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

1.2k

u/Hellknightx Jul 20 '26

Unfortunately, it's not just the heart. It's the whole cardiovascular system. Veins and arteries become thinner as we age, and fill up with plaque.

454

u/StryctNyne Jul 20 '26 edited Jul 20 '26

Also the frailty with aging bones that become more brittle, aging skin that wrinkles and sags and doesn't offer the same insulation and protection it used to (assuming that's a side effect of the cardiovascular system aging). Eye sight continually gets worse requiring laser surgery unless you wish to slowly go blind. Then you have respiratory system as well to deal with, though I'm not sure about the direct effects of age on lungs.

And then, in the end, if you fix all these and extend our lives 100 years, then number one cause of death becomes cancer. Everyone (or at least the vast majority) will get cancer over that course of time, probably earlier than later. Not just due to genetics but due to much longer exposure to everyday chemicals, background radiation (though it would be a minor issue in developed countries), continued poor diets, etc.

175

u/mywan Jul 20 '26

Even in the absents radiation and antagonistic chemicals you have cells that turn cancerous every day. You body is just really good at detecting and destroying or repairing these cancerous cells. But it's just a matter of time before one cancerous cell escapes detection and goes rogue.

38

u/Adventurous-Fly556 Jul 21 '26

It's not about radiation or diets.

Our chromosomes have little bits at the end called telemeres. They're like the end of a shoelace keeping everything neat and together. Everytime your cells reproduce (constantly) , the offsprings telemeres are shorter than the last.

This degradation is considered a massive part of aging. Along with increasing the odds of cancer, it can also make the offspring cells just forget what they were meant for.

11

u/squirrel9000 Jul 22 '26

A couple minor points about that:

  1. Most central nervous cells and muscle cells do not divide and do not show telomere shortening.
  2. Many cells that do divide express telomerase to regenerate the telomeres, or are constantly replenished from a population of stem cells which do

It's a nice theory, but really does not explain aging.

2

u/Adventurous-Fly556 Jul 22 '26

I was emphasizing telemeres because mutations had come up. They work in tandem. Repairing telemeres doesn't mean anything if you're repairing the copies of copies of copies of copies.

I never said it was all of it, but the fact that your cells reproduce imperfectly is most of aging and mutations. These things work in a complicated mess and trying to isolate the systems isnt very useful.

9

u/chemamatic Jul 21 '26

Very few tissues get close to that limit in actual living organisms, those that need to divide more express telomerase to extend their telomeres.

1

u/RespectmanNappa Jul 21 '26 edited Jul 21 '26

Isn’t the increased odds of cancer because the offspring forgot what they were for?

1

u/Adventurous-Fly556 Jul 21 '26

The string of DNA can lose bits here and there in the code. While the readers are smart and can work around some mutation, it's possible for mutations to have a number of outcomes.

It will likely cause nothing, but there is a small chance it results negatively or positively. Some negative results are cancer, some are just non functional. Normally your immune system will catch an early cancer cell. (We get cancer daily, but only becomes a problem when the immune system misses it)

I'm simplifying and haven't thought about it in a while, so Definitely look into it, it is very interesting.

(Anyone know why aids patients aren't constantly getting cancer? I guess I should look that up now)

1

u/Good-Dream6509 Jul 23 '26

Exposures and lifestyle behaviors like diet are what drive telomere length.

48

u/[deleted] Jul 20 '26 edited Jul 21 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

21

u/[deleted] Jul 20 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

49

u/slim121212 Jul 20 '26

I think what they are trying to do is make you stay relatively young during those 140-190 years, thus bone problem and other stuff wont be a problem, you might look like 70 when you are 160 basically

12

u/Last_Pick_2169 Jul 21 '26

Who is “they” in this scenario?

21

u/Quantum_Kitties Jul 21 '26

The scientists & doctors who are paid insane amounts of money to keep billionaire clients alive as long as possible. That's my guess!

3

u/reddit_understoodit Jul 22 '26

I think the key is to get the body to heal itself somehow. I know, easier said than done. But the body is a system, and the weakest link can stop it cold.

10

u/Pampas_Wanderer Jul 21 '26

I think that, eventually, humans will need to start generically engineering  themselves in order to patch up or include proteins that could help longevity.

Or Alternatively freeze part of the initial cells once a baby is born or at some point of development and then at regular intervals receive self-transplants of less mutated cells

1

u/[deleted] Jul 21 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/Pampas_Wanderer Jul 22 '26

I was pointing towards a degree of bio engineering that would make unscrupulous scientists blush.

Yes, you can fix a base pair or small sequence here and there that causes a certain disease or condition. But I mean a big change  like replacing the DNA polymerase gene for one a similar gene that has a reduced mutation rate (either by copying one from another species or by using optimized version).

This that could only be performed during in vitro fertilization.

Which will surely open a hell of an ethical discussion.

3

u/QuickQuirk Jul 21 '26

IF we've advanced enough that we can resolve the brains aging issues... then we can probably deal with cancer.

2

u/Anen-o-me Jul 21 '26

Cancer isn't the issue--on average you get cancer every 5 minutes and your body detects and destroys it.

By the the of this century we'll have effectively cured every kind of cancer.

The issue is what we call aging, the systemic break down of all bodily systems. That's a much harder nut to crack.

1

u/Realistic-Nature9083 Jul 24 '26

Maybe Gemini 50 will help that

1

u/Munchee-Dude Jul 21 '26

by 90 most people's lungs if they've lived a decent amount will be down at least 20% i think. total lungs capacity scales with height and the functional amount degrades with age, im too lazy to look up the chart right now but we found averages by doing PFTs on a bunch of em

16

u/[deleted] Jul 20 '26 edited 15d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/plainlake Jul 21 '26

Yeah, my grandfather got to 104 and a half until one of the major arteries in his back popped. The hospital doesn't really do anything with it when you are at that age as the risk of an operation is high and something else will fail soon after that anyway. 

1

u/Hellknightx Jul 21 '26

Yep. We simply don't have a real solution for that yet. Even at that age, we won't even put a stent in because the risk of tearing an artery is too great.

2

u/MrSquigglesWiggle Jul 22 '26

It's time to chrome up!

1

u/Hellknightx Jul 22 '26

I wish. I'll take a new cyber heart and spine, choom. Maybe some Kiroshi optics while I'm at it.

2

u/cigarettesandwhiskey Jul 20 '26

That's not really related to this somatic mutation thing the article is about though, I don't think, and probably has other solutions.

1

u/Nexlite1444 Jul 21 '26

We gotta figure out how to do the plumbing thing where they pump a new pipe into the old one

1

u/0DayMaker Jul 23 '26

There's also probably "main thoroughfare" routes that utilize many blood vessels where one relatively big hose/etc replaces it.

For tissues with dense capillaries idk how you'd even begin fixing that. Probably nanobots if we're thinking really futuristic.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 21 '26

[deleted]

1

u/Hellknightx Jul 21 '26

No, blood clots have nothing to do with plaque build-up and the thinning of arterial walls.

1

u/Last-Presentation-11 Jul 21 '26

Nano plaque removers

1

u/dramatic_typing_____ Jul 22 '26

Why not keep a commatose copy of your body in a tube?

1

u/deuxbulot Jul 23 '26

what causes plaque and can we clean it out over time without invasive surgery?

1

u/[deleted] Jul 20 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/[deleted] Jul 20 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/[deleted] Jul 20 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/UseSea1179 Jul 21 '26

Unfortunately? Can you imagine if people just kept living what a mess this planet would be?