Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 262

Why we will live for at least 1,000 years

My thesis is that medical technology will not just cure the various illnesses of aging, but it will stop and then reverse aging itself. While our technological progress will be punctuated and irregular, each advance will incrementally extend our human lifespan. For most of us, these advances should be sufficient, each time, to increase lifespan long enough to allow time for the next advance, such that our healthy lifespan should be, effectively, infinite (but let’s call it 1,000 years).

While this may be a startling claim, I hope to show that it is not at all unreasonable and ultimately inevitable.

We start with the claim that the human body is just a machine. Indeed, an extraordinarily complex one, but at the end of the day, a machine that is subject to the same universal laws of physics, mechanics, chemistry and biochemistry. In other words, there is nothing mystical or magical about how the human body works.

Given sufficient technology, knowledge, time and resources, there is nothing, in principle, that will prevent us from maintaining the human body in the same way that we can maintain other machines. And in the same way that any other machine, given the right care and replacement parts, can be maintained forever, so can our human bodies.

When viewed in this way, we can understand medicine as simply a form of highly complex engineering applied to the human body. Once we have mastered the relevant technologies and techniques, the challenges will not be insurmountable.

Indeed, medicine is rapidly transforming into information science. This is a process which started with gene sequencing and has moved on to new technologies like iPS cells and CRISPR – where we are increasingly mastering our ability to synthesize the tools and materials we need. Moreover, as more and more of medicine becomes information science, it will benefit from exponential, rather than linear, progress.

Understanding aging

The best way to understand aging is to consider it a gradual accumulation of different types of damage in the body.

In order to understand the concept of accumulated damage, let us use the analogy of a laptop computer. When it is new, the hard drive is mostly empty, it has few programs installed and runs rapidly and faultlessly. But over time, the hard drive gets filled up and fragmented, more and more software gets activated on startup, malware and spyware creep in, the registry gets cluttered, etc. Moreover, dust enters the casing, the cooling fan slows down and the springs in the keyboard get worn out.

These are all forms of ‘accumulated damage’ which result in the laptop becoming slow and faulty. After accumulating all this damage, we can say that the laptop has ‘aged’. Many aspects of the laptops functionality degrade until it succumbs to old age (too much accumulated damage) and dies.

When it comes to a laptop, we understand how to rejuvenate it: we can de-fragment, or reformat the hard- drive, or even replace it. We can add and replace memory and faulty keys – or even the whole keyboard. We can reinstall the operating system from scratch and remove unneeded software. We can use an anti-virus program to remove malware. And we can even replace and upgrade the CPU and/or the motherboard. In doing so, we can stop and even reverse the aging of the laptop, and can, in principle, keep it running forever.

Similarly, the illnesses of aging are either caused by, or are a direct manifestation of damage accumulated in the human body. For example: Heart disease is mostly caused by the accumulation of plaque in the arteries. If we were able to remove that plaque, we would largely remove heart disease. Similarly, Alzheimers is believed to be mostly the result of accumulated junk in and between brain cells as well as the loss of neurons. All of these forms of accumulated damage are, in principle, reversible.

Aubrey de Grey and others have already identified the seven types of accumulated damage in the human body that we call ‘aging’. He has also identified plausible methods by which medical science, or medical engineering will be able to stop and reverse all of these seven types of accumulated damage. Researchers are already working on methods and cures to stop and reverse all these.

Strategies to combat aging

Once we understand that aging is essentially the accumulation of damage at the organ, cellular and molecular level within our bodies, four interconnected strategies become apparent to combat aging:

  • Slowing down the accumulation of damage in the body
  • Reducing, delaying or bypassing the effects of accumulated damage in the body
  • Repairing the accumulated damage in the body
  • Replacing body parts that have accumulated too much damage

All four strategies are already being pursued in parallel. Because they are interconnected, it is likely that success and progress on any of the four strategies will help inform and promote progress on the other three strategies. From my reading and analysis, I believe that only strategy 3 will lead to an indefinitely long healthy lifespan.

Objections to this thesis

  • New medical developments will be available only for the super-rich.
    Like all new technologies, new medical solutions will rapidly filter down from the rich to the middle class to the poor as economies of scale reduce costs.

  • Progress may take much longer than we expect.
    Initially, progress may well be slower than we expect and our lives might end before sufficient progress is achieved, but the predictions above have significant margin of safety.

  • Medicine is becoming an information/engineering science subject to exponential progress.

  • We are making progress on other technologies which will also help, including nanotechnology, artificial intelligence, artificial organs and others.

  • Incremental progress will increase lifespan, buying more time for more progress.

  • Extending life span beyond 120 and reversing aging may be an ‘all or nothing’ endeavour.
    Making partial progress may be of limited value since it just means something else will kill us soon after. For example, it has been argued that curing cancer would only add about three years to the average human lifespan as those that would have died from cancer end up dying from some other age related illness soon after.

  • We are already working on methods to stop and revere all seven types of accumulated damage and curing all age-related diseases.

  • At age 120, most humans would suffer from terminal cancer, terminal Alzheimer’s, terminal diabetes, terminal heart disease, etc all at the same time. Therefore, breaking beyond the 120 age limit may indeed be all-or-nothing. However, extending healthy lifespan up to 120 is probably not all-or-nothing with partial progress having meaningful life extending impact.

  • Age 120 is still a long time away, thus there should be sufficient time to make progress on all Partial and even limited progress on all fronts will buy us more time to make further progress.

  • Radically extending lifespan will cause severe problems.
    Such problems may include overpopulation, social unrest, mass unemployment, pollution and water shortage.

  • As life expectancy increases, birth rates will rapidly decline.

  • We are well on the way to solving energy, water, pollution, food and other problems via advanced technology. Once these issues are solved, overpopulation will no longer be a problem.


Over the next few decades, medical science (increasingly called medical engineering) will provide ways to both stop and reverse the accumulation of damage in the human body that we call aging. As a result, life expectancies will increase rapidly until reaching the tipping point where life expectancy increases by more than one year every year at which point death due to aging becomes improbable.

If we exclude horrific dystopian futures such as a global nuclear war, or similar overwhelming disasters, I see no credible future scenario where an essentially infinite healthy lifespan for humans does not happen. The only significant uncertainty from my perspective is timing.


Ori Eyal is the Founder and Managing Partner of Emerging Value Capital Management. Given the nature of these conclusions, Ori has provided a full reference list for further discovery. 



Ending Aging by Aubrey de Grey

Transcend: Nine Steps to Living Well Forever by Ray Kurzweil

Fantastic Voyage: Live Long Enough To Live Forever by Ray Kurzweil

Abundance: The Future Is Better Than You Think by Peter Diamandis


Experts in the field

Aubrey de Grey -

David Gobel -

Ray Kurzweil -

Peter Diamandis -

Nathaniel David -

Jan van Deursen -

Cynthia Kenyon -

Matt Kaeberlein -

Laura Deming -

Nir Barzilai -

Leonard Guarente -

Craig Venter -

Michael Greve -


Foundations and Research Organisations

Sens Research Foundation -

Methuselah Foundation -

Institute for Aging Research -

Max Life -

Gerontology Research Group -

Super Centenarian Research Foundation -

Forever Healthy -

USC Longevity Institute -



Unity Biotechnology -

The Longevity Fund -

Elysium Health -

Human Longevity -

Calico -



Longevity Poll -

Longevity Science -

Grand Challenge for Healthy Longevity -

Silicon-valleys-quest-to-live-forever -

Fight Aging -

John Livesay - aubrey-de-gray/


References in article






Carol Chambers
July 19, 2018

Oh dear, what negative comments.

I LOVED this article! For as long as I can remember I have always said that I will live to 120 years old....and here it is in writing with all the reasons why.

Mind you to make sure it happens I live a life with a positive outlook no matter what happens, I eat a very healthy balanced diet and exercise several hours a day and yes I am fortunate to have the time to do that. Overall I remain optimistic and laugh a great deal.

Thank you for the article, I look forward to reading the other references

Ben Wilson-Powell
July 16, 2018

Scary, but a tad of truth to it!

July 13, 2018

There appear to be many mis-assumptions throughout this article but, in particular, "We are well on the way to solving energy, water, pollution, food and other problems”.

If anything, the evidence is to the contrary and as populations increase - partly as a consequence of increased longevity - we are not breaking even on these issues (”and other problems”) which history shows can eventually lead to conflict.

To add a philosophical question to a technical article, for what reasons would anyone want to live to be 1000 ?

July 12, 2018

This essay is built on such sloppy logic that it is difficult to know where to start. Basic thinking is that just because linear projection is difficult, lets just imagine any kind of future. Decay or breakdowns in complex systems are also not simple. Complex systems are complex because they have complex connections and dependencies within and with the outside. While a hip or heart may be replaced to gain few more years, surgeons understand that replacing a replaced heart is very complex and if the person also has a replaced kidney then chances of further substitutions are very small. Assumption that the environment in which we will live will remain friendly to life needs support which is not supplied. There is also a assumption that we all want to live forever. I am wondering on the age of the author. I am over 70 and I have seen the problems of extension of life - meaningless and irrelevant existence, patronized and ignored by the society and nothing to look forward to except helplessness and hopelessness. A long life is only part of the solution.

Phil K
July 12, 2018

And yet, we still haven't conquered the common cold.
But more importantly, medical science doesn't just have to keep advancing but has to do so at a rate that more than compensates for the rate of genetic mutation (which appears to be exponential).


Leave a Comment:



Beyond financial solutions for longevity

Balancing longevity and sequencing risk


Most viewed in recent weeks

10 reasons wealthy homeowners shouldn't receive welfare

The RBA Governor says rising house prices are due to "the design of our taxation and social security systems". The OECD says "the prolonged boom in house prices has inflated the wealth of many pensioners without impacting their pension eligibility." What's your view?

House prices surge but falls are common and coming

We tend to forget that house prices often fall. Direct lending controls are more effective than rate rises because macroprudential limits affect the volume of money for housing leaving business rates untouched.

Survey responses on pension eligibility for wealthy homeowners

The survey drew a fantastic 2,000 responses with over 1,000 comments and polar opposite views on what is good policy. Do most people believe the home should be in the age pension asset test, and what do they say?

100 Aussies: five charts on who earns, pays and owns

Any policy decision needs to recognise who is affected by a change. It pays to check the data on who pays taxes, who owns assets and who earns the income to ensure an equitable and efficient outcome.

Three good comments from the pension asset test article

With articles on the pensions assets test read about 40,000 times, 3,500 survey responses and thousands of comments, there was a lot of great reader participation. A few comments added extra insights.

The sorry saga of housing affordability and ownership

It is hard to think of any area of widespread public concern where the same policies have been pursued for so long, in the face of such incontrovertible evidence that they have failed to achieve their objectives.

Latest Updates


$1 billion and counting: how consultants maximise fees

Despite cutbacks in public service staff, we are spending over a billion dollars a year with five consulting firms. There is little public scrutiny on the value for money. How do consultants decide what to charge?

Investment strategies

Two strong themes and companies that will benefit

There are reasons to believe inflation will stay under control, and although we may see a slowing in the global economy, two companies should benefit from the themes of 'Stable Compounders' and 'Structural Winners'.

Financial planning

Reducing the $5,300 upfront cost of financial advice

Many financial advisers have left the industry because it costs more to produce advice than is charged as an up-front fee. Advisers are valued by those who use them while the unadvised don’t see the need to pay.


Many people misunderstand what life expectancy means

Life expectancy numbers are often interpreted as the likely maximum age of a person but that is incorrect. Here are three reasons why the odds are in favor of people outliving life expectancy estimates.

Investment strategies

Slowing global trade not the threat investors fear

Investors ask whether global supply chains were stretched too far and too complex, and following COVID, is globalisation dead? New research suggests the impact on investment returns will not be as great as feared.

Investment strategies

Wealth doesn’t equal wisdom for 'sophisticated' investors

'Sophisticated' investors can be offered securities without the usual disclosure requirements given to everyday investors, but far more people now qualify than was ever intended. Many are far from sophisticated.

Investment strategies

Is the golden era for active fund managers ending?

Most active fund managers are the beneficiaries of a confluence of favourable events. As future strong returns look challenging, passive is rising and new investors do their own thing, a golden age may be closing.



© 2021 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. Any general advice or ‘regulated financial advice’ under New Zealand law has been prepared by Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892) and/or Morningstar Research Ltd, subsidiaries of Morningstar, Inc, without reference to your objectives, financial situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide (AU) and Financial Advice Provider Disclosure Statement (NZ). You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.

Website Development by Master Publisher.