I agree that it's fun to imagine, but the realities of longevity is probably a lot more prosaic. Granted Jeanna Clement can spoke for 100 years and be fine, but

I agree that it's fun to imagine, but the realities of longevity is probably a lot more prosaic. Granted Jeanna Clement can spoke for 100 years and be fine, but that doesn't mean the rest of us won't get lung cancer 10 years in if we try it. So, at present, the real secret to longevity is either superior genes (which isn't mass distributable except over a great many generations, and even then, it means giving up a portion of our genetic diversity on a societal level), disciplined lifestyles (30% less caloric intake according to the article, which means you can kiss your gains and muscular physique good-bye), and some very tricky and expensive combination of advance medicine (which, in a world where there are people who still starve to death, seems rather out of reach). In addition, you have to avoid all accidents, which is entirely out of your hands. In a lot of ways, the concern over mass longevity squeezing the world to death is like the concern over AI robots who become intelligent enough to eradicate all of humanity or the gays mass-releasing gay gay-marriage-spores that make all the straight people fall out of love. It's fun to speculate, write country songs about, and produce post-apocalyptic movies around, but being seriously worried about it as a social issue is a little unrealistic.