Thiel is misinterpreting the increase in lifespan data. It's a famous dataset, but it's intepreted in terms of decreasing infant mortality -- not an increase i

Thiel is misinterpreting the increase in lifespan data. It's a famous dataset, but it's intepreted in terms of decreasing infant mortality -- not an increase in the average upper limits. Over the last couple hundred years, the average western lifespan if you've made it to age 40 has increased by about ten years. However, infant and childhood mortality (and death due to childbirth in someone's twenties) have gone through the floor, leading to the graph Thiel is using here. The ~6 years of lifespan gained at age 65 since the 60s largely has to do with basic geriatric care (60 years ago, a fall leading to a broken hip would kill you at age 70) rather than true "life extension". Also, many therapies for things like cancer at that age can keep you alive, but quality of life is another thing entirely; and then it still kills you.