The world of tech billionaires and longevity experiments took another turn into the surreal recently, with Bryan Johnson, the tech entrepreneur fixated on reversing aging, hosting a livestreamed psychedelic mushroom trip. The event featured Grimes DJing, and at one point, was slated to include YouTube star MrBeast.
Johnson, who has previously experimented with immunosuppressants and plans for mind uploading, measured biomarkers while under the influence of hallucinogens. The livestream drew attendees like Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff and tech journalist Ashlee Vance. While Johnson claims to have known what he was doing, the spectacle raises questions about the increasing overlap between extreme biohacking, celebrity influence, and psychedelic exploration.
The event is part of a broader trend of wealthy individuals pursuing radical life extension through unconventional methods. Johnson’s experiments, while attention-grabbing, represent a larger movement driven by the belief that aging is a disease to be cured rather than a natural process. This raises ethical concerns about access, safety, and the potential for widening health disparities.
Meanwhile, a bizarre correlation study from 2014 asked whether latent toxoplasmosis (a parasite found in many people) might link to traffic accidents. The study’s title is, “Does the prevalence of latent toxoplasmosis and frequency of Rhesus-negative subjects correlate with the nationwide rate of traffic accidents?” The answer was no, but the question itself demonstrates how far some scientific inquiries can stray into the absurd.
Even stranger, an AI-generated graphic in a retracted Scientific Reports paper claimed to illustrate a system for diagnosing autism. The image featured a woman with concrete legs, a child pointing at nonsensical text bubbles (“MISSING VALUE &runctitional features”), and an inexplicable spiked bicycle. The journal quickly retracted the paper, but the graphic remains a testament to the unpredictable outputs of AI and the need for rigorous peer review.
The speed of the retraction itself is notable: journals often take years to correct errors, but this one was pulled within weeks. This highlights a growing recognition of AI-generated content’s potential for inaccuracies and the urgency for better validation processes.
In a world where tech billionaires experiment with radical life extension and AI generates nonsensical scientific illustrations, the line between innovation and absurdity is blurring. The convergence of these forces raises questions about the future of science, technology, and the pursuit of immortality.
