“Stay young – live longer!” – which sounds like a current health guide, is in fact a bestseller from 1951. The author Gayelord Hauser promoted above all a whole-foods diet enriched with dried milk powder, yeast extract and molasses. “I have devoured everything and anything about longevity,” he writes. “Why? Well, because I want to live at least one hundred years.”
The current boom around “Longevity,” that is, a as-long-as-possible and healthy life, is thus less a new trend than a revival of an ancient longing. Advances in aging research bring the dream of longevity within reach – but in the wings there continues a lot of charlatanry and scams.
But first the good news: researchers today know much better which processes drive the body’s decline. Cell damage from free radicals or chronic inflammation are among them. The mitochondria, the “powerhouses” of the cells, also lose efficiency over time.
As a consequence, so-called “senescent” cells arise – nonfunctional cells that no longer divide but also do not die and accumulate in tissues. This development starts comparatively early, around the age of 30. Current studies show that people born after 1965 age even faster than the generation before.
Aging, a controllable process
The growing knowledge about aging processes at the molecular level has now changed the perspective. Aging is no longer seen as a purely fated process. “Aging is rather malleable,” says Hubert Trübel, physician and author of the book “Longevity – the Anti-Bullshit Formula.”
What influences the aging processes? Of course age itself is a factor, as is how healthy the organs are; gender is a second. Women typically enjoy a longer life expectancy than men. Current research also shows that traumatic experiences or extreme heat burden the body enough to shift the aging clock. Genes also play a role – all of these are factors that an individual cannot influence.
However, a large-scale study last year showed that lifestyle factors have a significantly greater influence on lifespan than genetics. There are only a few diseases in which hereditary factors have a larger leverage. “The influence of genes is estimated at about 10 to 15 percent,” says Joris Deelen of the Max Planck Institute for Biology of Aging to Zeit Online.
When it comes to lifestyle factors, nutrition in particular plays a key role. A look at the so-called “Blue Zones” provides striking examples. In regions like Okinawa in Japan or Cilento in Italy, people reach old age more frequently and often stay healthy for a long time. Centenarians in Cilento, according to blood values in the CIAO study, had a biological age 8.3 years younger. This is attributed, on the one hand, to their calorie-light, Mediterranean diet with plenty of olive oil. Severe overweight is practically non-existent in the Blue Zones.
On the other hand, the Italians aged 100 in the CIAO study were also remarkably mentally fit and emotionally stable. The reason could be that the very elderly were socially well integrated and also pursued hobbies such as solving puzzles, being creative, or making music. “Loneliness and the feeling of not being needed anymore is, conversely, associated with a shorter healthy lifespan,” says Trübel. “I therefore recommend consciously nurturing contacts, club activities, and volunteer roles.”
Don’t smoke, don’t drink, don’t stress
The effects of other classic elements of a healthy lifestyle are well established as well: abstaining from nicotine and limiting alcohol, regular exercise, adequate sleep, and keeping stress as low as possible. Stress reduction, for example through yoga or medication, seems sensible. Notably, changes can still have an impact even in older age.
Studies suggest that it is never too late to adopt healthy habits. According to a Russian study from 2021, with a good lifestyle, robust genetics, and a bit of luck, the lifespan could be extended to up to 150 years.
A large-scale study last year showed that lifestyle factors have a significantly greater influence on lifespan than genetics
Beyond simple prevention, the dream of a long and healthy life has become a multi-billion market. This ranges from dietary supplements, wearables and apps to diagnostics and dubious rejuvenation treatments in anti-aging clinics. Experts watch the growing market skeptically. Much of it is indeed intensively studied, but not every treatment lives up to its promises.
“For vitamins and dietary supplements, there is usually no demonstrated benefit; they are only useful in the case of a proven deficiency,” says Trübel. “The effect of omega-3 fatty acids is, for example, small.” Also for the much-praised spermidine, which naturally occurs in soy, wheat germ, and cheese, there is a lack of evidence of effectiveness when taken in highly concentrated capsules.
Hacking the body with data
Besides vitamin powders, self-tracking is also popular in the longevity scene. Using biomarkers and digital technologies, individual risk profiles are to be created to detect diseases early or even prevent them — this is called “biohacking.”
Among the best-known self-optimizers is the 47-year-old American entrepreneur Bryan Johnson, who wants to reverse his biological aging process. In his project “Blueprint” he records vast amounts of biodata daily; his daily life is meticulously planned, with fixed sleep times, a vegan diet, numerous dietary supplements, and strict fitness training.
He also tests rejuvenation treatments on his own body that have so far no proven effect. For example, he had his son’s blood plasma injected. The rationale: in animal experiments, aging processes in the organs of a mouse could be reversed by the blood of a younger mouse. According to his biomarkers, Johnson is on average 5 to 10 years younger than his real age.
In rejuvenation medicine, paid-out-of-pocket options also include cryotherapy chambers, red-light therapy, or treatment with medical oxygen. Again, there is no proven evidence that these slow aging processes. Sometimes growth hormones are administered in anti-aging clinics — a method that could be not only ineffective but potentially cancer-promoting.
Drugs against aging
In serious medicine, research is being conducted into other pharmacological interventions in the aging process. One approach are so-called senolytics – substances intended to selectively destroy senescent cells. “Dasatinib, a cancer drug, and quercetin, a secondary plant substance from the flavonoid group, are among the best-studied compounds,” says Trübel. Initial human studies are currently underway.
Other strategies are also being tested. The drug rapamycin, which is used, among other things, in transplantations, also extended the lifespan of mice in studies. It dampens inflammatory processes in cells and makes metabolism more efficient. Yet human studies are still lacking.
Modern gene technologies like CRISPR also open the possibility to specifically modify age-relevant genes or reprogram cells. This would require the development of gene therapies. Currently, corresponding experiments come with significant side effects. Some researchers doubt that there will ever be a corresponding “wonder pill.”
With the progress of longevity research, societal and ethical questions also grow. Already today, many of the new therapies are expensive and accessible only to the well-to-do. Critics warn of a possible “two-tier society of aging.” At the same time, one hesitates to imagine the consequences a markedly increased life expectancy would have for pension systems, labor markets, and social structures.
And not everyone wishes to become extremely old. A survey among our Austrian neighbors in 2019 showed that at least a quarter of respondents did not want to experience their 150th birthday, even if it would occur in good health. Gayelord Hauser would probably have answered this question differently. With his modest means at the time, he nonetheless reached almost 90 years of age—and apparently in very good health.
