Implausibility of radical life extension in humans in the twenty-first century

Over the course of the twentieth century, human life expectancy at birth rose in high-income nations by approximately 30 years, largely driven by advances in public health and medicine. Mortality reduction was observed initially at an early age and continued into middle and older ages. However, it was unclear whether this phenomenon and the resulting accelerated rise in life expectancy would continue into the twenty-first century. Here using demographic survivorship metrics from national vital statistics in the eight countries with the longest-lived populations (Australia, France, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland) and in Hong Kong and the United States from 1990 to 2019, we explored recent trends in death rates and life expectancy. We found that, since 1990, improvements overall in life expectancy have decelerated. Our analysis also revealed that resistance to improvements in life expectancy increased while lifespan inequality declined and mortality compression occurred. Our analysis suggests that survival to age 100 years is unlikely to exceed 15% for females and 5% for males, altogether suggesting that, unless the processes of biological aging can be markedly slowed, radical human life extension is implausible in this century. In the twentieth century, human life expectancy rose dramatically. Based on the past three decades of observed mortality in the eight countries with the longest-lived populations and in Hong Kong and the United States, Olshansky et al. propose that, without medical breakthroughs that slow aging, radical lifespan extension is implausible in this century.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Nature Aging
Published
2024-10-07
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s43587-024-00702-3
Citations
70
Primary Topic
Birth, Development, and Health
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
77.65

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Implausibility of radical life extension in humans in the twenty-first century

S. Jay Olshansky, Lloyd Demetrius, Hiram Beltrán‐Sánchez, Bradley J. Willcox
70 citations
Nature Aging
Birth, Development, and Health
77.65
article

Implausibility of radical life extension in humans in the twenty-first century

S. Jay Olshansky, Lloyd Demetrius, Hiram Beltrán‐Sánchez, Bradley J. Willcox
article en
70 citations

Abstract

Over the course of the twentieth century, human life expectancy at birth rose in high-income nations by approximately 30 years, largely driven by advances in public health and medicine. Mortality reduction was observed initially at an early age and continued into middle and older ages. However, it was unclear whether this phenomenon and the resulting accelerated rise in life expectancy would continue into the twenty-first century. Here using demographic survivorship metrics from national vital statistics in the eight countries with the longest-lived populations (Australia, France, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland) and in Hong Kong and the United States from 1990 to 2019, we explored recent trends in death rates and life expectancy. We found that, since 1990, improvements overall in life expectancy have decelerated. Our analysis also revealed that resistance to improvements in life expectancy increased while lifespan inequality declined and mortality compression occurred. Our analysis suggests that survival to age 100 years is unlikely to exceed 15% for females and 5% for males, altogether suggesting that, unless the processes of biological aging can be markedly slowed, radical human life extension is implausible in this century. In the twentieth century, human life expectancy rose dramatically. Based on the past three decades of observed mortality in the eight countries with the longest-lived populations and in Hong Kong and the United States, Olshansky et al. propose that, without medical breakthroughs that slow aging, radical lifespan extension is implausible in this century.

Nature AgingVol. 4(11)
University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa (US), Kuakini Medical Center (US), University of Hawaii System (US), University of California, Los Angeles (US), Harvard University Press (US), University of Illinois Chicago (US)
National Institute on Aging, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, California Center for Population Research, University of California, Los Angeles, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
Zero hunger
Openalex Percentile: Top 0%
Birth, Development, and Health
77.65
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.