Modern medicine has increased human lifespans significantly, but one controversial scientist believes the first person who will live to 1,000 years old is already alive today. Biogerontologist Aubrey de Grey claims that scientific progress is accelerating so rapidly that the first ultra-centenarians have already been born. 

De Grey’s provocative ideas force society to confront deep questions. What would radically extended lifespans mean for humankind? Could science truly help us “escape” our innate expiration dates? British-born de Grey has been at the epicenter of longevity research for nearly two decades. His co-founding of the SENS (Strategies for Engineered Negligible Senescence) Research Foundation in Silicon Valley ushered in a new era in aging research and advocacy.

Understanding de Grey’s unconventional science, which focuses on repairing the molecular and cellular damage of aging, is critical for envisioning the future of human longevity. Supporters hail him as a visionary crusader, while critics question his radical vision of extreme life extension. But whether you find his ideas inspired or outrageous, Aubrey de Grey is undeniably catalyzing global efforts to intercept and reverse aging.

Racing Past Built-In Obsolescence 

For most of history, aging and death from “old age” were considered inevitable. De Grey sees things differently. “Aging is just a process, and processes can be hijacked,” he says. As an analogy, he notes how engineers have continually defused the built-in obsolescence of machines like cars. Biological systems are vastly more complex, but the aging process ultimately stems from discrete types of molecular and cellular damage over time. As an engineer at heart, de Grey approaches aging as an engineering problem. 

De Grey points out that many single-celled organisms like hydras are biologically immortal. They show no signs of aging since they constantly renew themselves. He believes science could replicate such youthful cellular vigor in humans via precise repair of cells and extracellular matrix. De Grey founded SENS to categorize aging as a functional atrophy of biological systems that can be repaired. As he succinctly puts it, “aging is something we can cure.”

Many gerontologists call this perspective radical. Today, most doctors treat aging as an inevitable, inexorable decline. Traditional approaches try to alleviate late-life diseases like cancer, dementia, heart disease and diabetes instead of targeting aging itself. But de Grey counters that curing the diseases of old age makes about as much sense as curing the “diseases” of youth like acne. Instead of just stretching out the period of frailty and decline at life’s end, he wants to extend our healthy, vigorous lifespans.

Turning Back the Clock with SENS

So how does SENS aim to turn back aging's clock and add decades or centuries of healthy life? The key is targeted repair. De Grey notes how engineers have kept vintage cars from rusting and falling apart indefinitely via careful repairs. He wants to perform similar maintenance on human bodies. 

SENS focuses on a “panel” of seven types of aging damage that accumulate over time. These include cell loss, mitochondrial mutations, death-resistant cells that cause cancer, extracellular crosslinking that leads to arthritis and vessel stiffening, extracellular aggregates like amyloid plaques seen in Alzheimer’s, intracellular aggregates like lipofuscin that accumulate with age, and random extracellular aggregates that can also disrupt tissue function. For each type of damage, SENS is developing biotech therapies to halt and repair it.

Reimagining Elder Care

Some critics dismiss de Grey as a “snake oil salesman,” while others protest that radically extending lifespan is unethical. But de Grey responds that throughout history, life-extending advances from antibiotics to surgery were initially attacked on moral grounds too. He sees longevity as a social justice issue, arguing that longer healthy lives will reduce suffering. The “compressing of morbidity” that comes from extending middle age is morally superior to our current model of elderly frailty, isolation, and dependence, he argues.

De Grey imagines profound social changes from extending vitality. Retirement ages would become flexible. Elder care models would move away from end-of-life management to supporting continued activity. With reproductive age spans lengthened, birth rates could decline. Intergenerational connections might strengthen, as older adults stay vibrant and engaged. 

Questions do remain about resource allocations in a radically extended longevity society. But de Grey maintains that anti-aging treatments will end up much more affordable than late-life care for diseases of old age. He also notes how adapting infrastructure and institutions is part of human progress. For instance, reinventing education to include multi-decade career sabbaticals could provide new psychological benefits.

Of course, realizing such a vision depends on SENS therapies succeeding. But after nearly 20 years of advocacy and fundraising, SENS now has over two dozen researchers directly pursuing its damage-repair approach. De Grey notes that stem cell therapies to restore aged tissue, selective elimination of senescent cells that accumulate with age, and other interventions are already augmenting SENS strategies. 

Whether de Grey’s vision proves precisely accurate or not, it seems certain that dramatic longevity extension is coming. De Grey is optimistic that tailoring medicine to specifically target aging has begun. He points out how scientists are already making rapid gains—for instance, drugs controlling TOR and NAD+ pathways to mimic youthful gene expression patterns. Says de Grey, “The first person to reach longevity escape velocity is likely already alive.” His bold vision reshapes how we conceive human longevity potential.