Goldhawk Fights Back: Living to 100

But even before that, would you even take the test? Would you want to know? It's a DNA test, checking for 150 different markers and could be on the market by the end of the summer. That's at least the enthusiastic and optimistic prediction of research scientists at Boston University. They say they can predict, with a 77 per cent accuracy rate, whether or not you have the right biological components to rack up 100 years of living -- or maybe more.

Of course, nothing is written. And just because you have the equipment, it doesn't you can make it work. But the trend to longer lives, in the developed and developing worlds, is solidly established. For example, scientists say that more than half of all babies born in richer countries, in this century, could easily live to be 100.

Does that mean that future income earners will retire at age 75 or 80 or even older than that? Probably. The trend to more years of productive work is also growing right now. Diane Ablonczy, the Minister of State for Seniors, told reporters a few days ago, the government is considering dropping the mandatory retirement age of 65 for those who work in federally-regulated industries, such as broadcasting.

All of this talk brings up the usual worries about money. Will there be enough if we are going to live these long lives? Will we have enough savings? Will government or private pensions help support us to the point where we will be able to enjoy life?

But forget the money for a minute and look at the other side of the coin. What if we have the money but still don't have the kind of life where getting up every day is still a bit of a joy and anticipation and hope are still active within us.