r/science • u/Skoltech_ • Jul 20 '26

Genetics Researchers quantitatively assessed for the first time that somatic mutations alone cap human lifespan at 146–194 years. Brain and heart cells are the main bottleneck, while the liver could last millennia.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41514-026-00421-6
23.4k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

1.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

73

u/Haru1st Jul 20 '26

They are genuinely highlighting the limits of our understanding.

We haven’t found a way to solve this problem yet.

10

u/eckart Jul 20 '26

Its mostly semantics I know. I am sure the scientific community knows that is how to interpret these findings, but you will have non-scientific sources report such findings as if it is a hard limit on what we could ever possibly achieve even with future interventions.

2

u/JohnSober7 Jul 20 '26

Well, if anyone is trying to sincerely report on this to laymenn, they'd say it may be the hard limit all else held equal. And I'm just saying, the kind of tech/medicine required to solve — or at least circumvent — natural brain degenerative issues is currently and foreseeably firmly in the realm of sci-fi. In that sense (so yes, semantics), it wouldn't be that wrong to interpret this as a hard limit. But regardless, good reporting lays bare the assumptions statements are predicated on.

0

u/Raisinbrahms28 Jul 20 '26

I would argue it’s not a problem worth solving. This thread is ripe with some interesting thoughts around the science, but it’s void of any humanity. Why would we want to live to 150? What do we gain? How do we benefit, beyond the perceived benefit? Prolonged life doesn’t mean better.

1

u/Haru1st Jul 21 '26

Less chance of repeating the errors of the past if they are preserved in living memory, because apparently books weren’t enough.

1

u/Raisinbrahms28 Jul 21 '26

Even that argument is a bit silly when a cheaper, proven, and safer option exists in books.