How to Live to 100

Just floss and don't smoke...

In the United States of America, approximately 1 in 3300 people live to be a 100 years of age and reach the select club of Centenarian's. To some, including myself, the idea of living a full century is not the most riveting thought i've ever had. By the time a 100 years roll by, gone are the days of wheelchair races, understanding any type technology invented within the past 30 years, or relating with any cultural figure likely to crop up and grab the youth's (anyone under 80) attention.

Today, the prospects of you reaching 100 are actually quite slim. In those budding years building up to a dime of a millennium you are about 14 times more likely to get killed by a firearm assault, 25 times more likely to simply fall down and die, 40 times more likely to commit suicide, and around 800 times more likely to tap out as a result of heart disease. In fact, for every person that is legally executed in the American judicial system, only about 30 people correspondingly live to be 100.

Of course since "everyone" wants to ideally live forever, doctors and scientists have endlessly studied these poor, frail, old folks to see what makes them tick for so long. They actually were able to identify certain controlling and risk factors that played into longevity. Flossing adds six years to your life, eating nuts adds another two years, smoking takes away ten years, and drinking wine everyday presents you an 18% lower death rate. Stress is a surefire killer and an outgoing persona will actually decrease your risk of dementia 50%.

As interesting as all that is, unfortunately it really doesn't apply to you or me-- or really anyone besides those who are already 100. That's because they are all lagging indicators, meaning those are the steps you should have been taking back in 1920 if you wanted to live to see 2010. New research in Denmark suggests that most babies born in rich countries this century will eventually make it to their one hundredth birthday. In fact, according to the Danish experts, since the 20th century people in developed countries are living around three decades longer than in the past. Now some believe that this figure could go even higher. If improvements in health continues, "a majority of children born since the year 2000 will celebrate their hundredth birthday," states James Vaupel, of the Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, in Rostock, Germany.

No matter what you do, if you were born in the past few decades, are moderately healthy right now, and don't smoke 4 packs a day you will probably live to be 100. Advances in medicine will compensate for the poor health decisions you make and give you more excuse to spend a large portion of your income to the preservation of your existence.

Cambridge researcher Aubrey de Grey argues that aging is merely a disease -- and a curable one at that. Humans age in seven basic ways, he says, all of which can be averted. Grey and his very long beard claim that he has drawn a roadmap to defeat biological aging. In the video from the TED Conferences below, he provocatively proposes that the first human beings who will live to 1,000 years old have already been born.








Of course I am a skeptic. Again, I have no illusions or little want to extend my life to 100 much less 1000. Perhaps if I could persevere this young, virile, body I inhabit right now? But a realization that such things are pipe dreams brings me back to firm ground, as much of my post 100, 200, 500 year birthdays would likely be spent with my soul stuck in an immobile log of a body. I would rather die from a firearm assault mid duel (which is a rather unlikely situation, me losing a duel).

4 comments:

J. Orange Endorphin said...

See, I'm drawn to this age as a disease idea in principle, age simply being the probability of mutation increasing after every cellular generation in our bodies. But I'm a firm believer in the forces of entropy, sooner or later an ordered system collapses into disarray, it's why we are here to begin with. Life owes its origins to the very "chaos" that kills us when we get old. It will get us all, so exactly like you said would we rather live unnaturally long fighting off death with arthritic fingers and a flimsy broom? Or would we rather bow to the bigger picture?

J. Orange Endorphin said...

that's not too "fatalistic" is it?

Ben Irwin said...

Chaos is fatalistic, it has to be.. a "naturally" long life is based on its own precedent, as is natural wealth-- both of which have seen dramatic increases in our lifetimes alone. Though I agree that death is inevitable, and as a concept chaos dictates the timeline-- but the true key to whatever meaning that holds is perspective. Through our eyes, the universe is perceiving itself, and any entropy that advances (or deteriorates) in that blip of our existence can just as easily be perceived as optimism-- death not being something to fight off, but rather life as something to live. The "bigger picture" doesn't really matter to me, or you.. and bowing to it shouldn't weight the mind.

Jake said...

http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,685426,00.html

Post a Comment

top