3 replies to this topic

[PaulH]

Escape velocity has been reached when each year brings more than a year's improvement in life expectancy.

1) When do you predict this will happen?

2) What therapies/technologies will be making it happen?

and going further,

3) What technologies will be required to reverse biological age, and when do you think that will happen?


I think we could hit escape velocity in less than 10 years, or by 2014 at the latest. I'm not entirely sure what therapies will make it possible, but I think some kind of genetic therapy, telomorase "activators", and regenerative medicine will be a part of it. I also suspect that such gains in longevity have limits without the infusion of nanotechnology, especially when it comes to reversing the aging process.

[ocsrazor]

Hi planetp,

1) I think 10-20 years is a legitimate time frame, we are close to having the technology, human factors are the major holdup now (for example - the current ban on embryonic stem cell creation for research in publicly supported projects).

2) Genetic therapy will likely have too many complications to be an effective short term solution and other solutions will become more attractive in the long term. As far as the literature shows now, telomerase has very little to do with human aging except in possibly the oldest old (I say human because it does have an effect on other mammals, but unfortunately not much on us). Regenerative medicine is a strong possibility though, with stem cell therapy and tissue engineering at the forefront. There is still a possibility that small molecule drugs could provide the initial extension in lifespan, especially those that mimic caloric restriction in action or those that act as general oxidation preventitives. Bioengineered systems are the ultimate solution to human aging.

3) Bioengineering - design of hybrid or wholly artificial tissues that interface seamlessly to the biological will provide both short and mid term extensions of lifespan and ultimately produce human decendants that do not age. This includes developments in material sciences, nanotechnology, complex systems research, and microelectronics. I do not think full reversal of aging in people who want to remain wholly biologically human will ever be an attractive solution. Effective stem cell therapies will go a long way towards reversing the appearance and general effects of aging, but there are some tissues which will always have a fixed lifespan if they remain wholly biological. It is going to be more economical and make better design sense to create "better than original parts" rather than trying to tweak existing systems which are not ideally suited for extended longevity. We should learn from the biology but not be slaves to it. I would say expect to see most human organ systems able to be replaced by hybrid or artifical ones in the 30-50 year time frame - the central nervous system being the most complex and therefore last system to be converted to a nonaging substrate. (once again, human factors (or the emergence of AI) could greatly slow or accelerate this predicition)

Best,
Peter

[chubtoad]

I'm not sure if the formulas used to calculate life expectancy can actually output rates of change for life expectancy greater than 1year/year. They seem to depend on death rates of various intervals of life (e.g. 50-55, 70-75). They would probably fall apart if new age intervals were continually being created as the "escape velocity" draws near.
I don't think the graph of life expectancy would be a smooth exponential curve. In fact, I would say that it will remain linear for a while except for a few discrete, dramatic jumps due to specific advances. I don't see a rate of change of life expectancy being greater than 1 for some time (maybe 100 years), but a few specific advances in fields like nanotechnology, AI, and regenerative medicine will keep us alive until then. As for reversing aging I would say nanotechnology will be
the big one in the long run, and genetics and stem cells in the short term.

[macdog]

Anybody remember the show called 1999? Or the stranded planetary colonist who get rescued in the Twilight Zone in 1987? Or the plan to have men on Mars by 1995? predicting the future, especially dates, usually says more about the present than the future. But I'll bite.

Carnosine is now shown to extend the Hayflick limit in lab trials by 20%. I'm betting that in 50 years we'll extend it 100%. So basically escape velocity has been reached already. This ties into something else I find interesting and don't understand very well called the Carter Catastrophe. The Carter Catastrophe states that statistically, humans will go extinct in no more than 200 years. His counter-intuitive reasoning is that if the human future involved hundreds of billions of people spread throughout space, that that is where you would be most likely to find yourself observing humanity from. Since you aren't, you're here and now, statistically you are already at the peak of human population, on what is called a J-curve. However, if a large number of us actually are going to survive into this distant future and observe it through life extension, then Carter is moot. Read Stephen Baxter's Manifold Time. Baxter is one of the most grim writers of speculative fiction but he makes you think, and spins a good yarn.