On Saturday I attended an insightful talk by Russian scientist and aging expert Alex Zhavoronkov at Birkbeck College. The talk was titled ‘Biomedical Discoveries and the Ageless Generation’.
Alex talked us through the scientific breakthroughs taking place in aging research at the moment, drawing attention to successful experiments that have significantly extended the life spans of mice and house flies. He explained that our understanding of the factors that cause aging has come a long way, and that this is one of the main reasons he is so confident that the current generation of 20-40 somethings will go on to live healthy lives until 150 years old.
Yes, you did that right – 150. A bold prediction, but one that Alex confidently believes will come true and I’d pay attention too – he’s the expert and is really at the leading edge of this research at the moment. I won’t go in to much detail about the scientific context, but you can find out more by reading the book that Alex has recently released.
What I would like to do is share a few reflections I had following the talk on a possible future in which our lives are greatly extended. I’m always a bit sceptical of technological breakthroughs and all the potential they promise to transform our lives for the better. Technology has long promised this ‘life of abundance’ in which we have lots of time for leisure and family, and we are free of suffering. If anything though, I see our lives getting more stressful – indeed in Andrew Simms’ book Cancel the Apocalypse he highlights the fact that in the UK our working weeks have actually grown since the 1980s, despite all the technological development supposedly making our lives easier. The techno-optimist perspective seemed to be the dominant one though amongst the attendees. I feel that now it is more our cultural mindset and economic system that stand in the way of this easier life, rather than the technology itself. I’m not sure we’ve made much progress in these areas over the past few decades. So like any technological development, I believe prolonged lives will solve some problems, and create others.
First reflection: Any discussion of extending quantity of life should include a discussion of quality of life. We live in a time where ‘more is better’ is a dominant philosophy. What will we do with all these extra years? What new possibilities will they enable in our lives? A couple of friends I spoke with afterwards turned their noses up at the prospect of living an extra fifty years just to spend it all working – and this is what our economy would demand.
Second reflection: As someone who is rather concerned about our current overshoot of environmental resources and the consequences this will have for the future, the idea of us living longer brings some obvious worries. Of course technology could come to our rescue, but at the moment we are using up 1.4 Earths to sustain ourselves and so far technology seems to be enabling this to worsen. Ultimately, the effects of overshoot will be felt in poorer countries first, who would not be the beneficiaries of any breakthroughs in aging science. The rich will benefit, and by living longer put more demand on resources, with the impacts of this felt first in poorer countries. My concern therefore is that breakthroughs in aging science will likely increase global inequality, which is not something I am a great fan of.
I have to say though, I love the idea of having an extra 70 healthy years. What would you do with that time?
Confessions of an expat entrepreneur 
Sep 04, 2013 @ 22:07:49
Hi Nathaniel
>I feel that now it is more our cultural mindset and economic system that stand in the way of this easier life, rather than the technology itself.
I entirely agree! That’s why I personally emphasise the need for a change of philosophy, to match our change in technological possibility.
>Any discussion of extending quantity of life should include a discussion of quality of life
Agreed again. Everyone I know who is carrying out research into enabling longer lifespans talks about “longer healthspans” alongside “longer lifespans”, and indeed, “expanding life” rather than just “extending life”.
>the idea of us living longer brings some obvious worries. Of course technology could come to our rescue, but at the moment we are using up 1.4 Earths to sustain ourselves
As you imply, the worry isn’t so much the number of people on the earth, but the rate at which everyone is consuming and polluting. With the potential improvements in harnessing solar energy, we’ll have more than enough energy available to look after a planet with 10 billion people. Arguably the planet could sustain at least 100 billion people.
That argument is made, in a well-balanced way, by Ramez Naam in his recent book “The infinite resource”. I also address it from time to time on my personal blog – see e.g. the post entitled “Achieving a 130-fold improvement in 40 years”.
Regards,
// David W.
Sep 22, 2013 @ 12:37:50
Thanks for the comments David. I’ll check out Ramez’s book and I see in your post you’ve drawn on Tim Jackson’s book, which I think is an excellent read. Anyone interested in the future and how we shape it should have solid grounding in economics, and Jackson’s book is very good in this regard.
One of the key take homes for me from Jackson’s book is that decoupling has not proved possible, despite many efforts so far. So to me this makes a clear point that technology is only one part of the solution, and moving away from a consumption growth-based economic system is another – I see these as the two most significant. So as you say, it is about philosophical changes as much as change in technological possibility. I would also add that change in our macro institutions (economics, business etc) is an important part of this process. I’m always wary when people take an isolated approach and believe that one component e.g. technology, business innovation etc will save us when in truth many systems are interacting with one another and shaping behaviour. This is where I think systems-thinking has a key role to play.
On the quality of life, I wasn’t so much getting at the longer healthspans/longer lifespans debate which does seem to be addressed well, but rather my view is that we still have a long way to go to understand how to get the best out of our 80 year lives, never mind 150 year lives! 50 years spent working in jobs many of us find unfulfilling for businesses driven by profit, so we can earn money to buy things we don’t need to impress people we don’t like. I feel we need a change in our consumerist philosophy, and also a move towards work that matters (Schumacher has been a big influence on my thinking in this regard).
Hopefully I’m not sounding like a Luddite….I’d love to live until 150! I just try and look at things through a holistic lens and see where this lengthening of life fits in with other crucial areas.
Sep 22, 2013 @ 16:46:37
Hi Nathaniel, Since we seem to be in strong agreement, I’ll just add one more thought. The best book I’ve read on “the quality of life” is : “The Happiness Hypothesis: Finding Modern Truth in Ancient Wisdom” by University of Virginia Associate Professor Jonathan Haidt. I gave a quick summary of its impact on me here: http://dw2blog.com/2008/12/28/the-best-book-i-read-in-2008/.
I’ve recommended that book to very many people over the intervening years, and no one has ever got back to me saying they were disappointed by it. On the contrary, the feedback has been warm and positive.
Sep 23, 2013 @ 15:49:43
Thanks David, I’ll endeavour to read it!
Will see you at an event soon – hoping to make the Energy of Nations one.