https://edition.cnn.com/2024/10/07/health/live-span-estimates-wellness/index.html

"Gerontologist Jay Olshansky is used to backlash about his views on human longevity. Decades ago he and his coauthors predicted children, on average, would live to only age 85 — only 1% to 5% might survive until their 100th birthday.

Many recoiled from his splash of cold reality, Olshansky said, having grown accustomed to predictions that 50% of babies would live to 100.

“In 1990, we predicted increases in life expectancy would slow down, and the effects of medical interventions, which we call Band-Aids, would have less and less of an effect on life expectancy,” said Olshansky, a professor of epidemiology and biostatistics in the School of Public Health at the University of Illinois in Chicago.

“A lot of people disagreed with us. They said, ‘No, no, NO!’ Advances in medical and life-extending technologies will accelerate and will drag life expectancy along with it,” he said.

Now, 34 years later, Olshansky says he and his coauthors have proven their point. Their analysis of lifespan data from Australia, France, Hong Kong, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the United States was published Monday in the journal Nature Aging.

Overall, female children born in 2019 in these places have a 5.1% chance of reaching 100 years of age, the study said. There is only a 1.8% chance for males.

“We waited 30 years to test our hypothesis. We have shown the era of rapid increases in human life expectancy has ended, just as we predicted,” Olshansky said.

“Now, I want to make sure that this is interpreted correctly,” he added. “We’re still gaining life expectancy, but it’s at an increasingly slower pace than in previous decades.”

Olshansky spoke to CNN about his analysis of longevity data."

Even worse:

https://time.com/7062977/anti-aging-life-expectancy/

"Despite all the recent hype from anti-aging evangelists and companies touting ways to extend life, human life expectancy is actually slowing down after accelerating in the previous century.

In a paper published in Nature Aging, researchers led by S. Jay Olshansky, professor of public health at the University of Illinois in Chicago, report that factors that have contributed to remarkable extensions of life expectancy in the 20th century are reaching the point of diminishing returns. Public-health interventions such as clean water and better sanitation and hygiene, as well as medical innovations like vaccines and advances in drug and surgical treatments, are approaching their optimal impact. For human life expectancy to extend much further beyond where it exists today, says Olshansky, entirely new strategies that focus on manipulating the biological processes of aging need to occur. And we aren't there yet."

Btw, Olshansky's paper:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s43587-024-00702-3

"Over the course of the twentieth century, human life expectancy at birth rose in high-income nations by approximately 30 years, largely driven by advances in public health and medicine. Mortality reduction was observed initially at an early age and continued into middle and older ages. However, it was unclear whether this phenomenon and the resulting accelerated rise in life expectancy would continue into the twenty-first century. Here using demographic survivorship metrics from national vital statistics in the eight countries with the longest-lived populations (Australia, France, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland) and in Hong Kong and the United States from 1990 to 2019, we explored recent trends in death rates and life expectancy. We found that, since 1990, improvements overall in life expectancy have decelerated. Our analysis also revealed that resistance to improvements in life expectancy increased while lifespan inequality declined and mortality compression occurred. Our analysis suggests that survival to age 100 years is unlikely to exceed 15% for females and 5% for males, altogether suggesting that, unless the processes of biological aging can be markedly slowed, radical human life extension is implausible in this century."

Considering mathematics, the number of people we get in the world, and the actual trend of technological progress and life expectancy, I find this highly unlikely.

/IsaacKing/will-anybody-born-before-2000-live is virtually equivalent. Some arbitrage is needed.

@NicoDelon the resolution criteria are completely different, and the linked market will basically never resolve no.

@twink_joan_didion Heyyy look at that! We're buying shares on the same side for once!

@firstuserhere you and i, we could've run this town together if only our predictions weren't otherwise different in every way