7:31
Humans have doubled average life expectancy over the last two centuries, but the ceiling, it hasn't budged. Our maximum you human lifespan is 15 years. This is statistics. But is that about to change? I've spent the past few months speaking to the pioneers who aren't just trying to push the limit on human lifespan. They want to eliminate it entirely. It will be a blink of an eye that we will go from we're all dead to wow. maybe not. And I even went to a longevity clinic to find out how long I might live. They told me that about 15% of people who go through this array of testing find
something that they need to do something about immediately. My father died last year, almost exactly 1 year ago, from pancreatic cancer. So, this is a very personal journey for me, and I'm feeling definitely lightheaded. So, why is it almost impossible to live past 115? And will anyone alive today be the first to escape death? And then you said, "Do you like these?" It's hard to grasp just how much Helen Glover has beaten the odds. I don't have any friend that's over 90. Helen outlived her husband.
I was married to him for 82 wonderful years. No, I'm sorry. 85. And two of her sons. And I saw him lying in that bed with his eyes shut and I said, "Mama's here." He was 82 when he died. Once you reach about age 30, your chance of dying doubles roughly every 8 years. And you see that across populations from poor countries to wealthy countries. It doesn't matter. That's called the Gumpert's law. It was first described in 1825 and it remains one of the most robust facts in human biology until today. At birth, the chance of dying within the next year is relatively high. That's the impact of infant mortality. But after that first year, the risk falls dramatically. And
for decades, this line increases only gradually. Then something important happens. The risk of death goes from linear to exponential. And this is where we see the Gumpert's law in action. After age 30, mortality risk doubles every 8 years. Then by age 105, the chance of dying basically flattens out around 50%. Basically a coin toss every year. And that rate of infant mortality may have seemed high at half a percent. But throughout most of human history, it was much higher, about 30%. That means one in three children died within their first year. That all started to change radically over the course of Helen's lifespan. What happened in those 150 years is we did a lot of prevention.
We cleaned the water, we built sewers, we have vaccination. So a lot of those prevention allow us to get older and older. Helen was born in 1917, a time when one in 10 babies didn't survive until their first birthday. Children died by the millions from diseases we now treat with a 5-day course of antibiotics. There wasn't even a polio vaccine until Helen was almost 40. Helen managed to hit age 100, avoiding the top two age- related killers that take out half of us, cancer and heart disease. And now at 108, she's active and sharp as attack. I'm setting you up if I do that.
Uh-oh. I better not do that. Not only they leave long, they leave healthy. They are they get disease 30 years after their children get diseases. Helen did have a fall a few years ago and that required brain surgery. Since then, she's had to use a walker. But here's the thing. Helen didn't try to live so long. She just did. In the past 100 years, did you do anything special in terms of your diet, your health, your routine? I don't think so. I My, you know, my parents, my father made good money. We always had a cook and ate well and didn't do anything special.
Studies have shown that the higher you go up on the longevity curve, the less individual habits matter. Exactly how much remains an area of debate. Jean Calman set the world record when she died at 122 years old. She famously drank red wine, enjoyed dark chocolate, and smoked until age 117. One recent study showed that once you account for random things like accidents and infections, up to half of how long we live comes down to inheritance. So the current theory is that super aers carry dozens if not hundreds of small genetic advantages that together delay the things that kill the rest of us. So if the reason that Helen Glover lived so long is half luck, what can I do to live longer? I went to California to find out.
Okay, here we are. Bye, Whimo. Human Longevity is located in Silicon Valley, right near the San Francisco airport. It's one of the first clinics in America to offer a suite of tests under one roof that together paint a highresolution picture of your current health and future risks. Good morning. Yes, that's me. Thank you so much. Nice to meet you. You too. First one. All right. The largest one. Wow. Thank you. They put me in this large sort of conference room where you can get comfortable, get situated. They told me that about 1 in 10 clients find something from this testing, like a tumor, that they need to act on
immediately. However, this level of insight comes with a steep price tag, often ranging from $8,000 to $20,000 for a full workup. And before I share the rest of this experience, please know that we didn't get this service for free. I paid a special discounted media rate. So, what we're going to be doing next is I'm going to be taking you with me to do um the rest of the stuff like I mentioned vitals, EKG, and body blood draw. I did want to mention there's a urine cup in the restroom. We want you to start voiding the first couple of drops into the toilet and then you're going to hold the stream, open the wipe that's next there, next to the cup, clean the opening of the urine
track, and then proceed with the rest of the collection into the cup. So, you have to stop. Yes. Start. That might be the hardest thing I have to do today. The day got going with pretty standard stuff. Blood pressure, temperature, pulse check. Did you just film that I'm wearing two pairs of socks. All right, that might not make the final cut. Then I stood on an inbody machine. Do not talk or move during the test. Which measures body composition for the record is 246. That's my weight. Next up, the EKG. Then I did a few tests that aren't part of a normal checkup.
Ah, that one hurt. This machine measured calcification in my arteries. The echo cardiogram checked my heart function and the DEXA scan measured my bone density. And I see your all nose. Just want to make sure you're not wearing any medication patches, glucose monitors, insulin pumps. The test that took the longest was the full body MRI. Is that comfortable? Yes. Okay, great. All right, you ready? I'm ready. All right, we're going to get started. And the hardest part was the blood draw.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11. About to give 15 vials of blood drawn from my arm. And um see how I feel after that. By the way, if you like what you see, don't forget to like and subscribe. Business Insider YouTube. After that much blood loss, I started to feel laded. The champagne of apple juice. But it's a small price to pay for the information I'll get back about my future health. This lavender vial here is the one that's going to go for the genomic sequencing. All you need is one vial to get like a full profile of a lot of the things that um I'll be finding out, you know, including how you metabolize coffee and alcohol and how you metabolize different drugs in addition to I think you know your risk factors for other diseases.
It took about 3 weeks to get my initial results back from human longevity. Over the nearly hour-long call with Dr. Pearson, I learned a ton of new information, but I'm just covering the biggest revelations here. The whole body MRI looked clean. So did the liquid biopsy, which is also known as a grail test that tests for over 50 kinds of cancers. Your weight was 246 lb. Technically, I'm obese. Of those 246 lbs, 58 lbs were fat. That gives you a 23.6% body fat. On the other hand, I'm also very muscular.
Your skeletal muscle index is actually very, very good. Skeletal muscle index or SMI is your weight in kilogram of muscle divided by your body surface area. Your score was 9.8, close to 10. That's very, very high for a man, almost in the elite athlete category. My genetic tests were ready after about 3 months, and I'm happy to report that I have no additional risk for cancer. Again, we didn't find anything for you, which is absolutely great. I have an elevated risk for two neurological diseases.
You have one copy of ApoE3 and one copy of APOE4. So your lifetime risk for Alzheimer's is just like slightly increased compared to the general population. I will just say that my initial reaction to this is somewhat alarmed because that means that there's a one in4 chance that I will get dementia. So for Parkinson's disease, you're in the 99th percentile for that. Your risk is up to 2.7 times higher than that. Wow. So, your lifetime risk is about 2.7%. How do we feel about that? Uh, not great. Finally, a piece of good news. I have one of the genes that contributes to longevity.
This FOX3 gene we think could be related to a person's likelihood of living past the age of 90 or older. Some people who are like super aers had certain changes in this gene. You have one of those changes, which is why it says you're likely to live to the age of 90 or older, which is great. Yeah. I my maternal grandfather lived to be 98. I want to show you something. This is a photo of my grandparents. That's Grandpa Dan who I'm named after. And this is a picture of him around age 94 95 climbing to the top of a Mayan pyramid in Guatemala. And this is a photo from another trip we took where he's climbing to the tallest point in the Gopagos Islands. So according to my genetic test results and
looking at my family history, on the one hand, I have some things stacked in my favor to live a long life. On the other hand, cancer took out my dad before his 73rd birthday, and that's very recent for me. So now that I know these things, what can I actually do to make a difference on the rest of my life? It turns out that part of the answer is already on the shelf at my local pharmacy. Okay, side note. I'm not getting the actual drugs right now, just the packaging. Okay, so I'm not getting free longevity drugs that aren't prescribed for me. Just want to be clear. Thank you so much, Rita. Have a wonderful day. Be well.
We actually have four FDA approved longevity drug. Although you might not know that we have that, but we do. None of these drugs were designed to slow aging. Each one was invented to treat something else and the longevity benefits were discovered after the fact. The cleanest example is metformin. It started out as a folk remedy. It's an extract of the French lilac in the 1920s and 1950s in Europe. People notice that if you take this extract, it can treat arthritis, it can prevent flu, you know, maybe malaria, lots of other things. But also they've noticed that people with who are taking these drugs and if they have diabetes, it lowers glucose. But now after decades of prescribing it to
treat type 2 diabetes, researchers have something they never could have built from scratch. A huge pool of data to make decisions about public health. People on metformin had less cardiovascular disease. They have less cognitive decline in Alzheimer. They have less cancers. And they die less. Their mortalities decrease. That pattern, a drug prescribed to treat one thing and then outperforming on other health measures, is not unique to metformin. Researchers have at least three more. First is a class of drug that's called SGLT2 inhibitor. They
were meant for diabetes and in diabetics and non-diabetic patient they prevent renal disease, cardiovascular disease and overall mortality. Another drug is osteoporotic drugs in a class that called a tedronate. Women who take a tedronate and get to ICU, they don't die. Really fascinating drug. And the fourth one is ompic right which are the GLP-1 agonist. It turns out that edidronate is actually discontinued in some places in favor of better drugs to treat osteoporosis. And recent research has brought into question whether or not metformin has the longevity benefits originally
thought. In any case, even the experts say that for someone my age, taking metformin isn't such a good idea. Metformin is not good for young people. It decreased their growth hormone level which is good when you're young and not good when you're old. It decrease in men the testosterone sometimes. It prevents them to get their muscle to be as big if they exercise. So this is not a drug for young. This is a drug for somebody who starts to have this breakdown of aging. So here's the kicker. None of these drugs will get you to 115. they might get you to 90 in better shape than you otherwise would be.
I'm not talking about people living forever. I'm talking, you know, maybe a 5% increase in lifespan, maybe a 10% increase in lifespan. That's kind of what I'm thinking. And I do think that's certainly feasible in the next few decades. There really is no supplement that has been convincingly shown to improve health span or longevity um in people. What about other treatments like peptides or NAD, which is an injectable that I've actually tried before? It's not that those things can't make you feel better or that they're dangerous. It's just that there isn't enough long-term data to say definitively that they can extend human life.
Supplements everybody can buy and we don't know what's in there and we don't know if it's safe and we don't know how it interacts with other drugs. So if drugs are only moderately effective at extending human life, what does science say actually works for every one of us? Before we talk about drugs, we can optimize or maximize four things. Our exercise, our diet, the sleep, and social connectivity. Take a look at these senior athletes and you'll see how healthy habits set the course for their golden years. I've always exercised, okay? Even as a young person, I always and even before I swam, I went to the gym cuz there at levy on 23rd and FDR, they had classes and I would go there in the morning.
Basically, I've always been an athlete ever since I was a kid. You know, I really enjoyed playing. You know, back in the day, we used to play sandbot football, basketball, soccer. Here's what the science says. V2 max is one of the best predictors of overall cause of mortality. In other words, if you have a higher V2 max, you're less likely to die than somebody who has a lower V2 max. According to my Whoop, my V2 max is 44. The average score for men is 35 to 40. Brian Johnson brags about his elite score of over 64, the highest ever reported at 101, belongs to Christian Blumenfelt, a worldclass triathlete. The good news is that V2 max can be improved by alternating
highintensity workouts combined with lowintensity steadystate cardio. After age 40, strength training becomes a non-negotiable. That's because you lose up to 1% of your muscle mass every year after that. It turns out that grip strength is actually a really good indicator of how long you'll live. It's not about the strength in your hands. It's that this test is a proxy for your overall strength that you'll need to be aging healthfully. I got this one on Amazon. And the way that it works is first you tell the strength trainer if you're male or female. Then you put in your age, and I'm going to put in 39.
Okay? And then you hit start. So, let's let's see what I score right now. Oh, not too bad. So, this says the score was 65 kg, and that's considered strong for a male who's 39 years old. Studies have shown that for each 5 kg drop in grip strength, it leads to a 16% increase in all cause mortality. In other words, the weaker your grip, the more likely you are to die young. When it comes to diet, caloric restriction has been shown to extend the lifespan in more organisms, from mice to yeast to worms, than any other intervention. And many studies indicate that incorporating whole foods instead of processed foods leads to better health outcomes. Here's what Tom, the 80-year-old powerlter, eats.
The diet that I follow is low in added sugars, low in saturated fats. What that translates into is limiting fast food. Insufficient sleep is one of the strongest mortality predictors we can do something about. Since getting my results back from human longevity, this is the main thing I started taking seriously. I got a Whoop to measure sleep scores and this red light therapy thing to help me wind down. I even met the guy who invented it. I'm here with the doctor. The doctor's in the house. Are you doctor? Uh, well, I have a PhD, but not in medical science. I have a co-founder with a medical doctor. Okay, good enough. So, now I try to be in bed every night by 10 p.m. In the short term,
prioritizing sleep has been the most beneficial change I made. Studies suggest the mortality risk from loneliness is comparable to smoking up to 15 cigarettes a day. Helen's life centered around her faith community. When I grew up, I taught vacation Bible school when I was a teenager. I was a Sunday school organist and I was secretary of the upper league. So, I grew up in the church and data consistently shows that married individuals outlive their single counterparts. So, exercise, diet, sleep, and social connection, these seemingly basic things have the biggest impacts. So, even if I spend the rest of my life doing all the things we've discussed so far, I should have a long and healthy life. But if that's my goal, how can I
measure if these behaviors are making an impact? You've probably heard this term pace of aging. And what that means is that in my case, I'm turning 40 later this year. But based on my biometrics, my Whoop calculates my age as 35. So, how does that work? My name is Steve Hvath. I'm the inventor of the epigenetic clock, which measures aging. As we age, chemical tags called methyl groups attached to our DNA in predictable patterns, turning genes on or off. Horvath's breakthrough was an algorithm that reads methylation and estimates a person's age from almost any tissue in the body to within a few years. A UCLA colleague handed Horvath a data set gathered from sets of twins to answer an entirely different question.
Can genetics determine sexual orientation? Horvath has a twin brother who's gay. So he decided to look at the data and so I was very interested in that topic for personal reasons and um analyzed his data set this methylation data set and saw no signal whatsoever for homosexuality. Then I just said let me see whether there's an aging effect. And um the rest is history because the minute I looked for aging effects, I was really blown away at the very strong signal for aging. Today, anyone can find out their biological age. Dozens of tests claim to measure it using saliva and blood samples or by combining other metrics. My Whoop actually calculates my age at around 35, which is 4 years
younger than I am now. And then I took the labs that I got from human longevity and plugged them into this online calculator called the Bortz blood age calculator. And this came up with my age as 35.6. So you could see that even with these age calculators, there's a little bit of variance in the results you get. The science on this remains squishy, but some people believe that they can keep their pace of age low enough to actually escape death. There's this concept called longevity escape velocity. that today for every year that you're alive, science is extending your life for about a third of the year. And there'll be some point in the future that for every year that you're alive, science is
extending your life for more than a year. And when we reach that, that concept is longevity escape velocity. You know, the point is it's not 50 years away. It's the next, you know, 15 to 20 years away. And some people have turned that quest into a kind of sport. The Longevity Cup is a year-long competition to lower biological age. And these three winners each took home a cash prize. The reason why it needs to exist is because I believe we might have a chance to achieve longevity escape velocity through competitions rather than other kinds of work. Are you talking about literally not dying? Yes, I am talking about literally not dying.
53-year-old Michael Lustgarden won first place. He reduced his biological age by 22.1 years. I have more than 60 blood tests overall over that 10ear span, and I also test eight times per year. Michael documents his routine on his website and YouTube channel in extreme detail. He eats one big meal each day, and his body weight workouts focus on mobility. The question is, how deep do you want to go down the rabbit hole after that? You've got to know the what's under the hood stuff, cells, proteins, metabolites, etc. These longevity athletes do take supplements.
Possibly the most recommended one and research one is creatine. So, I would perhaps take that or recommend that. But I was surprised to find out that they aren't shelling out a huge amount every month. $100 a month, maximum 200, no more. So, this is not out of reach. Definitely not in the developed world. for an average person. But there's one man who's already spent millions of dollars in his quest to achieve immortality. Meet the final boss of longevity, Brian Johnson. You've probably already seen some of Brian's extreme habits online. Yeah. A lot of people perceive my endeavor to be like this crazy rich guy doing weird things. And hopefully what I can explain to you today is actually
what we're doing is very practical. My colleague Hillary Brick tooured his high-tech home in 2024. We try to have perfect air, perfect water, and perfect light. Yeah, like it is a pharmacy in here. Everything you see in here is either measuring something or doing a therapy. Brian rotates his mostly vegetarian meals and has experimented with hundreds of supplements. This is a morning drink. This is uh Blueprint Longevity Mix and it has 20 capsules into one drink. So, give it a go. Okay. It smells kind of like Tang. He works out every day and his home gym is filled with expensive recovery devices.
Like sauna has really good evidence. Like there's a very good basis to start. Same with hyperbaric oxygen therapy. Brian is ruthless about getting into bed at the same time every day. But some of his stunts have caused cringe-worthy reactions online like taking blood plasma from his son and then injecting his plasma into his father. Like I never imagined in my entire life this kind of relationship with my child or posting about intimate moments with his girlfriend. Brian tweeted this on April 29th. Just gave Kate oral sex. Good night everyone. This is her vaginal microbiome report. 100 out of 100 score. Top 1% of all vaginas. Okay, I think we've had enough of this. But I guess that's the price you pay to become the
internet's most famous longevity biohacker. you're you're a lot more in your face, you know, with some of the stuff you're putting out there. Um, was that a conscious effort or was it because you took shrooms? Yeah. I mean, um, this whole thing has been play. I started this as a scientific experiment and then like it just we just kind of messed around like, you know, I started posting nudes. You know, I live streamed shrooms. I'm going to be doing 5 MO DMT in the next week and a half. Oh boy. Now Brian's offering his $2 million protocol to others at a discount. $1 million to access all the treatments he does. We have a ton of takers. Yeah. In fact, we
have more people who we can accommodate. Brian's 48 years old, but he told us he's got the skin of someone in their late 20s and the heart and lungs of an 18-year-old. So, when does he think he'll achieve longevity escape velocity? I mean, I think I said that we would achieve it by 2039, where we would achieve biological escape immortality, where one year of time would pass and I would stay the same age. But longevity scientists don't seem to be on board with this idea. According to others in the longevity space, Brian could be popularizing treatments that at best have no effect and at worst cause actual harm.
Nothing is proven yet. people um take this interventions without understanding what can be the long-term consequences of uh of these interventions. I wouldn't suggest anyone to try it on yourself. First of all, Brian is a data set of one. He only experiments on himself. To be fair, he does discontinue doing things that don't have measurable health impacts. But that's not how public health research really works. The FDA approved drugs we talked about earlier use data collected from thousands of people over decades. Also, don't forget that Brian's selling his own line of supplements. In fact, the Academy of Longevity Scientists are struggling to
separate themselves from influencers like Brian. For me, as the president of the academy that has all those people who are doing geroscience research, on one hand, I have to come and say I'm really excited. I mean, the here is now. We kind of have lots of data. On the other hand, there is a lot of noise. The more we have progress in the science, the more noise there is. And that's not science at all. If somebody comes and say we could leave right now to be 150 years, that's that you cannot say it. But there are new technologies that could reverse aging. And even the most conservative scientists have to admit they show promise. And these therapies target the most basic building blocks of life.
20 years ago, a Japanese scientist named Shina Yamanaka made a discovery that could change medicine forever. And Yamanaka discovered that just turning on four genes would be enough to take any fully grown adult cell all the way back to pluropotent stem cell, which is the stem cell that could make any kind of tissue. These four genes are now known as the Yamanaka factors. He won the Nobel Prize for his research in 2012. But researchers soon discovered that reversing aging comes with risks. Two of the factors are anko genes and that means when they're overexpressed, they help the cell to become proliferative dividing without limit. Uh so there is always in this reprogramming
there's always this cancer risk that people have to worry about and people are trying to get around it by asking can we reprogram them transiently just give a little burst of the Yamanaka factors turn them on and then figure out how to turn them off. It took another decade to start to tackle that hazard. In 2016, Spanish scientist Tuan Carlos Is Pisua Belmonte showed that briefly activating Yamanaka factors in mice could partially reverse signs of aging and extend life. The treatment targeted the animals epigenetics. If DNA is the hardware, epigenetics is the software that tells the genes when to turn on, when to stay silent, and what kind of cell to become. Over time, those
software instructions begin to break down. when you h a lot of epigenetic signature to turn ging on is not as good as it was when you were young. So the east pisua experiments reset some of the epigenetic changes that accumulate over time without fully turning the cells back into stem cells. And the idea is if you do it transiently, you minimize the cancer risk. If I hadn't seen the papers that came out in the last few years, I would have thought this was a relatively far-fetched idea for aging. And now companies like the Jeff Bezos backed Altos Labs are trying to commercialize this technology. A number of others are going from a skin cell to an induced puropotent stem cell, growing these stem cells to a large amount,
differentiating them into a liver, and then growing you a liver based on your genetic code. Now, here's the reality check. In January 2026, the FDA cleared the first ever human trial of a reprogramming therapy, Life Biosciences ER 100, a gene therapy for two age- related diseases, glaucoma, and a rarer condition called NA. It uses three of the four Yamanaka factors with the cancer linked one deliberately left out. mean, the eye is essentially nervous system tissue, the optic nerve and so on. So those things I think uh if they worked could be real a real benefit. But scale matters. This is roughly 18 patients, two eye diseases, and it's designed only to test whether the
therapy is safe, not whether it reverses aging. Still, it doesn't mean it might not one day take off. For example, in 50 years, you when you'll be 20, you'll come and get a treatment, maybe an IV treatment, and we'll erase the aging from your cells, and maybe you'll be able to pass 115. But this is not the science that we have now. So, now we've arrived at the biggest question. If everything we've discussed so far, lucky genes, good habits, drugs, and emerging cell therapies can't guarantee that we live past 115, what about the sci-fi idea of freezing our bodies to wake up in the future?
One of the things that you get really excited about when diving into the field of cryopreservation is you realize that this technology has already been in use over for over 40 years on human tissues and cells. So, cryopreservation isn't purely theoretical. It's just that scaling from an embryo to a full human body is an engineering challenge of a completely different order. We know how to freeze things, you know, that's easy, but bringing it back is the hard part. Here's how one company that actually freezes people does it. Freezing means ice crystals. They destroy the tissue and nothing would work after if you
freeze it. So we do what is called cryopreservation or the technical term is a vitrification using a so-called cryoprotective agent which is pretty much a medical grade antifreeze bring the tissue to a vitrified state which you can think of as a glass like amorphous state it's a fluid but the viscosity is so tremendously high that nothing moves anymore. The trick here is that at with that technology you can preserve tissue, organs or whole organisms including humans for pretty much indefinite time frames. It doesn't matter if it's 10 years or 20 or 100 or even a thousand years. So cryop preservation I think the best way to think about it is to think as a stop gap measure as a bridging technology.
Even the people selling this technology can't guarantee it. That is the what is called the aspirational goal of the scientific research. So aspirational goals don't mean they're going to happen. And there's one more frontier worth visiting before we close. If we could slow or stop the physical decline of the body, what about preserving the mind outside of it? Researchers claim to have simulated the brain of a fruitly on a laptop. That's an exciting development until you realize that a human brain has 600,000 times more neurons. So something like the Sanjunapro episode of Black Mirror where people can upload their consciousness after they die to a server, that's still squarely in the realm of science fiction for now.
Okay, so now you've met super centinarians and scientists, longevity athletes and futurists who are trying to live long enough to let AI solve death. my entire project is about AI. And so obviously it seems as though it's about health. It's not. If you go forward in time to the year 2500 and you're there with intelligence at that time, whether it's human AI or some version of combination, and they are looking back at this time and place, our century, and they're saying what happened in the 21st century, they'll I think they'll say two things. One is that's when homo sapiens gave birth to super intelligence. And two, that's when homo sapiens figured out they wouldn't die. But let's take a minute to think about what might happen if everyone actually
lived past 100. A Pew Research Center survey found that over half of Americans said slowing the aging process would be bad for society. Americans who reach age 65 today can expect to live nearly 20 additional years on average with women living longer. At the same time, the fraction of life spent with four or more serious conditions hasn't decreased. It's actually slightly increased. In other words, we're living more years and possibly a greater fraction of those in poor health. Our current retirement and health care systems are already a ticking time bomb. What we see families on trajectory for is a pretty significant shortfall of anywhere between hundreds of thousands of dollars to millions of dollars if we don't plan
if they don't plan for their aging trajectory now. So if more people live even longer, the way we take care of the elderly will require a complete overhaul. There must be new insurance plans, new pension plans, elderly care. That's a more than a trillion dollar industry overall. And right now, the richest Americans live approximately 15 years longer than the poorest. A gap that widened between 2001 and 2014. Unless treatments become as cheap and generic as statins, longevity advances could create two permanent classes of humans.
This is my dad's grave. And uh it's the first time I'm seeing it in person. being here, coming to a place like this, remembering my father, um, makes you realize this is where we're all headed. And maybe that's the point that when we know we have a limited time on this planet that we try to make the most of it. So, is there a possibility that in the future not everyone will end up in a place like this? Maybe. But even if that is possible, the question is, is it a good idea? Who gets that extra time? And what does it mean for the rest of us? Me personally, I'm okay with knowing that my time is limited, not knowing exactly how much we have, and just enjoying the ride.
