By Neil Skjoldal
With the death of President George H. W. Bush this past weekend, the country seems united in eulogizing him for, among other things, having lived “a well-lived life,” because amidst his accomplishments, he was able to reach 94 years of age. This brought to mind a recent article published in The NY Times, “How Long Can People Live?” In it, health writer Nicholas Bakalar observes, “There is considerable dispute, however, over how long humans might live under optimal circumstances.”
The brief article discusses the possibility of drug therapies designed to kill old cells, while leaving young cells in place. Apparently many are working on research projects to see what may be possible. Even the well-known drug metformin will be tested to see its effectiveness against age-related diseases. Bakalar is not overly optimistic. He clearly states, “No serious scientist believes in immortality.” Rather the goal is to assure a “healthier old age than ever before.”
I find Bakalar to be reasonable in his assessment. Of course, one can question whether trying to extend life past 100 years is the best use of limited resources when there are so many other health issues with which to contend. However, perhaps a ‘healthier old age’ could reduce some of those very high medical costs at the end of life which seem to plague our health care system.
I do not anticipate that I will be jumping out of an airplane at an advanced age like President Bush, but I am interested to see if any of the health issues related to old age can be addressed in a meaningful way.