2 ms·

> he hasn't contributed much to the actual research itself From what I've read, he's done quite a bit of this but it's been restricted to a population of one.

> he hasn't contributed much to the actual research itself From what I've read, he's done quite a bit of this but it's been restricted to a population of one. If his healthspan hits 120, the experiment he's run has been successful, no? He's already 46 so we will have a result relatively soon (within 60-70 years).

indoordin0saur 2y ago
In 20 or 30 years you can look and see if he's 99th percentile for his age along whatever metrics (mile run time, VO2 max, skin elasticity, etc.) and that will be an obvious sign of a successful experiment.
Temporary_31337 2y ago
Statistically it will not be a very useful scientific experiment - too many variables, too small sample size. Plus he will die a lot sooner from all the pills he is taking.
- criddell 2y ago
  IMHO, even experiments that don't seem useful today can still be interesting. Dying at age 48, 80, or 150 are all potentially interesting results.
- ericmcer 2y ago
  I really doubt he will die young, people who die in their 40s usually have something they don't notice until it is too late (heart disease, cancer). There is no way he would not notice something like that lol. The amount of testing he undergoes is as interesting as the regimen itself to me. So many things that take you out are very survivable if caught in advance, and he is going to catch everything.
ben_w 2y ago
Results on those timescales are a bit too much of a Pascal's Wager for my liking.
- criddell 2y ago
  How do you get longevity results on short timescales?
  - ben_w 2y ago
    GM lab rats if you want in-vivo, better computational models of you want in-silico. Both are happening; I have no idea what ultimate (or indeed present) limits each has.
    - criddell 2y ago
      Rat experiments would give you longevity results for rats which may or may not be the same in humans. AFAIK, the only way to get actual results for humans is to run the experiment.

indoordin0saur 2y ago

In 20 or 30 years you can look and see if he's 99th percentile for his age along whatever metrics (mile run time, VO2 max, skin elasticity, etc.) and that will be an obvious sign of a successful experiment.

Temporary_31337 2y ago

Statistically it will not be a very useful scientific experiment - too many variables, too small sample size. Plus he will die a lot sooner from all the pills he is taking.

criddell 2y ago
IMHO, even experiments that don't seem useful today can still be interesting. Dying at age 48, 80, or 150 are all potentially interesting results.
ericmcer 2y ago
I really doubt he will die young, people who die in their 40s usually have something they don't notice until it is too late (heart disease, cancer). There is no way he would not notice something like that lol. The amount of testing he undergoes is as interesting as the regimen itself to me. So many things that take you out are very survivable if caught in advance, and he is going to catch everything.

ben_w 2y ago

Results on those timescales are a bit too much of a Pascal's Wager for my liking.

criddell 2y ago
How do you get longevity results on short timescales?
- ben_w 2y ago
  GM lab rats if you want in-vivo, better computational models of you want in-silico. Both are happening; I have no idea what ultimate (or indeed present) limits each has.
  - criddell 2y ago
    Rat experiments would give you longevity results for rats which may or may not be the same in humans. AFAIK, the only way to get actual results for humans is to run the experiment.