Implausibility of life extension in humans in the twenty-first century
nature.com
nature.com
Substantively;
unless the processes of biological aging can be markedly slowed, radical human life extension is implausible in this century.
This paper is fantastic science, but the title/conclusion is just lazy rhetoric. “If we don’t get a breakthrough, we won’t have a breakthrough” is just tautological, and high-resolution recent trend analysis is not a meaningful tool for answering that question, anyway.Even if we figure out how to do the latter, it doesn’t help folks who have already had most of their heart beats. It’s not actually life extension.
And what is life like lived at half speed? Let’s say we can get people to 200 by keeping them immobile and cold and nearly starving them of calories and oxygen—dramatically suppressing their metabolism. Who would want that?
I can imagine quite a few people. Maybe they are already in pain or have mobility issues. At that point why not say "yeah just feed me painkillers and keep me half-frozen. i can do everything in VR/online"? It's better than hospice.