We’re living in the age of the anti-aging gold rush. Biohackers are fasting and cold-plunging, injecting themselves with peptides, and tracking every heartbeat in hopes of extending lifespan by months, if not years. The fascination with “defeating death” has gripped Silicon Valley, where billions now flow into longevity tech, regenerative medicine, metformin cocktails, supplements, and comprehensive digital health platforms.
And for good reason. Once-impressive gains in life expectancy have dwindled. In 1800, no country had a life expectancy at birth greater than 40 years. By the turn of the century, life expectancy in most countries had reached around seven decades, largely due to advances in medicine and the defeat of fatal infections. However, in high-income countries, those gains are now marginal, and we find ourselves grappling with stagnation.
Historically, we might have expected continuous improvements akin to Moore’s law in technology, but the reality is much different. If we want to keep pace, we’ll need to spend and innovate exponentially more. Our limited resources force us to reconsider priorities. Rather than placing our bets on extending the longevity of the fortunate few, we should focus on increasing the average lifespan across populations. This approach maximizes lifespan potential for the majority, delivering a collective public health benefit.
Increasing life expectancy doesn’t necessarily require high-tech solutions for cell regeneration. Even if we manage to make such breakthroughs, the overall effect on life expectancy would be small. Studies show that even curing major diseases, such as cancer, would only add two to three years on average, as most deaths occur late in life. Therefore, concentrating on preventing deaths unrelated to aging could lead to more significant improvements in overall life expectancy.
The U.S. currently lags behind other high-income nations like Sweden and Japan by over four years in life expectancy, despite being a leader in healthcare spending. We hold an embarrassing global rank of No. 49. Tackling preventable causes of death, such as reducing gun violence and addressing the opioid crisis, could add substantial years to life expectancy. For example, cutting gun-related deaths could increase life expectancy by nearly two years for men.
Moreover, even something as simple as adding an hour of walking daily could lead to an increase in life expectancy of five years. Physical activity stands as one of the simplest, most effective anti-aging strategies available—one that doesn’t come in pill form.
Addressing life expectancy can also alleviate inequalities among different population segments. Over the past century, global lifespan disparities have diminished, yet the World Health Organization recently reported a staggering gap of over three decades in life expectancy between those in the richest and poorest countries. A child born in Norway can expect to live around 83 years, while one born in Chad is limited to just 52 years. Meanwhile, millions still succumb to early death around the globe.
On a larger scale, increasing life expectancy can be implemented through cost-efficient measures. For instance, insecticide-treated bed nets drastically reduce malaria transmission, potentially extending life for those in endemic areas by six years. Basic healthcare measures like vaccinations and routine screenings could add around three years to life expectancy. Even education plays a role; each additional year of schooling correlates with a 2% reduction in adult mortality, demonstrating that the benefits of education extend beyond academic knowledge.
One might wonder: Why can’t we pursue both improving life expectancy and combating aging? The challenge lies in the quality of those extra years gained. Polls indicate that many Americans fear unhealthy aging more than death itself. Ideally, we’d like our later years to be spent in good health rather than frailty, yet the U.S. currently has a more than twelve-year gap between expected total lifespan and healthy living, the largest among any country.
This discrepancy is rooted in chronic diseases typically associated with aging, which are best managed through preventive measures. The elusive antidotes or tech solutions won’t erase the need for foundational lifestyle changes: eating better, exercising more, reducing harmful vices, and nurturing strong social connections.
The prospect for a longevity economy remains vibrant, but it should perhaps emphasize improving the quality of later-life experiences over mere quantity. Innovations aimed at addressing caregiving needs, curbing social isolation, and combatting loneliness are crucial. Various technologies—from smart canes to AI-driven smart homes—have the potential to reduce care-related stress and help seniors live independently for longer.
Yet, the battle against loneliness is more nuanced. If technology can alleviate the burden on caregivers, it can also empower them to spend quality time with their loved ones. Initiatives like virtual reality gatherings or online peer support networks might foster connections and shared experiences. Robotic companions, such as ElliQ, have shown promise in significantly reducing feelings of loneliness and enhancing overall well-being.
Structural community-level changes are equally essential. Innovative housing models that promote multigenerational living could bridge generational gaps, and while these solutions don’t require new technology, they do call for widespread acceptance and demand.
We ought to stop viewing aging and longevity as elite pursuits isolated to fitness enthusiasts and the wealthy. Aging is a universal reality, and the disparities we witness in our later years reflect broader societal inequities. By concentrating on reducing mortality risks earlier in life, narrowing the healthspan gap, and focusing on enhancing the quality of our years, we can aspire to become a nation that embodies true longevity.
Michael D. Gurven is a distinguished professor of anthropology at the University of California-Santa Barbara and the author of “Seven Decades: How We Evolved to Live Longer” (Princeton University Press).