June 25th, 2026
Members of the life insurance industry have typically been far ahead of the rest of the general public outside the life sciences when it comes to an appreciation of progress towards therapies to treat aging as a medical condition. It is a very large industry, and thus has significant funding to direct towards analysis and prediction of trends in medicine. The prospect of increasing healthy human longevity, of a change in the way in which aging is addressed by medical research and development, is both an existential threat and opportunity for the life insurance industry. Those who predict correctly will thrive, and those who do not will suffer.
Thus it is always interesting to see how insurance industry researchers and analysts react to developments in the medical life science space. Here, the focus is on aging clocks, ways to combine biological data that predict mortality risk across populations. If biological age could be measured accurately for an individual via any specific variety of aging clock, and thus a good estimate of intrinsic mortality risk derived that individual, one would imagine that the life insurers would adopt this technology very rapidly. They have every motivation to do so. The reasons why they have not so far done are the same reasons as to why clocks are not yet the gold standard for assessing the quality of potential rejuvenation therapies: the clocks are not accurate for individuals, and their underlying connections to biological age are not fully understood.
