From Science Fiction to Strategy: Why AI and Longevity Must Be on the National Agenda

Today’s Yorkshire Post runs my latest column, exploring something that once sounded like sci-fi but is fast becoming scientific fact: the role of artificial intelligence in dramatically extending human life expectancy.

Imagine blowing out candles on your 150th birthday, surrounded by five generations of your family—not in Silicon Valley, but right here in South Yorkshire. It sounds fanciful, but the technology is advancing at such a pace that we must now start taking these questions seriously.

In the piece, I reference a compelling prediction by Dario Amodei, CEO of AI lab Anthropic. He argues that, just as life expectancy nearly doubled in the 20th century—from 40 to 75—it’s plausible it could double again this century to 150. Some corners of the press scoffed. But Amodei’s point is a serious one: we are not approaching a biological ceiling. Quite the opposite—we may be on the cusp of rewriting the rules of human lifespan entirely.

I included a story that, to me, illustrates the velocity of this change. At Imperial College London, a team led by Professor José R Penadés spent a decade decoding how certain superbugs develop antibiotic resistance. When they handed the problem to a Google-built AI called “co-scientist”, it reached the same conclusion—in 48 hours. That’s not evolution. That’s revolution.

This is happening across the board. AI is no longer a lab curiosity—it’s diagnosing cancers earlier, predicting protein structures, designing new drugs, and accelerating therapies that once took years into timelines of weeks. And it’s not just about treatment. It’s about prevention, preservation, and—ultimately—prolongation.

Here in the UK, and especially in regions like South Yorkshire, this presents both a huge opportunity and a pressing challenge. We have a world-class research base. We’ve got the ambition. But we also have to be brutally honest: our institutions aren’t yet ready for a population living to 120 or 150. Retirement at 65? A national curriculum that stops at 18? Pension schemes built for a 20-year wind-down? All of it must be reimagined.

And crucially, we must ensure that the benefits of this longevity revolution don’t accrue only to those with the deepest pockets. The NHS was founded on the principle of care based on need, not wealth. That principle must extend to access to life-extending technologies. Otherwise, we risk entrenching a two-tier system—not just in healthcare, but in lifespan itself.

Amodei’s prediction may sound radical, but the trends are unmistakable. AI isn’t just reshaping how we live. It may soon reshape how long we live. The real question is whether our politics, economics, and institutions can keep up.

We’re not talking about immortality. We’re talking about an extra 30, 40, even 50 years of healthy, productive life. What could you do with that time? What might you build, write, or give back? It’s a conversation we need to start now.