As far as life extension goes, I understand that the prevailing view here is to do the very best that we can with the existing technologies, so that when more effective methods such as gene theraphy come along we are in good enough shape to take advantage of them. This is a very sensible approach which I also share and try to follow as much as possible.
However, as someone who has followed R&D efforts of many large corporations (as a financial executive) I would also add that forecasting advances is notoriously difficult -especially in the healthcare field. Hence, I say -just for a moment- let us assume that there will be no breakthrough new technologies arriving in the next 15 years (another scenario is that such technologies will be prohibitively expensive when they debut and most of us will not be able to afford until their prices come down from the stratosphere, which could easily take 15 years from now). If we simply continue to do the best we can within our ability, how much can we actually extend our lifespan? Or how much can we slow the biological clock? I know this is a question that may be very difficult to answer quantitatively but I would still like to hear your views. Like all rational decisions in life, a cost/benefit analysis is critical in the area of nootropics and healthy living and wihout some sense of what the benefits are, a rational decision will simply be impossible.
To make the answer a bit easier let me try and better define the situation.
John and Mike 30 yr old are identical twins. John lives the typical American lifestyle. He tries not to put on too much fat but still has a spare tire around his waist. He knows fast food is bad for him but cannot resist the 99 cent deal at McDonald's a few times a week and downs a doughnut or two in the meetings at his office. He doesn't smoke and does play baseball with the kids or basketball with the guys at the backyard once in a while. He takes just a multivitamin and nothing else. His achol cosumption is not excessive and he is not dependent on alchol but likes beer and consumes it in fairly large quantities.
Mike on the other hand keeps a good weight, exercises frequently and with the right intensity. Keeps his house as pure from pollutants as possible (he has good air filters, and a chlorine filter at home), avoids inhaling too much exhaust fumes and does not drink alchol. He sleeps as much as needed, not more and not less. His diet is rich in organic fruit and low in insulin spiking foods. He takes a number of vitamins and most importantly a great deal of nootropics. His nootropic regimen consists of 10 or so compounds recommended to him by LifeMirage. Maybe he avoided a few of the nootropics that were difficult to get or too expensive but he is mostly following LifeMirage's advice.
Both John and Mike started living this way at 30 years of age and were living identical typical American lifestyles until their 30th bday (Mike continues to do the same old, whereas John has changed)
So if they continue as described above, how much longer would you expect Mike to live? Or If they do this for 20 years, how much younger -bilogically- would Mike be compared to John when both celebrate their 50th bday?
Thanks a lot all
Sub7
