A recent study reveals that only 5% of baby girls and around 2% of baby boys born today are expected to reach the age of 100. CNN
Gerontologist Jay Olshansky has long faced criticism for his views on human lifespan, especially after he and his colleagues predicted decades ago that children would likely live only until around age 85. At the time, many people found this prediction hard to accept, as more optimistic forecasts suggested that about half of all newborns would reach the age of 100. However, recent research published by Olshansky and his team provides evidence supporting his original claims.
In an analysis of lifespan data from various countries, including Australia, Japan, and the United States, Olshansky reveals a stark reality: only 5.1% of girls born in 2019 in these nations have a chance of living to 100, while the odds for boys are even lower at just 1.8%. “We waited 30 years to test our hypothesis,” Olshansky remarked. “We have shown the era of rapid increases in human life expectancy has ended, just as we predicted.” He emphasized that while life expectancy is still increasing, the pace is slowing down significantly compared to previous decades.
When asked about the widespread belief that humans will soon live to be 120 or even 150 years old, Olshansky dismissed such claims as mere speculation without solid scientific backing. “Those are all made-up numbers. There is no way to empirically verify claims of radical life extension that are being made by folks in this industry,” he stated. He pointed out that aging, which leads to the decline of bodily functions, is still an inevitable process. “If you expose enough people in a population to the immutable force of aging, you run up against a roadblock that makes it difficult to achieve further gains in life expectancy.”
Olshansky further explained that advancements in medicine and technology have allowed people to live longer, but they often do so with multiple age-related diseases. The focus, he believes, should be on improving health span—the length of time one lives without serious health issues—rather than merely extending lifespan. “The longevity game we’re playing now is Whac-A-Mole,” he noted, comparing the challenge of treating various diseases as they arise.
The rise in obesity and related health conditions, like type 2 diabetes, has also contributed to this slowing trend in longevity. Olshansky and his colleagues previously predicted in 2005 that obesity would lead to the first generation of children living shorter lives than their parents. While modern medicine has produced effective treatments for many diseases, these advances alone may not significantly impact overall life expectancy.
Despite the sobering findings, Olshansky does see some promise in ongoing research into aging. Advances in geroscience, which explores the biological mechanisms of aging, offer hope for breakthroughs that could change the future of human longevity. “Researchers are succeeding in slowing biological aging in fruit flies, worms, mice, and primates,” he explained. However, he cautioned against making too many assumptions based on animal studies. While progress in extending the lives of shorter-lived species is evident, it does not guarantee similar results in humans.
Ultimately, Olshansky argues that the focus should shift toward enhancing health span, not just lifespan. He warns that if society continues to rely solely on treating diseases individually, there could be a rise in frailty and disability. “Life extension without health extension would be harmful,” he cautioned, urging for a balanced approach to longevity that prioritizes overall well-being alongside lifespan.
