Worldwide there are over 500,000 centenarians. By 2025, there should be a million centenarians in the world and 2 million by 2040. This is before the changes that might occur with radically improved antiaging or aging reversal technology.
In 2015, the United States has the most centenarians (people who live to 100) with current estimates as high as 72,000.
A health-conscious lifestyle can boost life expectancy to 90 and bring the odds of reaching 100+ up to about 0.5%
Assuming public health and other progress is the same then reaching 100+ could improve to about 0.5% by 2060.
Japan level life expectancy and health seems achievable by people who follow mostly best-known practice on diet and exercise.
Asian Americans currently have a higher life expectancy than people in Japan.
Worldwide there are 700 confirmed supercentenarians (people who live to 110).
The total numbers of centenarians in Japan are second to the US Japan’s number has almost quadrupled in the last 10 years, making the centenarians population in Japan rising more dramatically than anywhere else.
They follow a diet vegetarian diet, kosher diet (no pork or shellfish) or a diet with fish. There is no smoking.
Brian Wang is a Futurist Thought Leader and a popular Science blogger with 1 million readers per month. His blog Nextbigfuture.com is ranked #1 Science News Blog. It covers many disruptive technology and trends including Space, Robotics, Artificial Intelligence, Medicine, Anti-aging Biotechnology, and Nanotechnology.
Known for identifying cutting edge technologies, he is currently a Co-Founder of a startup and fundraiser for high potential early-stage companies. He is the Head of Research for Allocations for deep technology investments and an Angel Investor at Space Angels.
A frequent speaker at corporations, he has been a TEDx speaker, a Singularity University speaker and guest at numerous interviews for radio and podcasts. He is open to public speaking and advising engagements.
Err…? What’s the theory behind microwaves being unhealthy?
The best thing an American could do for their health is STOP EATING OUT. The second best thing would be to stop eating anything prepackaged or microwaveable. That is just horrible for you. It is amazing how much better you feel when you stop eating it.
Err…? What’s the theory behind microwaves being unhealthy?
The best thing an American could do for their health is STOP EATING OUT. The second best thing would be to stop eating anything prepackaged or microwaveable. That is just horrible for you. It is amazing how much better you feel when you stop eating it.
Average life expectancy in Italy has grown from ~70 maybe in the 1950s to the ~80 years old in the 2010. We have also a much larger population than 70 years ago which means the oldest person living in Italy and / or the world should be more than 10 years older than in the 1950s Still it is about 5-6 years older Which means there is a plateau at abut 110-115
Average life expectancy in Italy has grown from ~70 maybe in the 1950s to the ~80 years old in the 2010. We have also a much larger population than 70 years ago which means the oldest person living in Italy and / or the world should be more than 10 years older than in the 1950s Still it is about 5-6 years older Which means there is a plateau at abut 110-115
I’m guessing the problem isn’t the microwave, but all the processed cr@p in the prepackaged food.
Some of that gain was from reduction in infant mortality and maternal death (death during child birth). The infant mortality rate has gone from 29 out of 1000 in 1950 to 5.6 out of 1000 in 2017 in the US. And the Maternal death rate has gone from about 20 in 1000 in the US in 1950 to 2.6 in 1000 in 2017. The main reasons for this are prenatal care/nutrition, increasing C section rate, antibiotics, blood transfusions, reduction in smoking during pregnancy, improvements in preemie care (adding neonatal wards with incubators, lung treatments, infant surgery) and increase in maternal stature. But we could do even better here: standardizing treatments/practices that work, improving the exercise rates of women (prior to pregnancy, and during the begging of pregnancy), improving the quality of prenatal supplements, and nutrition, reducing toxins in the environment and in food and water, and by more vigorous action of the CDC/FDA and more robust health laws to stop/reduce the spread of pathogens. I think the only deaths we can’t stop are due to large chromosomal anomalies. Single gene stuff we should be able to fix with CRISPR, if we act quickly. Perhaps even treating them before they are born. Every baby should be genotyped before they are born, and any major genetic defect corrected, if possible. This can be done using the mother’s blood. There are some cells from the baby in that blood that can be tested (by either separating or by separating results based on the size of the signals). Reduction in smoking rates and improvements in air and water quality, and awareness of risks from asbestos and radon has also saved lives. Less black lung from less coal mining. Automobile/motorcycle safety has also improved. They did not even require seat belts in the US until 1968. 3 point, airbags, crumple zones, improved handling, improved tires (tires use to blow out all the time), increased automobile reliability, motorcycle helmets, have all improved safety on the road. A
Correct, it is a crime that they can call it food. That kind of food is the reason a lot of Americans (me included but I am getting better after changing my diet) are fat and in general poor health.
Some of that gain was from reduction in infant mortality and maternal death (death during child birth). The infant mortality rate has gone from 29 out of 1000 in 1950 to 5.6 out of 1000 in 2017 in the US. And the Maternal death rate has gone from about 20 in 1000 in the US in 1950 to 2.6 in 1000 in 2017. The main reasons for this are prenatal care/nutrition increasing C section rate antibiotics blood transfusions reduction in smoking during pregnancy improvements in preemie care (adding neonatal wards with incubators lung treatments infant surgery) and increase in maternal stature. But we could do even better here: standardizing treatments/practices that work improving the exercise rates of women (prior to pregnancy and during the begging of pregnancy) improving the quality of prenatal supplements and nutrition reducing toxins in the environment and in food and water and by more vigorous action of the CDC/FDA and more robust health laws to stop/reduce the spread of pathogens. I think the only deaths we can’t stop are due to large chromosomal anomalies. Single gene stuff we should be able to fix with CRISPR if we act quickly. Perhaps even treating them before they are born. Every baby should be genotyped before they are born and any major genetic defect corrected if possible. This can be done using the mother’s blood. There are some cells from the baby in that blood that can be tested (by either separating or by separating results based on the size of the signals).Reduction in smoking rates and improvements in air and water quality and awareness of risks from asbestos and radon has also saved lives. Less black lung from less coal mining. Automobile/motorcycle safety has also improved. They did not even require seat belts in the US until 1968. 3 point airbags crumple zones improved handling improved tires (tires use to blow out all the time) increased automobile reliability motorcycle helmets have all improved safety on the road. Auto fatalities has
Correct it is a crime that they can call it food. That kind of food is the reason a lot of Americans (me included but I am getting better after changing my diet) are fat and in general poor health.
I’m guessing the problem isn’t the microwave but all the processed cr@p in the prepackaged food.
I have noticed looking at my older relatives that they are relatively fit and healthy in their 80s. There seems to be a steep decline after 90 is reached. Right now I have no relatives in the 100. Although in the past a few did reach the century mark.
No argument from me. I have some education in the hard sciences and I am aware irradiation as a food preservative. It is a shame it isn’t used more. It is more like an industrial strength UV light sterilizer with a LOT more penetration.
If we increase 100 times the number of 80 years old and the oldest person living on Earth goes from 110~111 to 115~116 this means that aging goes very fast from 110 to 115 Other wise we would have a few 125 in the world today I hope this clarifies the issue
I think you are failing to grasp that you are messing up apples with oranges you are comparing the increase in AVERAGE expectancy of life with the OLDEST human on Earth Two very different things Regards
If the deaths are not related to aging, then saying those numbers tell us something about maximum human lifespan is irrational.
I think you still miss the point There has probably been ain increase f a factor of 100 on the number of 80enarians in the world since 1950. therefore one might expect a significant increase in the expectancy of life still it is just 5 years more for the olderst person
You push the same argument even though you know your evidence is junk. Why? What do you hope to achieve?
I have noticed looking at my older relatives that they are relatively fit and healthy in their 80s. There seems to be a steep decline after 90 is reached. Right now I have no relatives in the 100. Although in the past a few did reach the century mark.
No argument from me. I have some education in the hard sciences and I am aware irradiation as a food preservative. It is a shame it isn’t used more. It is more like an industrial strength UV light sterilizer with a LOT more penetration.
If we increase 100 times the number of 80 years old and the oldest person living on Earth goes from 110~111 to 115~116 this means that aging goes very fast from 110 to 115 Other wise we would have a few 125 in the world today I hope this clarifies the issue
I think you are failing to grasp that you are messing up apples with oranges you are comparing the increase in AVERAGE expectancy of life with the OLDEST human on Earth Two very different things Regards
If the deaths are not related to aging then saying those numbers tell us something about maximum human lifespan is irrational.
I think you still miss the point There has probably been ain increase f a factor of 100 on the number of 80enarians in the world since 1950. therefore one might expect a significant increase in the expectancy of life still it is just 5 years more for the olderst person
You push the same argument even though you know your evidence is junk. Why? What do you hope to achieve?
1) We probably have no one at 125 since most if not all the most old -living people come from Japan , USA and Europe and all such countries had a fairly well working system at the beginnng of the 1900s 2) I believe we have about 50-100 times more 80 year olds than 50 years ago for the following reasons. a) global population grew about 3 times plus b) most of the countries today have basic health care, not so 70 years ago. Indian and Chinese people were 500 millions or so and averagel life maybe at 50, now they are 2.5 billions and be happy and the y life around 75- years old on average. Soprobably we have many more 80s today there than in 70 years ago And the same goes for developed countres If you assume even only 50 times more 80 year olders today than 70 years ago, then you probably have to assume that life span after 90 or so goes down very fast If you are 60 there is 95% of probability that you reach 61 but if you are 90 there is probably a 70% probability that you reach 91 Otherwise, with all the 80s that are living today, you would have people 150 years old today
Look at my comprehensivereply below
Lookat my reply below
1) We probably have no one at 125 since most if not all the most old -living people come from Japan USA and Europe and all such countries had a fairly well working system at the beginnng of the 1900s 2) I believe we have about 50-100 times more 80 year olds than 50 years ago for the following reasons.a) global population grew about 3 times plus b) most of the countries today have basic health care not so 70 years ago. Indian and Chinese people were 500 millions or so and averagel life maybe at 50 now they are 2.5 billions and be happy and the y life around 75- years old on average. Soprobably we have many more 80s today there than in 70 years ago And the same goes for developed countres If you assume even only 50 times more 80 year olders today than 70 years ago then you probably have to assume that life span after 90 or so goes down very fast If you are 60 there is 95{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} of probability that you reach 61 but if you are 90 there is probably a 70{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} probability that you reach 91 Otherwise with all the 80s that are living today you would have people 150 years old today
Look at my comprehensivereply below
Lookat my reply below
1) We probably have no one at 125 since most if not all the most old -living people come from Japan , USA and Europe and all such countries had a fairly well working system at the beginnng of the 1900s
2) I believe we have about 50-100 times more 80 year olds than 50 years ago for the following reasons.
a) global population grew about 3 times plus
b) most of the countries today have basic health care, not so 70 years ago. Indian and Chinese people were 500 millions or so and averagel life maybe at 50, now they are 2.5 billions and be happy and the y life around 75- years old on average. Soprobably we have many more 80s today there than in 70 years ago
And the same goes for developed countres
If you assume even only 50 times more 80 year olders today than 70 years ago, then you probably have to assume that life span after 90 or so goes down very fast
If you are 60 there is 95% of probability that you reach 61 but if you are 90 there is probably a 70% probability that you reach 91
Otherwise, with all the 80s that are living today, you would have people 150 years old today
Look at my comprehensivereply below
Lookat my reply below
I have noticed looking at my older relatives that they are relatively fit and healthy in their 80s. There seems to be a steep decline after 90 is reached. Right now I have no relatives in the 100. Although in the past a few did reach the century mark.
No argument from me. I have some education in the hard sciences and I am aware irradiation as a food preservative. It is a shame it isn’t used more. It is more like an industrial strength UV light sterilizer with a LOT more penetration.
If we increase 100 times the number of 80 years old and the oldest person living on Earth goes from 110~111 to 115~116 this means that aging goes very fast from 110 to 115
Other wise we would have a few 125 in the world today
I hope this clarifies the issue
I think you are failing to grasp that you are messing up apples with oranges
you are comparing the increase in AVERAGE expectancy of life with the OLDEST human on Earth
Two very different things
Regards
If the deaths are not related to aging, then saying those numbers tell us something about maximum human lifespan is irrational.
I think you still miss the point
There has probably been ain increase f a factor of 100 on the number of 80enarians in the world since 1950.
therefore one might expect a significant increase in the expectancy of life
still it is just 5 years more for the olderst person
You push the same argument even though you know your evidence is junk. Why? What do you hope to achieve?
Some of that gain was from reduction in infant mortality and maternal death (death during child birth). The infant mortality rate has gone from 29 out of 1000 in 1950 to 5.6 out of 1000 in 2017 in the US. And the Maternal death rate has gone from about 20 in 1000 in the US in 1950 to 2.6 in 1000 in 2017. The main reasons for this are prenatal care/nutrition, increasing C section rate, antibiotics, blood transfusions, reduction in smoking during pregnancy, improvements in preemie care (adding neonatal wards with incubators, lung treatments, infant surgery) and increase in maternal stature. But we could do even better here: standardizing treatments/practices that work, improving the exercise rates of women (prior to pregnancy, and during the begging of pregnancy), improving the quality of prenatal supplements, and nutrition, reducing toxins in the environment and in food and water, and by more vigorous action of the CDC/FDA and more robust health laws to stop/reduce the spread of pathogens. I think the only deaths we can’t stop are due to large chromosomal anomalies. Single gene stuff we should be able to fix with CRISPR, if we act quickly. Perhaps even treating them before they are born. Every baby should be genotyped before they are born, and any major genetic defect corrected, if possible. This can be done using the mother’s blood. There are some cells from the baby in that blood that can be tested (by either separating or by separating results based on the size of the signals).
Reduction in smoking rates and improvements in air and water quality, and awareness of risks from asbestos and radon has also saved lives. Less black lung from less coal mining. Automobile/motorcycle safety has also improved. They did not even require seat belts in the US until 1968. 3 point, airbags, crumple zones, improved handling, improved tires (tires use to blow out all the time), increased automobile reliability, motorcycle helmets, have all improved safety on the road. Auto fatalities has gone from 23 deaths per 100,000 per year in the US in 1950 to 12.4 deaths in 2017. And again I think we can reduce that substantially by increasing strength of automobiles, taking licenses away longer perhaps permanently for intoxicated driving, curing people of Toxoplasmosis (CDC says 11% of Americans are infected, but that is old data and it has been spreading without any effort to control its spread). Study after study has found this increased risk of accidents in Toxoplasmosis infected drivers. Infected people are 2-3 times more likely to cause an accident. That translates to thousands of deaths annually. And we can make roads safer by separating oncoming traffic, adding more lanes to reduce congestion, tunneling through steep hills and mountains to straighten and shorten distances. And places where there have been repeated fatal accidents need redesigned. Cure Adenovirus 5, 36 & 37; cause of the obesity epidemic, because heavy people die in accidents more.
Correct, it is a crime that they can call it food. That kind of food is the reason a lot of Americans (me included but I am getting better after changing my diet) are fat and in general poor health.
I’m guessing the problem isn’t the microwave, but all the processed cr@p in the prepackaged food.
Average life expectancy in Italy has grown from ~70 maybe in the 1950s to the ~80 years old in the 2010.
We have also a much larger population than 70 years ago which means the oldest person living in Italy and / or the world should be more than 10 years older than in the 1950s
Still it is about 5-6 years older
Which means there is a plateau at abut 110-115
Err…? What’s the theory behind microwaves being unhealthy?
The best thing an American could do for their health is STOP EATING OUT. The second best thing would be to stop eating anything prepackaged or microwaveable. That is just horrible for you. It is amazing how much better you feel when you stop eating it.