The article reports, "There are some however, who regard the pioneering scientist [Aubrey de Grey] to be something of a maverick." That's an understatement. After an earlier discussion about Aubrey de Grey here on Hacker News, I spent an afternoon at a university library looking up publications by him, about him, and about his hypotheses about human aging. Basically, there are a lot of people who think his mitochondrial free-radical hypothesis about aging has already been demonstrated to be wrong.[1] His biography article page on Wikipedia is an interesting example of a page about a living person that is mostly edited by fans, as it has been full of statements over the years that cannot be verified by any published source, contrary to Wikipedia policy for articles about living persons. I would not count on de Grey's program, which is hardly ever published about in any journal except the journal he owns and edits, to produce the big gains in longevity that he predicts.
On the other hand, incremental progress by thousands of more careful researchers has already led to major gains in healthy lifespan. Girls born since 2000 in the developed world are more likely than not to reach the age of 100 (not 1,000, as de Grey is mentioned as saying in the article submitted here), with boys likely to enjoy lifespans almost as long. The article "The Biodemography of Human Ageing" by James Vaupel,[2] originally published in the journal Nature in 2010, is a good current reference on the subject. Vaupel is one of the leading scholars on the demography of aging and how to adjust for time trends in life expectancy. His striking finding is "Humans are living longer than ever before. In fact, newborn children in high-income countries can expect to live to more than 100 years. Starting in the mid-1800s, human longevity has increased dramatically and life expectancy is increasing by an average of six hours a day."[3]
An article in a series on Slate, "Why Are You Not Dead Yet? Life expectancy doubled in past 150 years. Here’s why"[4] Provides some of the background.
Life expectancy at age 40, at age 60, and at even higher ages is still rising throughout the developed countries of the world.[5] Steady, incremental progress like this is likely to matter for more improvements in healthy lifespan in our lifetimes than hypotheses (not really "theories") not as tightly tied to empirical experience.
On the other hand, incremental progress by thousands of more careful researchers has already led to major gains in healthy lifespan. Girls born since 2000 in the developed world are more likely than not to reach the age of 100 (not 1,000, as de Grey is mentioned as saying in the article submitted here), with boys likely to enjoy lifespans almost as long. The article "The Biodemography of Human Ageing" by James Vaupel,[2] originally published in the journal Nature in 2010, is a good current reference on the subject. Vaupel is one of the leading scholars on the demography of aging and how to adjust for time trends in life expectancy. His striking finding is "Humans are living longer than ever before. In fact, newborn children in high-income countries can expect to live to more than 100 years. Starting in the mid-1800s, human longevity has increased dramatically and life expectancy is increasing by an average of six hours a day."[3]
An article in a series on Slate, "Why Are You Not Dead Yet? Life expectancy doubled in past 150 years. Here’s why"[4] Provides some of the background.
Life expectancy at age 40, at age 60, and at even higher ages is still rising throughout the developed countries of the world.[5] Steady, incremental progress like this is likely to matter for more improvements in healthy lifespan in our lifetimes than hypotheses (not really "theories") not as tightly tied to empirical experience.
[1] http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-free-radical-th...
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20021368
http://news.discovery.com/human/aging-free-radicals-antioxid...
[2] http://www.demographic-challenge.com/files/downloads/2eb51e2...
[3] http://www.prb.org/Journalists/Webcasts/2010/humanlongevity....
[4] http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science_of_...
[5] http://www.nature.com/scientificamerican/journal/v307/n3/box...