How long do humans typically live in the 24th Century?

[t_smitts]

Okay, so we have McCoy still puttering around at the age of 137, which FYI is 13 years longer than the longest confirmed lifespan in real life of Jeanne Calment who lived to be 122. (No other human has reached 120).

Dr. Soong apparently wasn't quite that old when he died, but seemed to be pretty active as a guy over a hundred. Keiko's mother and Beverly's grandmother both lived to be a hundred. Dr. April Wade live to be 106.

The fact that McCoy's and all these centenarians out there doing stuff leads me to suspect there are probably humans even older than him. (Dax once O'Brien dying around 140, but she wasn't being too serious).

So short of being in suspended animation, or kept young by some sentient cloud that's in love with you, or something like that, how long do you think the average human lifespan is in the 24th Century?

 

[JirinPanthosa]

140-150, I seem to vaguely recall characters saying they expect to live that long in one episode but I can't place it in any kind of context.

 

[t_smitts]

140-150, I seem to vaguely recall characters saying they expect to live that long in one episode but I can't place it in any kind of context.

You're probably thinking of the Dax line to O'Brien in "To the Death" that I mentioned above.

 

[JessDD]

Didn't one of the Admirals in one of the early episodes say he was approaching "retirement age"? He must have been 70 or so.

You would figure when they got really old, they would just pull a "Scotty" and loop themselves in a transporter until they could figure out this whole "age" thing.

 

[The Wormhole]

Didn't one of the Admirals in one of the early episodes say he was approaching "retirement age"? He must have been 70 or so.

Robert April said so in TAS. Even ignoring the questionable canonicity of TAS, the end of the episode does say Starfleet is reviewing the mandatory retirement policy.

Anyway, I always assumed that in the 24th century while it is common to live past 100, making it to 130 or 140 or however old McCoy was supposed to be in Farpoint is the equivelant of making it to 100 today, it happens but it's rare.

If you want to include novels, the novels actually have all TOS characters still alive and active in the 2370s and 80s.

 

[t_smitts]

Didn't one of the Admirals in one of the early episodes say he was approaching "retirement age"? He must have been 70 or so.

Robert April said so in TAS. Even ignoring the questionable canonicity of TAS, the end of the episode does say Starfleet is reviewing the mandatory retirement policy.

Anyway, I always assumed that in the 24th century while it is common to live past 100, making it to 130 or 140 or however old McCoy was supposed to be in Farpoint is the equivelant of making it to 100 today, it happens but it's rare.

If you want to include novels, the novels actually have all TOS characters still alive and active in the 2370s and 80s.

Indeed. If most people lived to, say, 130 (might be less in the 23rd century), then having most people (Starfleet or civilian) retiring at 70 would mean nearly half your life is spent in retirement. If you factor in childhood, then people spend less then half their lives as part of the workforce.

That being said, apart from Spock and Scotty, I did think it strained credibility for the novels to have so many TOS characters working into their 140's.

 

[C.E. Evans]

Anyway, I always assumed that in the 24th century while it is common to live past 100, making it to 130 or 140 or however old McCoy was supposed to be in Farpoint is the equivelant of making it to 100 today, it happens but it's rare.

That's exactly the way I see it.

 

[F. King Daniel]

The last movie made mention of Admiral Archer - and if he's the same guy we saw as a Captain in the Enterprise TV series (as the writers intended), he would be around 140 at the time. That said, Archer was Trek's king of time travel.

It really depends who's writing. Although evidence from TNG and the novelverse indicates people can live to very old ages and remain useful and functional into their 100's (see: Elias Vaughn), the animated episode "The Counter-Clock Incident" gave officers a mandatory retirement age of 75.

 

[R. Star]

Elias Vaughn is the worst kind of character to trump out as an example being the gray haired Mary Sue he is.

That said, some of the ages seem somewhat ridiculous. I guess it's possible medical technology could advance to the point of keeping a person function into their 150's... but if that's possible, why aren't we just cloning people and putting them into new bodies... this isn't unprecedented in Trek by any means.

 

[Gary7]

In the "real world", scientists are saying that the first 150 year old person is alive today... So, by the mid 22nd century you'll start seeing some people living that long. What does that mean for the average age? Maybe it'll be up into the 90's or low 100's by then.

This is of course assuming present trends continue. But I have a feeling medical science is going to give a few more boosts to longevity in the coming years. Heck, in 20 more years, people will be growing spare replacement organs! Assuming surgical costs have come down enough, organs that are deemed less than 50% efficient will probably be replaced with healthy younger versions derived from a person's own cells (meaning no rejection issues). However, the brain... that's another story. Imagine a whole bunch of 100+ people living out their lives in a catatonic or near vegetable state. That's not exactly the utopia I'd expect humans to strive for.

But who knows, perhaps in 30 years we'll have medical nanobots able to comb through our bodies, correcting defective DNA and revitalizing organs/arteries that are aging, enabling those who can afford it to live up to 200 years or more (before too much decay makes it's impractical to continue rejuvenation efforts).

 

[Mojochi]

I'd think it could be possible that even though people live to 140-150 as it seems to be in Star Trek, it might also be possible that they would still retire between 70-80, because even though their medical tech has pushed back death, with treatments and organ replacements, there's been no evidence that their tech alters in any way the aging process of humans, meaning menopause sets in around the same time it does for us. They become geriatric at the same time we do, but their advancements have made geriatric living better and last longer

 

[cheesepuff316]

In cave-man days, people were living to 30/40ish
In 1800's people were living to 50/60ish
Today, man people live into their 80's...
With the 24th century tech that they have, it seems realistic.....

Love Jadzia's casual mention that she's over 300 when Virak'kara says he's 8! (To the Death)

 

[t_smitts]

The last movie made mention of Admiral Archer - and if he's the same guy we saw as a Captain in the Enterprise TV series (as the writers intended), he would be around 140 at the time. That said, Archer was Trek's king of time travel.

It really depends who's writing. Although evidence from TNG and the novelverse indicates people can live to very old ages and remain useful and functional into their 100's (see: Elias Vaughn), the animated episode "The Counter-Clock Incident" gave officers a mandatory retirement age of 75.

Yes, and Memory Alpha pointed out that Archer would've been 145 at the time of Abrams-Trek, which I personally think it more than pushing it.

I prefer Mike Sussman's unseen footnote from "In a Mirror, Darkly" that Archer died in 2245 (at 137) a day after attending the launch of the Connie Enterprise.

Elias Vaughn is the worst kind of character to trump out as an example being the gray haired Mary Sue he is.

That said, some of the ages seem somewhat ridiculous. I guess it's possible medical technology could advance to the point of keeping a person function into their 150's... but if that's possible, why aren't we just cloning people and putting them into new bodies... this isn't unprecedented in Trek by any means.

Kind of like the Emperor did in Star Wars comics? I always thought synaptic transfer into clone bodies would be the best bet for attaining near-immortality while preserving quality of life (not transferring yourself into a computer).

There have been a couple of examples in Trek of organic-to-organic transfers ("The Passenger"), but there's no way to know how reliable it is in the Trek universe. It's also possible it may work for some species but not others.

I'd think it could be possible that even though people live to 140-150 as it seems to be in Star Trek, it might also be possible that they would still retire between 70-80, because even though their medical tech has pushed back death, with treatments and organ replacements, there's been no evidence that their tech alters in any way the aging process of humans, meaning menopause sets in around the same time it does for us. They become geriatric at the same time we do, but their advancements have made geriatric living better and last longer

This is kind of an uncomfortable question but one wonders if a society could sustain a large number of retirees living that long, longer in fact than the number of years they can work productively.

 

[The Wormhole]

I prefer Mike Sussman's unseen footnote from "In a Mirror, Darkly" that Archer died in 2245 (at 137) a day after attending the launch of the Connie Enterprise.

Sussman made a joke a few years ago that in the Abrams timeline, Archer held on an additional ten years until the Enterprise 1701 was finally launched, then he dropped dead.

 

[T'Girl]

The last movie made mention of Admiral Archer

Yes, and Memory Alpha pointed out that Archer would've been 145 at the time of Abrams-Trek, which I personally think it more than pushing it.

If you remember the dialog, the movie actually mentions Admiral Archer's beagle.

Archer himself could have been dead a half century by that point.

My private theory is that Porthos is also dead by that time, but his body is preserved and on display at Starfleet Academy, Porthos is Starfleet's mascot. Scotty stole it from the student union for his transporter experiment.

 

[Timo]

They become geriatric at the same time we do, but their advancements have made geriatric living better and last longer

...Yet the show makes some attempt to show that Jean-Luc Picard is a decade older than Patrick Stewart, and physically very fit even for somebody who'd be Stewart's age today.

McCoy was two feet, one arm and four fingers into grave in "Farpoint" at 137, but does that mean he was doing extremely well for somebody his age, or extremely poorly? He has lived a demanding life, and his body has been violated by all possible and impossible ailments. Perhaps somebody like wiry Admiral Chekote is a better example of a 130+-yr-old in the 24th century?

Certainly O'Brien's comment about wanting to die at 150 establishes that this is a rarely (if ever) achieved age in the 24th century, as obviously the Chief isn't in a hurry to leave.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[t_smitts]

They become geriatric at the same time we do, but their advancements have made geriatric living better and last longer

...Yet the show makes some attempt to show that Jean-Luc Picard is a decade older than Patrick Stewart, and physically very fit even for somebody who'd be Stewart's age today.

McCoy was two feet, one arm and four fingers into grave in "Farpoint" at 137, but does that mean he was doing extremely well for somebody his age, or extremely poorly? He has lived a demanding life, and his body has been violated by all possible and impossible ailments. Perhaps somebody like wiry Admiral Chekote is a better example of a 130+-yr-old in the 24th century?

Certainly O'Brien's comment about wanting to die at 150 establishes that this is a rarely (if ever) achieved age in the 24th century, as obviously the Chief isn't in a hurry to leave.

Timo Saloniemi

Indeed. Perhaps the Dax / O'Brien line is the equivalent of predicting someone today will live to be 100.

While the AVERAGE lifespan is undoubtely longer than today and perhaps more than a century, I wonder what the extreme longevity record at that point is. Might there be some little old lady in a retirement home somewhere on Earth who's celebrated her 170th or 180th birthday, perhaps telling journalists about the time she met Former President Jonathan Archer or Ambassador T'Pol or a young lieutenant named Christopher Pike?

 

[Gary7]

The other thing is... living longer is only beneficial if you have good health. If you're suffering from chronic pain and bound to a wheel chair or bed for a couple of decades, I wouldn't call that quality living. Stephen Hawking is an exception, of course.

 

[robau]

The last movie made mention of Admiral Archer

Yes, and Memory Alpha pointed out that Archer would've been 145 at the time of Abrams-Trek, which I personally think it more than pushing it.

If you remember the dialog, the movie actually mentions Admiral Archer's beagle.

Archer himself could have been dead a half century by that point.

My private theory is that Porthos is also dead by that time, but his body is preserved and on display at Starfleet Academy, Porthos is Starfleet's mascot. Scotty stole it from the student union for his transporter experiment.

Recent issue of the comic showed a living dog in the experiment. It's also made clear that Archer is alive.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Same Archer, same Porthos. He just visited Re-Pet a few times between 2154 and 2258.