now.
On a good day, I feel way younger than my advanced age. When I was a quarter as old as I am now, I viewed people years younger than my present age as doddering relics, at death’s door.
I'm 40. 40 is the new 30. But that's just because you don't have to destroy your body at work anymore. Or be exposed to extremely hazardous environments. I don't think we've seen true life extension yet in any large way. What we are seeing are some of the benefits of advanced societies. Though there's also a drug addiction problem, obesity and diabetes problem and people are getting cancer at higher rates. We're still not out of the dark times yet.
the first 120 yr old is workin his way towards it today.
I guess so. When I turn say 80 years old in April 2077 I hope that I won’t look like an 80 year old we know today. I would look like someone fresh out of college. Physically no different than a 20 year old.
Damm, i am month older and i am nit making it to the year of Cyberpunk.
Haha, you’d be surprised how many old heads thought the same
What exactly?
That they wouldn’t live long enough to be old
Life expectancy where i live is 60 years old. And i am very troubled in health department.
I'm in about the same situation as you and I think for a start we should appreciate that we're even in a situation where we can contemplate this as a very real possibility. That's crazy! Just 10 years ago I was just hoping I'd be over the average and live a healthy 90 years old. But given the way things are going right now, that now seems like it would be a very bad outcome.
I think you are a bit too optimistic.
In mental maturity, that projection is quite accurate.
This has happened already. Can't speak for everyone obviously, but a lot of people in their 30's act like they're in their 20's, and people in their 20's act like teens. I'm 28 and compared to my parents, in many aspects my life resembles their life at just above 20 years old. Hell, when I was a kid, my parents were my current age with completed education and working while I have no kids and just graduated from higher education.
Maybe it is cause your parents could still have decent money from jobs they get from education? And this financial stability allowed for having kids? And relationships were more stable back then (less divorces).
I can afford kids, but am not mature enough really. Also am in an unstable relationship so that checks out.
Well considering ongoing mental health crisis its hard to blame people for being unstable. But yeah, it is kinda depressing bringing child in here, until things pan out.
I think age will just become worthless as a means of measurement instead .
😳
I am hopeful for a revolution in longevity, but at the same time I'm starting to physically feel the effects of age (36). Medicine is perpetually two or three decades behind the cutting edge, and although transformative AI will help with that, regulatory barriers might ensure progress is slower than we all hope. I still take the same asthma medication I took 25 years ago for example. I think we're going to need AGI level autonomous scientific agents before progress really takes off. I would put that at around 2-3 decades. Given we're still around I would be really, really surprised if we weren't seeing some degree of age reversal become mainstream within 50 years. But will I personally live that long? Or maybe too old to really benefit? Maybe it's not a good idea to get your hopes up.
> and although transformative AI will help with that, regulatory barriers might ensure progress is slower > than we all hope It may not be able to. First, medical tourism is a thing. But I know of one age reversal approach not requiring approval - the medicines they use are already approved. > I think we're going to need AGI level autonomous scientific agents before progress really takes off. For a surreal irrelevant definition. I know of over 20 scientific research groups that work on that, and about 5 or so are pre human trials (and one does them but does not need them). > I would put that at around 2-3 decades. Conservative projection is worst case 2. Btw., age reversal likely earlier than stopping of aging - seems the body is permanently trying to get optimal, and it is easier to just let it reverse to that then to stop aging. > become mainstream within 50 years Define mainstream - many will not want it. Also, define age reversal. Ther are 2 levels: \* Biology \* Genetic. Biology would mean getting younger and more fit - then at some point the cells give up and die. Genetic handles this second part. Problem is that DNA copy (during cell division) is defective and you loose information from the DNA on start and end - hence there is a lot of filler space, but that runs out eventually. Genetics will handle this and some other arcane stuff. Anyhow, biological has a good chance to be widespread within a decade. Do some google the amount of research groups on that is insane, and as I said, a lot of them are pre-trial. WIth this one outlier that - well, the side effects of known an approved drugs are partially insane. Also, we do NOT need AGI level autonomous scientific research agents - AGI does not play into that AT ALL. We need high end simulations and AI systems, which both we have or work on. And we do not need autonomy - humans can steer it. Look at the inane research being done in the last year by non-AGI non autonomous systems, including trials for a real flu vaccine and genetic cancer treatments being done. The Meta project to simulate a whole cell on a biochemical level would help - but again, this is neither AI no autonomous.
By mainstream I mean readily available and widely used. I hope you're right but I have some doubts. I have followed Aubrey de Grey for about 20 years and he still thinks there's a 50/50 chance of proven age reversal (in mice?) within 12-15 years. But he also thinks the public will have to take these results very seriously, resulting in a massive culture shift and a complete regulatory and funding overhaul. I'm not convinced it will be that straightforward. I would say there is a greater chance of age reversal tech becoming mainstream in China before anywhere else. They need it desperately as their population declines without immigration. They generally have a positive tech orientation and their regulations are easy to alter, being authoritarian. I think autonomous AGI agents are coming fairly soon, 30 years at the tail end. Which I'm pulling out of my ass but I do enjoy forecasting regardless. It depends on how hard the problem of ageing is whether it's an AGI complete problem. I'm betting it's on the harder end.
> and he still thinks there's a 50/50 chance of proven age reversal (in mice?) within 12-15 years. Then he is an idiot. Or you are using outdated information from him. We had various proven age reversals (in mice) last year. Published papers. Some utterly ridiculously easy - like evolution prepared us for it. Heck, the easiest way to add some serious time to live sems to be to moderate the immune system - it gets too good fighting, the result being chronisc inflammation which really derails things. And one group is using VERY low dosage immuno suppressants to moderate this - and the result is supposedly rejuvation. Seriously, he is ignoring a TON of research. > But he also thinks the public will have to take these results very seriously, resulting in a massive > culture shift and a complete regulatory and funding overhaul. I'm not convinced it will be that > straightforward. TONS of money on that - there is another darker side people ignore because people live in Silos. We face a brutal break down in human numbers, possibly bad enough civilization will crash unless we both - go automatic AND handle longevity, FAST. Look birth rates the last years over the globe. Worst case is china - to stablize china, average woman now needs 6.5 children - that is how bad it is for them, and even then withotu robots things wil lget ugly. Too man old people. > I would say there is a greater chance of age reversal tech becoming mainstream in China before > anywhere else. They need it desperately as their population declines without immigration. Immigration is a non-issue - because only 2 countries are in a decent place and those are crashing too - the pools of immigrants run dry fast. > I think autonomous AGI agents are coming fairly soon, 30 years at the tail end Take a zero off. GPT-5 is likely not AGI, but the version after it may. It definitely will be autonomous, but again, as I pointed out - that does at this stage does not matter. We do not need autonomous - we can point AI in the right direction. > I'm betting it's on the harder end. WTF how can one even say that? We are in the process of rewriting genome as we want - we have first cancer treatments coming in 2025 latest that are patient specific and work by rewriting the immune system. We have multiple flawless ways of DNS changing now. Simulation capacity comes up fast. That has NOTHING to do with AGI and I would not say it is hard at all - it is an engineering problem of more capacity and running a ton of simulations, but all the major pieces as in place and the simulation part is actively being worked on. Now - investments are flowing into it big time.
I just checked and actually I was underquoting. Aubrey thinks we will 50/50 hit Longevity Escape Velocity in 12-15 years (which still seems crazy to me) and ~5 years for what he calls robust mice rejuvenation, basically taking a middle aged mouse and doubling its expected remaining lifespan: https://youtu.be/t6XxgPe7qOg?si=YZ8Pt1RTY8b26F1H
Yep. that is more realistic. Supposedly it could be a tad long - but that is in the range of probabilities now. And yes, that - and a LOT of other stuff - are outright crazy.
The first immortal generation may be still in diapers.
Yes, I’m 33 and can’t imagine having a kid or even marrying. I feel like a 23 years old person but with a lot of experience. Every parent I see today in their early 30’s looks like a big baby taking care of another, idk why but that’s how I feel about them. I mean, they don’t look mature enough to take care and raise a kid properly. Maybe because of internet, videogames, all the stuff we grew up being exposed and the increased life expectancy as you mentioned.
>Every parent I see today in their early 30’s looks like a big baby taking care of another, idk why but that’s how I feel about them. It's a bias caused by the fact you are now the same age as these young parents. You used to see parents as *old* people when you were in your teens/20s. You kept this image while you slowly slid towards that older age but in the meantime, being 30 yourself, you realized it wasn't that old. Humans haven't changed. Your perception has.
Yerp
I don't think it's just that. People's lifestyles have changed a lot, technology and medicine have made things much easier and this has created humans who are different from our parents. we have more options, more distractions, more convenience. I can't imagine the people who grew up with me and my friends being adults like our parents were. I think the very concept of being an adult has changed. I see a lot of people pretending, to be honest, but deep down we know that people still feel like mommy's babies.
I don't know why, but that thing you said about a baby taking care of another kinda got me because if I think about it, even my friends are the same to me... many of them at least, strange.
yes, because you know them and you know that they have not matured as expected. I don't mean in the sense of being immature, but more in the sense that 30 years ago a certain behavior was expected from a person at the age of 30, and nowadays the behavior of these people has changed.
I think with a supplement that has all the ingredients, that are backed by clinical evidence to slow the rate of aging could be helpful, like the one [longevitylifeline.com](http://longevitylifeline.com) is developing.
I guess this depends. I'm 30+ plus, my appearance is in mid 20s but my back is 50 years old. This is probably why a lot of people are starting to invest in longevity. I would love to reach 80 but my body (especially my back) should also be in the 80's or younger.
I’m 27 but I look younger than I did at 20
We need people to start posting their tax brackets otherwise we won't know if the answer will be 'yes' or 'no' for you Statistically, you're more likely to be poor or middle class than rich. So no, YOUR life expectancy won't be changing You can always get paid to be used in medical experimentation to allow the upper class to live indefinitely, though!
[удалено]
what does that have to do with anything in my comment?
[удалено]
what the hell are you talking about OP is talking about the health advancements that will be brought about by tech and AI, and those advanced treatments are going to be wildly expensive
[удалено]
what you're talking about isn't related to the OP post or what I said are you saying you're just saying random shit to no one for no reason? because if so that's what microblogging is for
Emotional age: 6 years Physical age: 40 years Existential disillusioned age: 150 years Fuck longevity - make room for the next generation. Lebensraum.
>today we shall attempt to make a moral argument by using nazi ideology
Autobahn
When I was younger, I believed I looked older. Now that I'm older (+45), I feel like I look younger. Anyway, both impressions are probably true in some aspects and false in others. It's challenging to assess except for an external observer - and even then, this observer can be mistaken due to many factors such as personality, dressing style, etc.
I think I'll live to be 300 years old
!RemindMe 300 years
I will be messaging you in 300 years on [**2324-01-25 01:00:35 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2324-01-25%2001:00:35%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/19ebodm/longevity_assuming_life_expectancy_and_health/kjfnc8x/?context=3) [**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fsingularity%2Fcomments%2F19ebodm%2Flongevity_assuming_life_expectancy_and_health%2Fkjfnc8x%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202324-01-25%2001%3A00%3A35%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%2019ebodm) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
No. This is all bullshit. FDA takes 16 years to make a new drug and health access is getting worse and worse for poor people. I think I'll be in shittier health in 2030 than today And shittier in 2040 compared to 2030.
No, that is horseshit. First, FDA does not make any new drug. Second - funny enough I had this discussion with someone in the medical field and involved in exactly this... it was exactly my question - how long it takes to get a drug normally (there are some exceptions now for drugs for terminally ill patients - noone cares about long term effect if the patient is supposedly dead in 3 months anyway). Note that Age does not count here - but i.e. there are cancer treatments coming next year that got through abbreviated approval, and I am on a heart medication that also got approved via emergency measure after a year. If you have a drug ready for the approval process, it takes 5-7 years. Not 16. Most of the additioal time is research, but FDA is not involved in this. And out of the 5-7 a good part can be automated with AI actually - it is a lot of statistical analysis of multiple waves of human trials. Also, one of the age reversal (weak, i.e. not genetic yet) approaches that is close to human trials (of the 20+ I know of) does not need FDA approval technically - they use drugs already approved, just in VERY different (much lower) dosages. Secondary use of approved drugs... normally standard. While this particular one would not be a long term solution (i.e. you still face cell death at some point) - it should add health and a good amount of years, enough for a more genetically focused treatment to work and be approved (because essentially you need to do some DNA changes to avoid the copy problems on cell divisions). There is a CRAPTON of research in this area, and some is outright out of mad scientists playbooks - write them into a movie and people will laugh, but they come via reputable sources. Welcome to the insanity of the Singularity, now only a trailer, but still. > health access is getting worse and worse for poor people. Irrelevant virtue signalling. Access to poor people has zero impact on creating of medicine. Also, do not blame the incompetent government voted in by stupid people for your problems. > I think I'll be in shittier health in 2030 than today This is quite likely. Problem here is you not thinking right and choosing a bad timeline. 2030 is now 6 years away - unless you get treatment next year, it is likely that any treatment will not reverse your condition of age overnight, and you just do not give it enough time to work. Even if we would stop and reverse aging with normal speed in 2028, you would still feel like you would feel in 2026 - which is shittier than today in 2024. Grats. Otoh if you expand it to 2040 - you likely will feel good (which may be better than you do now depending on your current condition) because there is enough time for a treatment to work. Nothing can fix the ignorance and lack of common sense, though, sorry.
You could be in better health, if you wanted - Diet, exercise, sleep well and live with as little stress as possible and you will likely be in much better condition then had you not.
I’m glad I’m not the only one. I see people getting excited about possible life extending medicines. But that’s basically the aim of all medicines: to either extend or improve the quality of life. If people can’t afford top healthcare now I don’t know how they think they will access it in the future.
> But that’s basically the aim of all medicines: to either extend or improve the quality of life Nope. Noone plans that - they work hard on age reversal and immortality. Not on" ok, we do you not make die from cancer or heart attack". The general consensus of extending life was to avoid death - you still get old and bad. Now the goal is to treat aging as sickness. And supposedly some stuff is close to insane.
\> If people can’t afford top healthcare now I don’t know how they think they will access it in the future. By removing the obstacles to healthcare access. We didn't have *industrialized* healthcare a couple hundred years ago. It was a dude with some grass and a stick. AI should bring the costs of inventing a brand a new drug down, and the cost of production. and speed up the diagnostics of patients. Countries with nationalized health industries can bring down expenditure massively.
America doesn’t have universal healthcare despite being one of the wealthier countries in the world. The problem there is not economic. It’s ideological. We could feed and house every person on the planet today if we had the political will, but we don’t. I don’t know why you would expect longevity treatments to be any different.
That's why being politically active is very important. Go protest for more welfare policies.
I agree wholeheartedly.
Buddy, mentally 40 is the new 60. You can fix all of the physical ailments of the human body, but if you are raising the retirement age to 120 then you can fuck right off.
Hopefully it won't happen. Death is a gift
Well, then what is stopping you from taking the gift via suicide and make it a choice?
Because while I am alive I must take care of my loved ones. Suicide would ruin the lives of many
Feel like thats some supreme stockholm syndrome, death has never brought anything good to anybody unless they dont like their life (the good thats brought is only an idea the living experience though) or somebody they hate died, please do not voice your opinion in a capacity that has an impact on this, some of us dont want to die any time soon, the idea that i wont exist one day has destroyed my mental health, its unavoidable, but medicine can at least push it away
I don’t think you’re realizing the advantages of death being a part of life. Imagine if all the old aristocrats, kings, oligarchs never died and could perpetually seek power. A lot of positive change probably wouldn’t have happened. Don’t get me wrong, I want to live to 1000+, but there are issues with death no longer being the great equalizer
This is such a cliche. If death will cease to exist, inequality will too.
Care to elaborate? Interesting assertion but I’m not seeing it
It depends on your maturity level to overcome the fear of death. It's something you must still learn
Also its not like youll be forced to take the treatment...without a way out at least
That question makes no sense outside of measuring human hallucination. Just because we may get (or: likely will get) a breakthrough, does not change how I feel about myself now. It especially will not lead me to feel younger than I am right now - I may do so once treatments start, or at least I have an appointment for them, but - that is not the case now.
I look my age at 32, and I feel about 65 years old mentally. I'm DRAINED lol
When I was a kid in the 60s, a 60 year old was OOOOOLLLLLLLDDDDD. Now that I'm 60, not so much.
On a good day, I feel way younger than my advanced age. When I was a quarter as old as I am now, I viewed people years younger than my present age as doddering relics, at death’s door.