Reading · Celeste Garcia Getting Real About AI

My last post discussed the first of 5 major “forks” Peter Diamandis believes we all will face as AI continues to advance (see “Humanity is About to Fork”). By “fork” he means the choice between embracing new technologies or being left behind. This post is specifically about longevity and whether to significantly extend lifespan or accept the natural limits. Longevity is nuanced because while the Tech Bros are pursuing immortality and throwing a lot of money at it, there will be significant benefits for people with real medical needs and chronic health conditions.

I’ve written about longevity before and hypothesize that not only will it require great wealth, but many of the people who opt in are the worst humans among us. In 2025, Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping were famously overheard discussing whether advances in biotechnology might allow humans to live far longer. No doubt they plan to hold on to power forever. The Tech Bros are funding, driving and embracing longevity. Apparently, one lifetime is not enough for them to “benefit humanity” while achieving world dominance. I can’t help wonder if they are worried about what’s waiting for them on the other side.

Diamandis embraces the theory of Longevity Escape Velocity

What is Longevity Escape Velocity (LEV)? Pay attention because I’m getting a lot of mileage out of this concept at cocktail parties, and you can too. LEV is based on Ray Kurzweil’s definition that every year you’re alive, advances in medicine extend your life expectancy by more than a year. Once you cross that threshold, aging becomes a “solvable engineering problem” rather than an inevitable biological process. He doesn’t specifically say how long, but you see 120-150 years thrown around.

Peter contends that there are several sciences that will converge to allow people to live an extremely long time. In his article, he highlights epigenetic cellular reprogramming, senolytics, gene editing, and organ replacement. I will break these down one at a time.

1. Epigenetic Cellular Reprogramming

This is probably the most radical and speculative of the longevity approaches. Epigenetics refers to the system that controls how genes are turned on and off. One leading theory of aging suggests that over time cells gradually lose some of their epigenetic instructions, causing tissues to function less efficiently and recover less effectively from damage. Reprogramming attempts to restore some of that information, encouraging cells to behave in a more youthful way. In theory, this could delay aspects of aging and extend healthy lifespan. In practice, the same mechanisms that may permit rejuvenation also carry serious risks, including loss of cell identity and uncontrolled growth associated with cancer. In mouse studies, researchers have partially restored vision by rejuvenating damaged optic nerve cells. The first human trials for this specific application began in early 2026. The eye was chosen because it is a contained environment that can be monitored more safely. Applying this approach to whole-body longevity remains highly experimental and largely theoretical.

2. Senolytics

As cells age, some stop functioning properly but do not die. These are known as senescent cells, or “zombie cells.” Some play helpful roles in wound healing but many release harmful inflammatory compounds that drive the aging process. The goal of senolytics is to develop specialized medications that selectively remove dysfunctional cells to help tissues function more like they did at a younger age.

Studies by Mayo Clinic researchers in mice have proven promising, showing that clearing these cells can improve physical function and extend lifespan. Human research is still in the early stages; a recent pilot study on Alzheimer’s disease confirmed that these treatments are safe and feasible to test in humans, though much larger trials are needed to see if they can effectively slow cognitive decline.

3. Gene Editing

This is the attempt to directly modify DNA itself, using CRISPR gene editing. CRISPR is often referred to as molecular scissors that cut DNA at precise locations, then genes can be removed or replaced. The first-ever CRISPR-based therapy was recently FDA-approved to treat sickle cell disease. Clinical trials are currently being conducted for inherited blindness and certain cancers.

Longevity enthusiasts imagine using gene editing to reduce disease risk, enhance cellular repair, and alter metabolic pathways associated with aging. The big challenge is that aging is not associated with one gene, so it’s much harder than editing out a single gene.

4. Organ Replacement

Organ transplantation is already used for organs such as the heart, kidneys, liver, and lungs. These procedures are life‑saving interventions for people in organ failure.

Using transplantation as a means of extending already long lifespans raises serious ethical questions. Donor organs remain a scarce resource, and many otherwise healthy children and adults die while waiting for a transplant. It goes without saying that a class of people competing for this scarce resource to extend their lifespan over restoring a normal lifespan for people in need is absurd.

If we are looking at techno-optimistic solutions, it may eventually be possible to grow new organs in a lab. While progress has been made in tissue engineering and organoids, fully functional, transplant‑ready replacement organs are unlikely to be available any time soon. In the meantime, the tech bros will need to rely on “optimization” protocols of vitamins, green macha, fasting, stem cells, and plasma replacement.

The Good News

I choose to look at the longevity fork optimistically. AI is speeding up exponentially and enabling breakthroughs in biotech that can address or cure diseases for the rest of us. But immortality remains speculative. While incremental extensions of lifespan may be within reach, true immortality is not currently realistic, and may never be. The good news is that The Bros are pouring a lot of money into an ego-driven and philosophically questionable pursuit that will genuinely benefit people with serious health problems. As much as I want the Tech Bros to live forever so they can continue to torment generations to come, this current crop might be out of luck, despite the billions they pour into their immortality.

Living Forever

Comments