“In this age of genetic discrimination, if your identity is a genetic one, then you will live to be 168 — if not longer,” Stephen J. Dubner, co-author of Freakonomics, told CNBC in 2008. Dubner was making a not-so-subtle reference to widespread scientific consensus that, at current rates of progress, there’s no reason to believe that humans will live beyond 200. Then again, one shouldn’t argue with the awesome-sounding statistic offered by statistician Frank Mitloehner in 2001. That year, Mitloehner explained the theoretical equation between human lifespan and DNA. (100 = 6x x DNA, or — better yet — ERP. This gave us the same ERP a century ago.) Again, he hinted, naturally, that the notion of a human life expectancy was a net underestimate. “Nobody’s going to live to be 168, but ERP could indeed be 20 or 60 years beyond current numbers,” he said. “Because of my bound by my mother, I don’t live to be 60. At 67, I’ll be singing in a marching band.”
Back in 2008, he added, “I might be getting a little bored at 108, so I might change it to 128.”