How to achieve ‘biological immortality’ naturally
December 6, 2010 by David Despain
Evolutionary biologist Michael Rose, professor at University of California, Irvine, says he has discovered a natural way to achieve “biological immortality” without the use of anti-aging drugs and stem cell treatments.
“It’s one you can start this evening,” the author of Evolutionary Biology of Aging shared in his talk Saturday at Humanity+ @ Caltech in Los Angeles. “It comes at no cost, you don’t have to buy anything, and, in fact, it might save you money.”
The term “biologically immortality” in gerontology is not to be confused with the Greek idea of immortality, or a god-like sense of living forever. It’s the point in which the exponential increase in mortality rates of a species population appears to level off, producing a sudden late-life plateau.
The phenomenon happens when a species reaches a state where it ceases to age, or no longer experiences a further loss of physiological function, Rose said. Rose suggests humans also experience a biological immortality phase if they are able to live long enough. “You can die, but the idea here is that you are non-aging,” Rose said, “versus aging with a decline of survival likelihood under good conditions.”
It’s an hypothesis that he supports in detail in his forthcoming book, Does Aging Stop?, co-authored with Casandra L. Rauser and Laurence D. Mueller (Spring 2011, Oxford University Press).
Humans eventually achieve this period of non-aging, the authors suggest, just as several other multicellular living forms do, such as a creosote bush growing in the Mojave desert that has lived for longer than 10,000 years, and other long-lived organisms, including some animals.
“The fact that such a diversity of eukaryotic [all life forms except bacteria] organisms can have indefinite lifespan shows you that there is precisely nothing about eukaryotic cell or molecular biology that requires an aging process,” Rose said, countering the “Aristotelian” view that aging is an inevitability, caused primarily by an accumulation of molecular damage and decline in physical function.
Aging as an evolution byproduct
Rose argues that an organism ages because the process is a byproduct forced upon us by evolution by natural selection—governed by the passing on of genes.
That’s because across evolutionary species in eukaryotes, the genes selected generally favor survival of the young in a population, and then mortality rates begin to rise exponentially. “This is why you are all aging,” Rose said.
He began his work on fruit flies by tricking natural selection to produce what eventually became “Methuselah flies,” for which he is well known. The trick? Take the eggs from fruit flies that have maintained enough of their physiological function to reproduce in old age, and repeat.
Selection for late-life reproduction eventually made longer-lived fruit flies. This delayed-reproduction lineage, Rose showed, lives up to five times longer than average. “Hugh Heffner would love it,” he quipped.
From fruit fly to human immortality
Even better, the aging phase eventually passes, Rose explained, and survival reaches a plateau, which is when the biological immortality phase starts. The chances of dying become constant, neither increasing or decreasing, a period of no more aging.
Rose was originally doubtful of this model of aging because it was contrary to the Gompertz model, which has it that mortality increases exponentially with age and is unrelenting. But then he realized that natural selection’s evolutionary pressures would stop falling, and allow a period of later biological immortality.
For us, instead of his fruit flies, he has put together what he calls his “natural immortality plan,” one that he hypothesizes can keep us living far beyond the old-age record of Jeanne Calment, who lived until age 122.
Calment inspired Rose’s new plan—because before the immortality phase theory, there was no reason for why she or other supercentenarians could survive so long. He explained that Calment may have reached a phase where physical decline stabilized. And, as Rose showed in fruit flies, aging can potentially remain stabilized indefinitely.
However, Rose explained that the unfortunate problem for humans is that they have a rough and long aging phase. “We hit late-life immortality plateaus very late in life, in our nineties—in your eighties you’re still aging—and we do so in terrible condition,” he said.
“But,” he added, “there are good reasons theoretically that hunter-gatherer populations are more like fruit flies which hit immortality plateaus quite early. That, in fact, they might hit their transition from aging to late-life immortality perhaps in their fifties or sixties and do so in better shape.
He explained, “When you have an earlier likelihood of death from somebody’s spear in the back or because you can’t cope with infection, immortal phases should start earlier.
The natural immortality plan (for 40+ people only)
So Rose suggests a fast route to the immortality phase. “The key is not to slow the rate of aging, but go directly to the immortal phase at a lower rate of mortality, which is exactly what the fruit flies do,” he said.
How do you make the transition to the immortality phase earlier and stop aging sooner? Adhere to a regimen of “what is natural for humans, what is our best environment.”
That excludes an industrial lifestyle and a Western-style diet that involves sitting several hours in front of a TV or computer and munching on Twinkies, he explained. Instead, adopt an ancestral hunter-gatherer lifestyle and diet (the paleolithic, or “paleo” diet).
A paleo diet is a regimen that includes only foods available before the agricultural revolution of the Neolithic, which includes lean meats, shore-based foods, fruits and vegetables. Foods that became available after the Neolithic such as grains, dairy, and processed foods are all avoided.
But, interestingly, Rose told me, for people of Eurasian ancestry, he disagrees with the age a paleo diet should be adopted as advised by main proponents of the paleo diet, such as evolutionary nutrition researchers Loren Cordain and S. Boyd Eaton. He said that young people of Eurasian ancestry have actually adapted well to new environments brought on by the agricultural revolution.
“But at later ages,” he added, “you will lose that adaptation to a novel environment and you will revert back to a condition to which you are better conditioned to a long ancestral environment.”
He explained that after age 40, the physiology of people of Eurasian ancestry appears to return to a pre-adapted state with age to one that is better off with the same foods our pre-Neolithic ancestors ate: meat, seafood, nuts, fruits and vegetables.
“Don’t eat anything derived from a grain or grass of any type—that includes rice and corn—and don’t eat anything from the udder of a cow if you are over 35 or 40,” Rose warns. “If you are under 30 you should probably eat an Andrew Weil-style organic, agricultural diet.”
What this suggests is that the ancestral hunter-gatherer diet is best viewed as a late-life aging therapy. In combination with modern medicine and future breakthroughs of the next 10 to 15 years, that could allow you to join the exclusive club of supercentenarians — or beyond.
Rose’s natural recipe for immortality
- Adopt a hunter-gatherer lifestyle after 35 to 40 if Eurasian, earlier if ancestry is less Eurasian. If younger than 30 and Eurasian, continue on a post-agricultural revolution diet (or Andrew Weil-style diet).
- Use the best modern medicine
- Use autologous (from your own cells) tissue repair as it becomes available in five or more years
- Use next-generation pharmaceuticals in the next 10 or more years
“With this recipe, I feel, many of you could be alive, basically, indefinitely,” Rose said.
Paleo diet
The paleo diet, sometimes called the “caveman diet,” is one that mimics the diet of our ancestral hunter-gatherer ancestors in the Paleolithic era before the advent of the agricultural revolution of the Neolithic and animal husbandry.
It includes meats, seafoods, fruits, nuts, and vegetables. It excludes processed foods (including meats), grain-derived foods such as pasta and breads, and dairy-derived foods such as milk, yogurt and cheese.
Proponents of the diet such as Loren Cordain and S. Boyd Eaton argue that the agricultural revolution caused an “evolutionary discordance” between diet and our “genetically determined biology” as shaped through evolution.
Andrew Weil-style diet
Andrew Weil, MD, of the University of Arizona, has authored several popular articles and books about health and diet, including best-sellers Eating Well for Optimum Health and Healthy Aging. He also has a popular Web site.
The “Andrew Weil diet” is one in accordance with more conventional advice from dietitians and nutritionists. It includes eating whole grains, fruits and vegetables (50 to 60 percent of calories); fats largely derived from monounsaturated and polyunsatured oils (30 percent of calories); and protein (10 to 20 percent of calories) mainly from vegetarian sources such as soy.
He also recommends eating 40 grams of fiber a day and receiving calcium from dairy or from other sources such as vegetables.



Comments (15)
by Mark
I bet that imortality is biologicaly posible, but getting it widely available would ruin our planet very fast, we would spend resourses and big wars would come up, just my opinion. :)
by Blakdjeiki
What am I missing? If the key to living forever is diet, then why did paleolithic man never live forever? There must be some other thing necessary to prevent the aging process. I support the development of genetically engineered stem cells that do not loose their telomere that can be implanted into humans until all the cells in their body have been created by the immortal stem cells so they can always create new cells and never have to age.
by RBynum
Don’t forget what happened to Tithonus. In Greek mythology Eos asked Zeus to make her lover Tithonus immortal. However she forgot to ask for enternal youth. So she ended up with a demeted undying old man that she walled up in a tower. What good is reaching this plateau and not being healthy and sane?
by annonymous
because immortality isnt supposed to be for everyone, just the people who feel that they havnt accomplished much in their life. it is for the rich and powerful now a days, not for the every day fellow.
by kimishere
We all owe Michael Rose gratitude for all the fruit fly work he’s done to help understand aging, and he’s clearly a smart guy. However, the idea that taking on a paleo diet will make people go into an “immortality phase” earlier is pure speculation. He doesn’t cite any work with animal models that shows giving them a “natural” diet has any effect on their aging. This strikes me as just a hypothesis, and most hypotheses don’t pan out. Unless you can show some population data in humans or animals backing up an intervention it shouldn’t be taken seriously. (Which includes Kurzweil’s supplement plan)
While reasonably healthy, a paleo diet itself is just a hypothesis. We don’t know for sure what cavemen ate and no population data shows paleo dieters having particular longevity. (remember, evolution only cares about reproduction, not you living to a ripe old age) If you look at the epidemiology, you’ll see that the longest-lived peoples on Earth don’t eat a paleo diet, but instead eat a vegetarian or low-meat diet. For an intro to this, go to youtube and look up Blue Zones Study to see what I’m talking about.
If you want to live long, there are only a few things you can do: healthy diet, exercise, calorie restriction, and supporting real longevity research like the kind the SENS Fdn or Methuselah Fdn do. And even those will only help so much.
PS I see no reason to taken anything Dr Andrew Weil says seriously, as he is just an alt med guru who sells books and hasn’t ever done any science of merit.
by sequoiaorchids
I am confused. We are talking about choosing fruit flies that retain fertility as a way of breeding long lived flies. Next we are stating that without evolutionary pressures, we enter a period of ‘slow or no-aging’. Then we are saying, “eat this diet”. I missed the point where a causal connection was made between these data points. To me this is just another “diet” book. I think that older people are under evolutionary pressure, from bacteria, viruses and fungi, as well as neurological decay which leads to forgetfulness and ataxia, which leads to inanition and falls, which leads to malnutrition, hip fractures, infections and death.
It may be that nursing homes are not the place to study aging, but from what I can observe, there are several types of aging, which I group as follows: Spared body, Spared mind, Spared body and mind, Decay in both body and mind. The later is certainly the largest subset, while Spared body and mind is certainly the smallest subset, with patient encounters in the 1 to 3/yr range.
I think the bulk of jstjnk’s comments are well taken, though bringing in outlying data points like George Burns is absurd. There is always someone who wins the loto. How that translates to the rest of us…it doesn’t. There is clear evidence that smoking and drinking is physiologically harmful for the majority of humans. While that may not have been so for George Burns, I would wonder two things: What was his potential pre alcohol and tobacco? What was the genetic record of his family?
As for immortality, I am more interested in how to decrease memory loss in aging…. I have seen patients kept alive by their children into their 105 plus years, just to have a conversation piece or a reason to live (or so it appears to me). The patient was pleasantly demented decades prior and is no longer participating in social activities of any significant nature.
by melajara
This is very interesting, as long as the nutrigenomics screening strategy developed by Genescient, the biotech company where Mr Rose is involved.
However, I’m not understanding how the theory of a late life neutral plateau fits the demographic data available on supercentenarians, those peole living 110+. True, there are holes in the data as it is highly suspicious that Japan has the most concentrated population in supercentenarians when China would have none! For historical reasons, the current data is missing a large part of Asia, Russia and Africa.
Fair enough, from the available data, one can readily see that except the outlier point represented by the French Jeanne Calment (deceased at 122) there is still a quasi exponential decrease in late age population and no one ever succeeded to achieve 120.
So Mr Rose’s theory doesn’t fit the supercentenarrian data, or am I missing something?
by Mrs Z
The kind of ‘immortality’ discussed here is not the type of biological immortality most people want to achieve. Here the discussion is about a statistical event which happens in very old populations. The rate of mortality of these people may not increase as a function of age, but their bodies continue to age biologically (i.e. chronic degeneration continues). Those of us who are interested in finding ways to abolish involuntary death due to ageing look at more comprehensive ways to do so.
Whilst I agree that ageing is not inevitable, and I also agree that ageing is a by-product of evolution, I am not convinced that simple measures such as dieting will have any appreciable effect on reducing the damage caused by ageing. A ‘regimen that is natural for humans’ is a vague concept. The paleo diet may have been suitable for cavemen, but we now live in a society leading to global integration and transhumanism, with evolutionary and environmental pressures that are greatly different to those experienced by people thousands of years ago.
See here for a full discussion:
https://acrobat.com/#d=MAgyT1rkdwono-lQL6thBQ
by eric25001
To me the insect studies point towards two diet interventions.
Lower protein at an okder age and what ratio and types of fat and or carbohydrates. I am surprised Rose does not seem to be more aware of the work in the UK or Australia.
http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.0030223
and
http://www.impactaging.com/papers/v1/n10/full/100098.html
by donjoe
It would be nice to be able to consult a Paleo diet longevity study for corroboration, but I couldn’t find anything with Google Scholar.
by geekette
Growing happy. Do you really want to keep growing old if you are unhappy? Seems like we humans and scientists have an easy time with inventions and diets, but the psychological aspect of being alive is rarely addressed… I would be interested in hearing someone discuss the psychological aspect of growing older. In American society, despite biological progess for longevity, there are some people whose psychological state is so painful, they commit suicide. There are still
others who commit violent crimes, the worse of which is murder. Having worked in nursing homes, I have seen first hand, where some people ram other people in their wheel chairs. Where there are some “trouble makers” that everyone wants to avoid, etc. Depression is also a major issue, many people in those situations WANT to die. If the point of living longer is to suffer longer, I don’t see the point. We MUST address the aspect of happiness as we grow older. Without it we are DOOMED.
by jstjnk
A diet we were forced to eat “in earlier times”, means we have lots of data-points already on its effectiveness at “immortality”. Were early American Indians “Staying 30 years old” for 50 – 100 years? Early Egyptians living a millenia as “40 year olds” or even “80 years olds”? You don’t have to go back very far in the past actually, no doubt even today there are many places people are eating a diet like that now. Show me this tribe of 100 year olds that have the bodies of 40 year olds and I’ll give up the twinkies. :-) Otherwise 100 year old George Burns smoking and drinking, and other centenarians of his ilk are some REAL data-points.
by belacoz
I think it would be hard to find any early human evidence. Ancient Egyptians are more neolithic rather than paleolithic. Ancient Egypt around 3500 BC, Neolithic 9500 BC, Paleolithic 2.4 million years ago to 10,000 BC (Wikipedia estimates). So, to find evidence of humans living 100+ years old, we found have to find ancient fossils and those are rare. Additionally, during the Paleolithic humans probably died from physical injuries, cold, starvation, hunting accidents, and disease rather than old age.
I think Mr. Rose is saying that in the modern world most people don’t die from injury or starvation like Paleolithic humans did. We, today, die from old age (and diseases associated from old age). If people today, in our much safer world, lived the active lifestyle of Paleolithic man and ate the same foods he ate, then we could potentially become “biologically immortal.”
From an evolutionary biology standpoint, it makes sense – the healthiest life is one where we eat and live as humans were evolved to eat and live. Food that is present along coastlines (fish,etc), fruits, vegetables, nuts, and berries. I think having an active lifestyle is important too as our ancestors were very active – running and walking a lot (read “Born to Run” by Christopher McDougall).
Our modern world also has hundreds of dangerous chemicals in plastics and other products that is extremely harmful to human health. For humans to live longer, we must also deal with these chemicals in addition to our diet and physical conditioning.
by carl2nd
Mr. Rose I too have an interest of the immortality…a forever life span.,
I invite you to chat with personaly at eamil; alamnal@yahoo.com
I am also writng a book entitled “Beyond Longevity Unto Bodily Immortality”
by eric25001
What are the biomarkers or metabolite levels and ratios that indicate the [Non Aging] is achieved? What about protein intake? Lower protein intake increases lifespan in yeast and insects? What about carbon sourcees that have also increased lifespan like Mannoheptulose, trehalose, or glycerol?