Human lifespan in Trek

[Penta]

Okay, I'm confused by something.

How long-lived are humans supposed to be in Trek? Both in terms of "working" lifespan, and lifespan, period.

I'm hearing ages like 130+ for McCoy in "Encounter at Farpoint", and I'm thinking "But wait...Human physiology hasn't changed in Trek..."

In short, how old can people get?

 

[Nerys Myk]

McCoy has good genes.

 

[Finn]

^It has nothing to do with Human physiology. It has do with the medical technology. People are living longer today than we did a hundred years ago, and we are no different from 1910 Humans.

 

[Pavonis]

Well, we know that McCoy managed to reach at least 137 years, and Miles O'Brien expressed a desire to die at something like 130-150 years (I don't recall the DS9 episode in which he said it at the moment) in bed surrounded by family. Presumably O'Brien was expressing a wish to live at least an average Human lifespan, and probably a longer-than-average one. I'd say 120 years is within reach of most 24th century humans, given the medical technology available.

 

[T'Girl]

Somewhere along the way I picked up on 150 year average. McCoy in Farpoint looked to me to be close to being on his last legs. Living to be 150 isn't that great if you spend 50 or 60 years as infirm.

The longer life spans would be partially medical advances, but also life style. I remember only one case of anyone smoking, over weight persons are very rare, both Starfleet and the civilian we saw looked like they physically fit.

Jeanne Calment lived for 122 years , if you except infant mortality and acts of violence, we life pretty long now.

 

[Sci]

I would infer that the Federation has the technology to repair many of the errors that creep into cellular DNA as cells divide over the decades which create the effect we know as "aging." They can probably do this well enough to bring Human lifespans up to around 150 years, give or take another ten or fifteen.

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

But the weird thing is this. It seems that no matter WHAT human lifespans are, they are still a relatively short-lived species in the Trekiverse. Vulcans and Klingons live MUCH longer--Romulans by extension, and there is evidence to suggest the Cardassians and Bajorans, while not necessarily living Vulcan-long lives, live longer than humans. That's got to have an effect on the human outlook.

 

[Sci]

But the weird thing is this. It seems that no matter WHAT human lifespans are, they are still a relatively short-lived species in the Trekiverse. Vulcans and Klingons live MUCH longer--Romulans by extension, and there is evidence to suggest the Cardassians and Bajorans, while not necessarily living Vulcan-long lives, live longer than humans. That's got to have an effect on the human outlook.

Eh, maybe?

I'd guestimate the Vulcan/Romulan lifespan to be somewhere in the area of 250. Cardassians and Bajorans, I'd put in the same area as Humans; I'd suggest that Cardassian signs of visible aging probably aren't as apparent to mammalian species as to other Cardassians. Klingons, I don't think have that much longer of a lifespan -- there's no evidence that Kor was much older than this 30s to his 50s in "Errand of Mercy," and he certainly appeared to be nearing the end of his natural lifespan 110 years later in DS9 Season Seven. Though I'd point out that Klingons probably have a shortened life expectancy because of all that ritualized homicide they practice.

 

[BillJ]

I'm not sure what the expected lifespan is in Trek in the 24th century. But I'm not sure it was Roddenberry's intention for it to be 130 - 150 years based on Encounter at Farpoint:

MCCOY: What about my age?
DATA: Sorry, sir. If that subject troubles you
MCCOY: Troubles me? What's so damned troubling about not having died? How old do you think I am?
DATA: One hundred thirty seven years, Admiral, according to Starfleet records

Thanks to http://www.chakoteya.net

 

[Nerys Myk]

^It has nothing to do with Human physiology. It has do with the medical technology. People are living longer today than we did a hundred years ago, and we are no different from 1910 Humans.

Some people were living into their 70s 200 years ago. Sometimes genes combined with lifestyle lets you live longer than average.

 

[Penta]

Actually, something I distinctly remember from my history classes in college. Keep in mind that college was 6 years ago.

People have always regularly lived into their 70s. The reason life expectancy went splat for most of human history was infant mortality and homicide/work accidents/obviously unnatural ways of dying, plus things like starvation, etc. Mostly infant mortality really pulled down the numbers.

Additionally, there appears to be a cellular maximum age of about 200 years, if I remember my science right.

 

[SpyOne]

I believe McCoy's age was supposed to be exceptional, but not unique. Much like living to be over 100 is today.

As to the upper limit? It seems that, barring radical advances in medical technology (even better than shown in Star Trek), nobody could live for more than 500 years. As two examples, I recall one suggestion that the human brain can only hold about 500 years worth of memories, and other that says that 500 years living at sea level on Earth will expose you to enough radiation to kill you from cumulative radiation poisoning.
So, Trek proposes things improve, but have not yet reached 9or really even approached) the ideal in terms of expanding human life span.

As for useful or productive lifespans, in Nemesis Picard would have been 75, and he seemed to be doing pretty well.

 

[Anwar]

Yeah, that was kind of weird to me. Kirk was suffering depression and felt his career was over when he was in his 50s in WOK, but Picard was in his 60s when we first met him and he seemed to be doing just fine. So what was with Kirk at the time?

 

[maneth]

People have always regularly lived into their 70s. The reason life expectancy went splat for most of human history was infant mortality and homicide/work accidents/obviously unnatural ways of dying, plus things like starvation, etc. Mostly infant mortality really pulled down the numbers.

Infant mortality and the constant warring that went on. Besides, with no reliable birth control available, women went on having babies even when it was medically inadvisable to do so. Even today 1 in 8 women in places like Afghanistan die in childbirth because they have no access to ante-natal care or educated people to help them give birth.

Elizabeth I of England, the famous virgin queen, lived to the ripe old age of 69 in the 16th century. She was wealthy and never had to starve, and never had children.

With a good diet, healthy lifestyle and access to medical technology we only dream about today, no doubt the average lifespan could be extended to around 120 at least. But unless we can extend the healthy, active adult period, what's the point? I certainly wouldn't want to live in an old folks' home for 50 years.

 

[Penta]

And Maneth nails it as to why Trek on this point seems to be biologically impossible. You might get to 120...But past 70 or so, you biologically are not meant to live an active lifestyle, it seems.

Certainly, past 70 it would be inadvisable at best to be commanding a starship or serving on a starship, generally considered rigorous occupations. Kinda like flying a plane past 65.

 

[Shazam!]

Picard was in his 60s when we first met him and he seemed to be doing just fine.

And in the books he's just had a kid, which is a bit weird.

 

[Anwar]

Well, Picard's brother was older than him and had a young kid too meaning he had him when he was nearly 50. Kind of pushing it..

 

[maneth]

Well, if 70 year old women can have kids with IVF today (at least one case in India where women can't inherit property and a couple desperately needed a son), and men can sire children for as long as they can get it up, longer with some forms of IVF, I don't think it's weird for Picard to have a kid past 50.

 

[Crewman47]

Well, Picard's brother was older than him and had a young kid too meaning he had him when he was nearly 50. Kind of pushing it..

I always wondered why they (the writers) decided to have Renee (?) be in his early teens rather than his early 20's when Robert was around late 60 early 70?

 

[Anwar]

He was in his early teens? I thought he was supposed to be like, ten.

I think back then they hadn't solidly settled for an age for Picard. He was meant to be maybe in his 40s and Robert in his 50s somewhere. It makes a LITTLE more sense for Rene to still be a boy if Robert had him in his mid to late 30s.

If he was in his 20s, he would've remembered Picard. I guess they wanted this to be their first meeting.