Longevity! An ancient obsession of the ancient acupuncture practitioners, and now an obsession of the (mostly male) elite.
This is a summary of a lengthy article in the New Yorker, who’s actual title is “How to Live Forever and Get Rich Doing It”. It features a number of current experts both in the science and financial aspects of the longevity movement.
My take? Keep it simple (though not necessarily easy!). As Roizen (an anesthesiologist like me and decades into an interest in longevity) says, the main stays of a longer life are exercise, diet and sleep. Work on those before worrying about supplements. Roizen says “You can make a thirty-two-year difference in your life span by implementing the no-brainer stuff…but you can gain only four years by taking supplements.” Quite a claim!!
I also would say, do NOT invest your money heavily in any hyped longivity therapies. It’s too soon.
“Today’s biohackers sometimes look to antiquity for inspiration. This usually involves hormesis—a mild ordeal, such as exercise, fasting, or cold plunges, that can shock cellular pathways into better health. ” For the dear readers of my book (thank you!) they will recognize this advice.
Most quotable quote “Most biohackers are men, for the same reason that most gambling addicts are men.” For me, maybe that says it all. Many of the high priced strategies and interventions are a gamble. It’s not that you’ll just be out money, they could shorten your life, a bet I’m not willing to take. Recently, Bryan Johnson gave up rapamycin because it was making all of his markers worse. Video here.
The research is often in mice or even smaller creatures, making the research very iffy.
“Animal proxies turn out to be not all that proximate. Lab mice share eighty-five per cent of our DNA, and they live only about two years—a useful period when you hope to quickly determine whether a given peptide might be the long-sought elixir. But mice don’t have heart attacks or get Alzheimer’s, and their muscles waste suddenly, rather than gradually, as ours do. More than eighty per cent of animal-tested therapeutics fail in people.”
One key quote that, of course, I approved of, was Marcelle, the physician sister of Peter Diamandis, the main expert and booster for longevity hacks said
“Pete, listen to me,” Marcelle implored. “You’re chasing all this, chasing these markers of senescent cells. What you need to chase is stress. Breathing, and being present, and family, that’s what reduces stress.” (And acupuncture!!)
Longevity Science: Competing Visions, Tangled Realities
The modern longevity movement blends high optimism, deep biological complexity, and big money. At its center, Peter Diamandis—entrepreneur, physician, and founder of Fountain Life clinics and the $81 million Healthspan XPrize—frames aging as an engineering problem. His goal: extend healthspan by 20 years by 2030 using AI, biotech, and diagnostics. His model attracts wealthy clients willing to spend tens of thousands annually for advanced scans, blood tests, and experimental therapies, but also draws criticism for conflicts of interest, hype, and reliance on unproven interventions.
Different Approaches to Living Longer
Technology-Driven Optimists
Diamandis, inspired by Ray Kurzweil’s predictions of radical life extension by 2029 and human–AI merger by 2045, invests in emergent technologies from stem-cell injections (Hans Keirstead, Immunis) to brain-uploading concepts (Michael Andregg). Bryan Johnson, founder of the “Don’t Die” movement, exemplifies extreme self-experimentation—caloric restriction, devices, and biomarker tracking—framed as a pathway to eternal life. Aubrey de Grey’s concept of “longevity escape velocity” underpins much of this thinking: halt aging now, reverse it later. (Aubrey de Grey has been around forever, I need to read up more on him).
Functional and Measurable Gains
Some researchers focus on practical function rather than speculative immortality. The XPrize competition measures improvements in strength, cognition, and immune function, reflecting input from Steve Horvath, creator of epigenetic clocks, but moving beyond biological-age scores to tangible performance. David Sinclair calls this a “Wright brothers moment” for translating lab results to humans.
Lifestyle-First Strategies
Veteran physician Michael Roizen emphasizes proven basics—diet, exercise, sleep, stress control—adding decades of life at minimal cost. He warns that expensive supplements add little in comparison. Peter Attia prioritizes muscle mass for resilience and disease prevention. Luigi Ferrucci (mitochondria focus) and Tony Wyss-Coray (brain health) stress specific biological targets, while Tenzin Wangyal Rinpoche distills longevity to “eight hours of sleep.” Peter Attia, a physician and author of Outlive, argues that muscle mass is one of the strongest protectors against decline. Strong muscles reduce the risk of falls, help prevent fat accumulation, and even protect against dementia.
Key Health Issues and Scientific Challenges
Complexity and Trade-offs
Aging involves at least 12 interconnected “hallmarks” (DNA instability, inflammation, stem-cell exhaustion, etc.), each with benefits and drawbacks. Nir Barzilai explains antagonistic pleiotropy—traits like IGF-1 or cholesterol that help youth but harm in age. Interventions such as rapamycin or caloric restriction can slow some processes but worsen others (e.g., muscle loss, immune suppression).
Translation Gap
Animal results often fail in humans: >80% of promising therapeutics don’t make the leap. Mice, despite genetic similarity, don’t share key human aging patterns like gradual muscle loss or heart disease. Eric Verdin cautions that deeper biological problems grow exponentially harder to solve.
Intervention Interactions
“Combinatorics”—mixing multiple drugs/supplements—might offer synergy, says Joseph Raffaele, but can backfire through unknown interactions or liver overload. Nathan Price sees potential in personalized “digital twins” to model combinations, but real-world safety remains uncertain.
Gender Differences
Women’s aging is strongly shaped by ovarian decline, leading to different disease patterns and treatment responses. XPrize is exploring a separate ovarian-health prize.
Financial Dimensions
Wealth Access and Inequity
High-end longevity clinics like Fountain Life charge $21,500+ annually for memberships, tests, and supplements, creating an elite tier of health optimization. Diamandis’s network—wealthy, mostly male, often investors—enjoys early access to therapies years before public availability. As one startup CEO quipped: “We don’t work in mice. We work in billionaires.”
Investment Strategies
Longevity is framed as both personal insurance and a wealth opportunity. Diamandis and his partners back early-stage companies, aiming for massive returns on hits like Oura Ring. Sergey Young advises investing no more than 2–3% of wealth—it’s still an early, risky sector. Joe Polish notes that fear of missing out, not just optimism, drives affluent investors into A.I. and longevity plays.
Conflicts of Interest
In the tight “Peterverse,” investors, clinicians, and promoters often overlap. Diamandis has promoted companies he’s invested in, and his close ties required formal distancing from XPrize judging.
Skepticism vs. Faith
Some experts, like Jordan Shlain, dismiss direct lifespan-extension attempts as “bullshit,” focusing instead on extending healthy years through proven means. Andrea Maier points out that most clinic patients are already “polished diamonds” with marginal room for improvement. Even believers like Diamandis admit biology’s complexity and that current tools—rapamycin, NAD+, caloric restriction—are “pebbles in an ocean.”
Others, like Kurzweil, maintain death is the true tragedy, with technology poised to erase it. For him and peers, the prize is not just healthspan but potentially limitless life, whether in biological or digital form.
In the end, the field splits into overlapping camps: pragmatists who prioritize cost-effective, evidence-based healthspan gains; optimists who bet on near-term breakthroughs; and visionaries who see a post-human, AI-integrated future. All face the same stubborn truth: biology resists simple fixes, and resources—both biological and financial—may run out before the most ambitious dreams come true.
