Radical Life Extension: It Might Only Be A Couple Decades Away Which Will Have A Huge Financial Impact
One of the hottest topics today seems to be longevity or aging. Many are interested in the research being done to bring life extension into being.
This is a subject that seems to elicit a great deal of emotion. In fact, it is probably one of the most overlooked areas of research I can think of. Many simply refuse to believe things are going to change a great deal in this area.
As humans, we tend to have a view of time that works for us. We view a "lifetime" as a period shorter than 100 years. It is a length of time we can grasp just we know few of us ever make it to that age. Instead, we look at a "lifetime" as between 75-80 years.
At the same time, we know that most people leave their careers somewhere between the ages of 60-70. This was the way it was traditionally.
Another interesting factor is we tend to think in terms of 5s and 0s. Hence we see projections that go 5 or 10 years out. Rarely do you see a 7 year plan. We also like to deal with years that end in those numbers. Hence, if I put together a forecast for 2030, it will resonate better than if I did one for 2027.
Unfortunately, if some of the leading experts are right, we are going to see major changes in our life expectancy. This is going to happen over the next few decades according to some of the big names in the industry.
This is going to have a serious impact on people financially. We find that already many are struggling in their "golden" years. The biggest problem facing most people is their years outlast their money. If we are able to extend life for most people to 100, then we see the need for financial coverage for another couple decades.
George Church is one of the leading geneticist having a lab at Harvard. His team is working on hundreds of cutting edge projects that are having varying degrees of success in the area of life extension. He was also one of the ones who worked on sequencing the original genome.
Church's work already has shown that reversal is possible in mice. This leads him to be optimistic about the prospects in humans.
The next step toward replicating this science in humans is to achieve the same results in a clinical trial using dogs that he is conducting now. The process could be perfected in humans in less than 20 years says Church. "That veterinary product might be a couple years away. And then that takes another 10 years to get through the human clinical trials."
Church might seem a bit overly optimistic. However, he is not alone in his assessment.
Aubrey de Grey is a biologist at a non-profit in California called SENS. He is one of the leading figures in longevity research, a position he held for more than a decade.
In this interview, he places the odds at 50/50 that we achieve longevity therapies that work in 17 years. In contrast, he believes there is only a 10% chance that it will be more than a century out.
Thus, most people alive today have the ability to have their lives extended, if de Grey is correct. While 17 years could exclude a lot of people, it is best to keep in mind that impacts will be made before then that could help others who are a bit older.
I apologize that I don't have the place where he said that. Nevertheless, this is a worthwhile interview.
All of this leads us to ask much different questions. For example, how is your retirement plan looking? Someone who is in his or her early 40s might want to rethink the present plan. There could be a lot of years to cover that are not yet accounted for.
Also, what opportunities are there? To start, we know wealth is best built using compounding interest. The idea of getting returns over 50 years as compared to 30 will put people in a different economic class simply because of the compounding factor.
We also need to be mindful of what industries are affected. If people are living longer AND healthier, what does that do for nursing homes? Perhaps nothing since many will end up there anyway, the entry is just delayed by a few decades. Yet we could look at industries like Big Pharma. Where are they likely to benefit? How about in home health care, a field that is getting bigger every year?
My point is that if we take a look over a period of 50 rather than 30 years, or 40 as compared to 20, we are presented with a completely different picture.
It is best to be prepared. Many will read this article and laugh it off as crazy. Perhaps it is. However, what if what these two men are saying is correct? How are you going to handle the prospect of radical life extension in only a couple decades (if it comes into being)?
There is a lot of stuff we are going to encounter in the next few decades that will blow our minds. If it penetrates into the number and quality of years we live remains to be seen. Nevertheless, it is not wise to bet against radical ideas being a part of everyday life in a couple decades.
There are a large number of people who are working hard at making the radical become reality.
If you found this article informative, please give an upvote and resteem.
To listen to the audio version of this article click on the play image.
Brought to you by @tts. If you find it useful please consider upvoting this reply.
Congratulations @taskmaster4450le! You have completed the following achievement on the Steem blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
You can view your badges on your Steem Board and compare to others on the Steem Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPTo support your work, I also upvoted your post!
Vote for @Steemitboard as a witness to get one more award and increased upvotes!