News that scientists have developed a test, claimed to be able to predict if someone is likely to live to 100, is causing controversy.

Researchers at the Boston University of Medicine developed the test after analysing the genomes of over a 1,000 centenarians from different parts of the world and finding that 90 per cent of them possessed a definite genetic signature of extreme longevity. 

The test is said to be 77 per cent accurate in predicting whether someone is likely to live to 100, but the scientists expect that its accuracy will be improved and that commercial organisations are likely to market the test within the next few years.

The aim of the Boston team’s research was to understand the genetic reasons why some people live longer than others despite having similar lifestyles.

Thomas Perls, who led the study, said:

“These genetic signatures are a new advance towards personalised genomics and predictive medicine, where this analytical method may prove to be generally useful in prevention sand screening of numerous diseases as well as in the tailored uses of medication.”

But Professor Tom Kirkwood, director at Newcastle University’s Institute for Ageing and Health, and a former speaker at a TAEN annual conference, has cast doubt on the claims of the Boston team, saying they were open to serious misunderstanding.  Writing in The Independent, he commented:

“They are not suggesting they can screen the genes of you and me, for example, and tell us the chance we will live to 100.  This would be a tall order indeed, given that only a quarter of what determines the length of human life is genetic.

“What they mean is that in a fresh sample, which included a lot of people who were 100 already, the (genetic) signatures could pick, with reasonable reliability, which of the individuals they analysed actually belonged to the centenarian group. This is a different matter altogether…….From what we know already, it is rather unlikely that genetic screens will ever be able to forecast how long an individual will live.”