Magnitude of the FDS Epidemic
The Hypothesis will inevitably lead to the eradication of FDS, and thus the chronic degenerative diseases and system dysfunctions that are nothing more than symptoms of FDS. How big an impact will that have?
Every person who dies of “old age” or “natural causes” dies as the result of FDS. That’s been estimated to be about 100,000 people per day. All killed by the FDS epidemic. We're not bothered by that number of deaths, because as long as human civilization has been around older people have suffered the infirmities of aging and ultimately die of old age. But it’s not OK because it’s not natural. It’s not what evolution intended. With the advent of the Industrial Revolution, rickets became quite common among children in England. Like FDS, it was an epidemic caused by changes to the natural evolutionary environment that were wrought by human civilization. That doesn’t make it OK or any less of an epidemic.
In addition to the 100,000 lives per day, there are enormous financial costs that are directly attributable to FDS.
Academicians seeking additional funding for aging research have coined the term “Longevity Dividend” to describe the sum of health, social and economic benefits of delaying aging and eliminating the associated health care costs. Current rough estimates are that of the $3 trillion annually spent on healthcare in the United States, approximately $2 trillion is spent on aging-associated diseases. The academicians behind the Longevity Dividend analysis come up with much higher numbers, and project that the costs of not solving the “aging” problem will increase dramatically over time with the aging of the boomer generation.
Other academicians have used different calculation methods and included other factors. For example, the Milken Institute has done a number of studies on the economic burden of chronic diseases. One of the major economic costs that the Milken Institute identifies is the loss of productivity resulting from chronically ill workers:
“Chronically ill workers take sick days, reducing the supply of labor—and, in the process, the GDP. When they do show up for work to avoid losing wages, they perform far below par—a circumstance known as “presenteeism,” in contrast to absenteeism. Output loss (indirect impacts) due to presenteeism (lower productivity) is immense—several times greater than losses associated with absenteeism. Last (but hardly a footnote), avoidable illness diverts the productive capacity of caregivers, adding to the reduction in labor supply for other uses. Combined, the indirect impacts of these diseases totaled just over $1 trillion in 2003.”
The Institute acknowledges that the “aging-associated diseases” described in the Longevity Dividend analyses, and the “chronic diseases” included in the Milken analyses, include diseases that do not fit within the definition of chronic degenerative diseases that will be eradicated as a result of the Hypothesis. For example, cancer is not a degenerative disease. We have no reason to believe that correcting the Complex X deficiency will prevent or cure cancer. To the extent that the term used by the Hypothesis – “chronic degenerative diseases” does not cover all of the “aging-associated diseases” or “chronic diseases” used by the academicians, the financial estimates of those analyses overstate the financial impact of the Hypothesis.
On the other hand, there are a number of additional financial benefits that will be derived from the Hypothesis that are not included in those analyses. For example, the interventions prescribed by the Hypothesis will result in the better functioning of the immune systems of all humans, not just the elderly. Thus, with respect to workers of all ages, medical costs will decrease and productivity will increase as a result of workers suffering from fewer infectious diseases and/or recovering more quickly when they do contract such a disease.
Another human system that will work dramatically better is the central nervous system, including the brain. The brain’s hardware, just like every other organ in the body, starts to progressively deteriorate while we are in our twenties. We compensate through education, experience and specialization, so the decline is not generally noticed until we are much older. But, the loss of brain productivity with age exacts an immense financial toll on society, long before that deterioration is recognized as dementia. The interventions prescribed by the Hypothesis will result in improved brain function across all age groups. Smarter workers are more productive workers.
Finally, there are a significant number of chronic degenerative disorders that are aspects of FDS that are not recognized as diseases. Remedy the Complex X deficiency, and all human systems – skeletal muscle, digestive, respiratory, urinary, cardiovascular, reproductive, etc., will work better. Billions of dollars are spent on medical attention, drugs and supplements in an effort to treat systemic disorders that are not even recognized as diseases. In addition, these disorders also lead to the absenteeism and presenteeism lack of productivity described in the Milken studies. All of these problems will be remedied by the application of the interventions prescribed by the Hypothesis.
The Hypothesis will cause economic disruption. The value of many drugs that are currently valued in the billions of dollars will be reduced tremendously, because the single intervention prescribed by the Hypothesis will replace hundreds of drugs. But the net savings to society from the eradication of FDS (and thus, all of the chronic degenerative diseases and all disorders related to system dysfunction) will be immense.
The eradication of the chronic degenerative diseases will lead to a substantial increase in life expectancy. An obvious concern is whether that increase in longevity will lead to increased healthcare costs. After all, older people tend to have higher medical expenses. Fortunately, the Hypothesis’s approach of eliminating the physiological deterioration at inception will restore complete functionality throughout the human lifespan. To the extent that lifespans are extended, it will be because people are not suffering any of the infirmities of aging.