(Im)mortality: Researchers Find That Human Lifespan Has A Max Limit

C4Cat

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 9, 2015
Messages
14,307
Precisely. A few hundred years ago max lifespan was about 40, with most dying by 30. So yeah I'm with you. At the PRESENT time it seems as if ...

Well they took all that into account, if you actually read the article in the OP
Life expectancy has been on the rise since the 19th century (due to improvements in public health, diet, the environment, and similar factors). Data analysis showed that, while late-life mortality experienced a decline since the 1900s, age-at-death reached a plateau in 1995— despite rapidly increasing between the 1970s and early 1990s — indicating a lifespan limit.


Also:
Since the 19th century, average life expectancy has risen almost continuously thanks to improvements in public health, diet, the environment and other areas. On average, for example, U.S. babies born today can expect to live nearly until age 79 compared with an average life expectancy of only 47 for Americans born in 1900. Since the 1970s, the maximum duration of life—the age to which the oldest people live—has also risen. But according to the Einstein researchers, this upward arc for maximal lifespan has a ceiling—and we’ve already touched it.

"Demographers as well as biologists have contended there is no reason to think that the ongoing increase in maximum lifespan will end soon," said senior author Jan Vijg, Ph.D., professor and chair of genetics, the Lola and Saul Kramer Chair in Molecular Genetics, and professor of ophthalmology & visual sciences at Einstein. "But our data strongly suggest that it has already been attained and that this happened in the 1990s."
But when the researchers looked at survival improvements since 1900 for people aged 100 and above, they found that gains in survival peaked at around 100 and then declined rapidly, regardless of the year people were born. “This finding indicates diminishing gains in reducing late-life mortality and a possible limit to human lifespan,” said Dr. Vijg.

He and his colleagues then looked at “maximum reported age at death” data from the International Database on Longevity. They focused on people verified as living to age 110 or older between 1968 and 2006 in the four countries (the U.S., France, Japan and the U.K.) with the largest number of long-lived individuals. Age at death for these supercentenarians increased rapidly between the 1970s and early 1990s but reached a plateau around 1995—further evidence for a lifespan limit. This plateau, the researchers note, occurred close to 1997—the year of death of 122-year-old French woman Jeanne Calment, who achieved the maximum documented lifespan of any person in history.
“Further progress against infectious and chronic diseases may continue boosting average life expectancy, but not maximum lifespan,” said Dr. Vijg. “While it’s conceivable that therapeutic breakthroughs might extend human longevity beyond the limits we’ve calculated, such advances would need to overwhelm the many genetic variants that appear to collectively determine the human lifespan. Perhaps resources now being spent to increase lifespan should instead go to lengthening healthspan—the duration of old age spent in good health.”
http://newswise.com/articles/maximu...dy-been-reached-einstein-researchers-conclude

I just bolded the last line because I agree wholeheartedly!
 

etienne_marais

Honorary Master
Joined
Mar 16, 2008
Messages
15,093
Albert Einstein College of Medicine really? They name a medical school after a physicist?

They have some info on their website:

Einstein Mission Statement

Albert Einstein College of Medicine, a part of Montefiore, is a premier, research-intensive medical school dedicated to innovative biomedical investigation and to the development of ethical and compassionate physicians and scientists. Inspired by the words of our namesake, we have from our inception welcomed students, faculty and staff from diverse backgrounds who strive to enhance human health in the community and beyond. This is an attribute in which Albert Einstein took great pride when consenting to the use of his name in conjunction with the medical school.

At the core of the Einstein-Montefiore mission is the pursuit of social justice in meeting the healthcare needs of all individuals, including those from underserved communities.
 

WhoWhat

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2017
Messages
129
Well they took all that into account, if you actually read the article in the OP



Also:



http://newswise.com/articles/maximu...dy-been-reached-einstein-researchers-conclude

I just bolded the last line because I agree wholeheartedly!

But none of that alters the fact that the picture could change. I just have issue with absolute statements from scientists. Everything should come with the proviso 'According to current knowledge' because history shows that we don't know everything and that scientists who have made these kinds of absolute pronouncements in the past have been proved wrong to one degree or another.

We have no idea to what degree even our ability to test for things is limited by the limitations of our understanding. And we don't know everything there is to know about everything. So every scientific statement should be moderated by the proviso that something will probably come along to change this.
 

C4Cat

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 9, 2015
Messages
14,307
But none of that alters the fact that the picture could change. I just have issue with absolute statements from scientists. Everything should come with the proviso 'According to current knowledge' because history shows that we don't know everything and that scientists who have made these kinds of absolute pronouncements in the past have been proved wrong to one degree or another.

We have no idea to what degree even our ability to test for things is limited by the limitations of our understanding. And we don't know everything there is to know about everything. So every scientific statement should be moderated by the proviso that something will probably come along to change this.

I don't think the scientists were making absolute statements though, perhaps that's the way the media portrayed it but if you look at the quotes I gave above they say things like:
... But our data strongly suggest that it has already been attained and that this happened in the 1990s."
and
This finding indicates diminishing gains in reducing late-life mortality and a possible limit to human lifespan,” said Dr. Vijg.
and
... it’s conceivable that therapeutic breakthroughs might extend human longevity beyond the limits we’ve calculated...
 

etienne_marais

Honorary Master
Joined
Mar 16, 2008
Messages
15,093
Let's take the scenario that the article mentioned: they did not factor in synthetic biology / biotech and for argument sake anything else that can be artificially added or replaced.

How long would the brain / central nervous system theoretically survive, I remember something about brain cells never regenerating... (don't think stem cells would help either)
 

konfab

Honorary Master
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
36,118
I am doubtful of that number. Someone who is 125 today was born before antibiotics and had to live through two (or more) major wars. They are working with a tiny pool of people.
 

SeRpEnT

Executive Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2008
Messages
6,550
What I would like to know is what are the major causes of death amongst people dying of extreme old age (think the 100+ club). Would be interesting. And to see what are the scientific and medicinal advances towards battling/curing these particular causes of death.

I guess it would be mostly heart and stroke related.
 
Top