New Research Reveals Longevity Gains Slowing, Life Expectancy of 100 Unlikely
Key topics
The debate around a recent study's findings that longevity gains are slowing and a life expectancy of 100 is unlikely has sparked a lively discussion. Commenters are pointing out that the US lags behind other OECD economies in life expectancy, with factors like obesity rates, pollution, and healthcare systems being cited as potential reasons. While some predict that the gap will continue to widen, others suggest that emerging treatments like Ozempic could narrow the difference, and that the "slowly then all at once" theory of progress might still lead to unexpected breakthroughs in longevity. As one commenter astutely notes, past predictions about limits to progress have often been proven wrong, leaving room for optimism that future advancements could still push life expectancy higher.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Moderate engagementFirst comment
30m
Peak period
7
1-2h
Avg / period
2.8
Based on 17 loaded comments
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Aug 27, 2025 at 5:25 PM EDT
4 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Aug 27, 2025 at 5:55 PM EDT
30m after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
7 comments in 1-2h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Aug 27, 2025 at 11:42 PM EDT
4 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
40% of Americans are obese, which massively increases your risk of life-shortening conditions like heart disease, cancer, diabetes, etc.
That said, I’m not sure we’d hit 100 even if everyone was in perfect shape. Most healthy people still die in their 80s or 90s.
Plus no diesel fetish.
Covid altered trend lines but the gap predates covid by decades.
(The diesel thing, yes, but also climate affects smog. Don't live in Bologna)
It is unlikely any researcher looking at longevity in the 1920s would have predicted the impact of medical advances of the next 40 years.
Multiple converging technologies suggest we could be at an inflection point again.
Personally, we work in enhancing the restorative function of sleep with early research showing positive impacts in Alzheimer's and Parkinson's.
There is a theory that if we can slow the natural decline of sleep's restorative function, we slow age related metabolic function, cognitive decline, and immune system.
More details and links to research at https://affectablesleep.com
During early night stimulation, stimulation has shown to decrease cortisol levels by 15% in healthy older adults. One theory is this helps people living with AD because they have a cortisol dysregulation which is disruptive to their sleep.
Yeah, there is a relationship between sleep and Parkinson's and there is some preliminary research in what our technology does in that space.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2025.01.30.25320306v...
One of the challenges in improving sleep in these diseases is that just because we're improving sleep and people feel better because they are sleeping better, doesn't mean we're actually treating the underlying disease. It can be difficult to measure the difference.
It isn't like "longevity gains" are some sort of spontaneous process powered by historical inevitability. All the past gains came from people identifying and mitigating problems, and all the future gains will come from similar efforts. These efforts, which have yet to take place, obviously won't show up in the trend data.