1 hour agoCreated a post • 44 points @deegles
"the WTP at birth for the initial 1-year increase in remaining LE from 78.9 to 79.9 years via rectangularization is US$118,100, the WTP at age 60 for the first 1-year increase in remaining LE from 21.7 to 22.7 years through lifespan improvement is US$257,700."
Who the fuck did they get to determine willingness? Most people don't have the money to spend. If it takes you years of extra work to pay for a one year life extension, why not just retire years earlier and enjoy that time? After all, you could still die from an accident after paying the sum at birth/60. It seems highly inappropriate to use a population based metric like life expectancy to have individuals decide if they want a one year increase (likely the individuals don't understand life expectancy as well as).Reply
I know some really spry older (60-80) people. Good diet and exercise is what they have in common.
It also helps with mental health (which we have an epidemic of in the US).
By all means, this research should continue. But we do already have very good solutions to aging which are sorely overlooked.Reply
Maybe conservatives worrying about death panels in 2008 weren't so crazy...Reply
This reminds me of some articles that came out when the states sued the tobacco companies in the 1990s. Many asked why the US federal government did not sue as well, and the answer turned out to be that smoking is good for the federal government finances. It tends to kill people quickly (heart attack) just after they retire and start collecting social security.Reply
A cure for aging only needs to get through human clinical trials for treating one aging-associated condition like osteoporosis. Once it has FDA approval for treating that one condition it can be prescribed off-label by a willing physician. If the osteoporosis treatment has unusual side effects of also making skin appear more youthful, improving short term memory, and increasing libido, then there will probably be a lot of off-label prescriptions written a few years later.
So if you have a great way to cure aging but are worried that the FDA does not recognize aging as a condition, that's how you get the treatment to market.Reply
Not surprised David Sinclair is one of the co-authors. Anti-aging is a fascinating new field. It's great that there's some discussion about economical aspects of "slow down aging" at a large scale.Reply
The average age of university presidents and members of Congress in the USA is in the 70s. At the risk of sounding callous can we fix our gerontoctratic system and then fix aging?Reply
It’s obvious that healthy people that live shorter are better for the ‘economy’ but clearly humanity doesn’t live to optimize for the economy. If we did, we would be fighting obesity with 10x the seriousness of how we fight COVID.Reply
I only skimmed past the abstract (wolverine case is gold, lol) feel that such an analysis gets squirrely, both morally and technically.
A few years back, there seemed to be a desire to justify cigarette taxes with a "it costs the state money when you get cancer" rationale. Some of the analysis seemed to indicate opposite results. Lung cancer, for example, tends to kill more quickly than age related diseases, saving on nursing home costs and palliative care. Everyone dies of something after all, and death is expensive as is aging.
Either way, it seems kind of strange to place economic values on life itself. I mean isn't economic utility premised on life?
In any case, it seems trivially true that economic measures will always correlate with either population size working age population size, depending on the model.
I feel like these kinds of papers only exist to be cited in support of cheap rhetoric.Reply
There are a lot of DIYers experimenting with senolytics and Rapamycin therapies for longevity. I expect that in the next 10 years or so evidence will be clear that at least some of these therapies work. It will be undeniable as more and more people start to hit their 80s, 90s, and beyond in very good health.
I'm in my 30s so not in need yet but I'm keeping a close eye on the science.
For example, this clinical trial  is studying the safety of various dosing schedules of Rapamycin, and a planned followup study will use the safest dose with a larger group and longer timeline.Reply