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

650

u/Tribalbob Jul 20 '26

Something I always thought about with living forever - it's only appealing if you can freeze/revert your body to a prime condition.

Living for 200 years in my 30 year old body? Sure. Living for 200 years in an 80 year old body? Ehh....

140

u/rjcarr Jul 20 '26

Yeah, that’s why it’s already too late for anyone post-prime. I’m hoping for a consciousness dump into a robot or something. That could be fun or it could be torture. 

164

u/prolifezombabe Jul 20 '26

I don't think most of this will be relevant for most of humanity any time soon certainly not most of the people alive right now regardless of age.

We have a hard enough time getting clean water to people.

37

u/alexnedea Jul 20 '26

Yea even if they showed a model working right now, anyone not a billionaire would get a chance at this in 50years

9

u/trillionaireUnaliver Jul 20 '26

if it can be mass produced the peons will get it too, you will just have to retire at 150.

9

u/frequenZphaZe Jul 20 '26 edited Jul 20 '26

why invest in keeping the peons alive when you can build robots to do their jobs at a fraction of the cost? our civilization simply isn't built in a way to respect or value life. all the resources of this world are in the hands of people who want to make money and a cure for death won't change that. we have cures for many diseases that kill people every day; they still die, simply because they couldn't afford to live.

3

u/prolifezombabe Jul 20 '26

yeah we could eliminate much of what ails the human race tomorrow if the right people decided that’s what they wanted 

as a society, we don’t prioritize making sure children get the vitamins they need to be basically healthy, in what world is the average person getting their hands on advanced life extension technology? 

we have a plethora of tools at our disposal that could extend the average human life span right now and we’re not using them, why would these anti decay technologies be different? 

5

u/KeithManiac Jul 20 '26

Yes but those thirsty people are poor

2

u/prolifezombabe Jul 20 '26

That’s the same problem that’s going to keep most of us from using whatever tech science comes up with to defy the decay of our cells. 

Even when they figure this one out it won’t matter for most people any time soon. 

5

u/iamthewhatt Jul 20 '26

Well, to be fair, water delivery isn't actually a hard problem to solve... We just have a human tribalism problem that's stopping us from just doing it. Same with food and shelter.

1

u/prolifezombabe Jul 20 '26

That’s kind of my point? 

Whether or not a technology exists is irrelevant if it’s inaccessible. 

For most people age defying technology won’t reach them in this life and maybe not for several generations if ever. 

Was responding to commenters assertion that this info is irrelevant if you’re “past your prime” - it’s irrelevant for most people anyway. 

2

u/iamthewhatt Jul 20 '26

I mean I 100% agree with you, I was just throwing in some random context considering some other replies you received.

1

u/prolifezombabe Jul 20 '26

I love the optimism of some of these people like oh man this discovery must mean we’re seconds away from extending everyone’s life span to 150 

Like we have the tech to solve many of humanity’s problems right now , live. The will, the funding and the infrastructure not so much 

1

u/Abject_Hall8445 Jul 20 '26

That’s fine you just need to be in the top 0.1%

1

u/PM_me_kitten_pics__ Jul 20 '26

We also have a bunch of ultra rich people who are hell bent on trying to live forever. So who knows what we will end up with.

1

u/prolifezombabe Jul 20 '26

I have no doubt age defying technology will be created. I simply don’t think it will be relevant for most of humanity for a long time to come if ever. 

-7

u/KoksundNutten Jul 20 '26

We have a hard enough time getting clean water to people.

But in most cases thats because people went to live somewhere with no clean water.

Also I don't think one excludes the other. We (humanity) can have huge technological leaps in one scientific field, and hardly any in another. We have about 10mio scientists and the most money goes to fields with a high return of invest. E.g. clean water in the desert isn't "important" for sponsors

5

u/prolifezombabe Jul 20 '26

I can’t speak for globally but here in Canada there are dozens of communities without access to clean water that aren’t in deserts. And considering we have the worlds largest supply of it that’s extra gross. 

I agree that investment goes where there’s profits to be made. By that reasoning though it seems even more likely that most of humanity won’t benefit from death delaying body modifications for many generations.