The Ledger — Full Calculator

Move the Inputs.
Watch the Calendar.

Adjust the inputs below to see how the projection shifts — illustrative estimates built from published longevity research, with an SSA actuarial baseline as the starting point.

Age 35
Sex
Diet quality
Strength or conditioning training3 days/wk
Average sleep7.0 hrs
For your age (30s) — normal ranges: deep sleep 1621%, REM 1924%, efficiency 8693%.Wearable sleep-stage percentages (deep, REM, light) are estimated by proprietary algorithms — not EEG. Agreement with clinical polysomnography is ~70% for deep sleep, and wearables characteristically underestimate deep sleep in older adults. Track your stages as personal trends over time, not against clinical thresholds. Duration and sleep efficiency from wearables are far more reliable than stage breakdown.
Alcohol2 drinks/wk
Cigarettes/daynone
Vapes daily
Chronic high stress
Close relationships you'd call strong
Clear sense of purpose
Ikigai — a felt sense of life worth living
Ohsaki Study, Japan (n=43,391) — culturally specific; distinct from generic “purpose”
Dog owner
Evidence is dog-specific; no clear mortality benefit established for other pets
Practiced, not counted

The following have real evidence for psychological and relationship outcomes — but no published mortality or years-of-life data exist. No figure is fabricated.

Nonviolent Communication (NVC)
Reviewers describe the evidence base as heterogeneous, calling for larger and longer randomized trials. No years-of-life
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT)
A 2025 meta-analysis of 23 RCTs (n=5,877) found large effect sizes for subclinical depression (Hedges' g = -0.89) and an

Life Calendar

Displayed in weeks because that period of time hits the sweet spot for how we live and plan.

livedbaselinegainedlost
+12.5 years
vs. SSA baseline
−$1,907/yr
estimated annual impact
Exercise+2.2 years
Diet quality+1.1 years
Social connection+2.0 years≈ est.
Sense of purpose+3.0 years≈ est.
Every dollar figure in this experience reflects a tangible market projection — direct consumption spending, medical costs, or insurance/healthcare-system costs — nothing more. It is not, and cannot be, a measure of what time with the people you love is worth. That value is priceless and immeasurable, and this platform does not attempt to price it.
≈ Approximate figures included. Social connection, sense of purpose, chronic stress, ikigai, and dog ownership are estimated from mortality hazard/odds ratios, not directly published years-of-life numbers. These carry more uncertainty than factors marked DIRECT (exercise, sleep, alcohol, diet, smoking).
No lab values connected. The 12.5-year adjustment above comes from self-reported habits only — not a biological age measurement. Connect lab values above to compute Phenotypic Age (Levine 2018).
Population-level estimates from published longevity research. SSA 2023 period life table sets the baseline. Not a medical prediction. See methodology →
Ecological Footprint — Parallel Axis

Diet's Planetary Footprint.

A second, separate output. Health years and ecological footprint measure different things — one is biological risk, the other is planetary resource draw-down. They are shown side by side and are never combined into a single number.

Source: Poore & Nemecek (2018), Science. 38,700 farms, 119 countries. Figures are full-lifecycle means per kg of food product (full supply chain, including retail losses). Producer variation is large — beef ranges ~9–105 kg CO₂eq/kg across producers.

Plant-forward vs. Mediterranean — what the evidence actually says

Whether a fully plant-based diet extends life longer than a well-constructed Mediterranean diet remains an open question. Overlapping confidence intervals, not a clear winner.

No randomized trial has measured life expectancy comparing plant-based and Mediterranean diets head-to-head. Both outperform a standard Western diet pattern. The gap between them is not established by current evidence.

Fadnes LT, et al. "Estimating impact of food choices on life expectancy: A modeling study." PLOS Medicine, 2022. A plant-based optimal diet showed modeled gains from a Western baseline — but confidence intervals for "optimal" and "Mediterranean" patterns substantially overlap.
Barnard ND, et al. "A Mediterranean diet and low-fat vegan diet to improve body weight and cardiometabolic risk factors: A randomized, cross-over trial." Journal of the American College of Nutrition, 2022. Metabolic markers improved on both; this is a risk-factor study, not a mortality outcome study.
Martínez-González MA, et al. "A provegetarian food pattern and reduction in total mortality in the Prevención con Dieta Mediterránea (PREDIMED) study." Am J Clin Nutr, 2014. More plant-forward scoring within Mediterranean eating was associated with lower mortality — this compares degrees of plant-forwardness within a Mediterranean context, not vegan vs. Mediterranean head-to-head.
Beef & lamb60 g/day
Pork, poultry & processed meat120 g/day
Include bacon, salami, hot dogs here
Dairy (all types)300 g/day
Milk, yogurt, cheese — total grams
Eggs7 /week
Seafood40 g/day
Farmed estimates used
Plant proteins80 g/day
Tofu, beans, lentils, nuts
Rice80 g/day
Wheat & other grains200 g/day
Bread, pasta, oats, cereal

Ecological Footprint

3,680 kg
CO₂eq per year (GHG)
10,201
land use per year
508k L
freshwater per year
GHG breakdown by group
Beef & lamb1658 kg · 45%
Dairy913 kg · 25%
Pork & poultry475 kg · 13%
Seafood257 kg · 7%
Rice130 kg · 4%
Wheat & grains115 kg · 3%
Eggs85 kg · 2%
Plant proteins46 kg · 1%
Not combined with health years. These are parallel measurements. A diet low in ecological footprint is not necessarily better for your health, and vice versa. The comparison that matters is internal: which of your inputs drives the most footprint.
GHG includes land use change, farming, feed, processing, transport, retail, packaging, and food waste losses — all lifecycle stages per Poore & Nemecek. Water = freshwater withdrawals (blue water only; excludes precipitation and pollution-dilution water). Source →
Rings of Influence

What You Do Inward Ripples Outward.

This section is deliberately general, not personal — it doesn't calculate a day-count for your partner, your kids, or your friends. It shows what the research actually says about health and household/social ties, so you can draw your own conclusions. Some of this research is settled. Some is genuinely disputed by other scientists, and we say so plainly rather than picking a side. Bottom line, though, is that your choices impact people and the planet.

Established causalAssociational, contestedWell-replicated associationStructural context
Money is not a ring: Financial-Economic — An Enabler, Not a Health Domain

Network medicine treats disease not as a single-gene or single-organ event, but as a disruption of interconnected molecular, cellular, and physiological networks — and by extension, the environmental and social networks those systems sit inside. This is the conceptual basis for pairing "biological" and "ecological" together in this framework, rather than treating the body as separate from the environment that sustains it. Money doesn't belong inside the rings — it's a different kind of thing. It expands or restricts access to what the two biological-ecological and psycho-sociocultural health domains need, but isn't itself a health outcome.

Global food-system externalities

The global food and agriculture system generates an estimated $10-12.7 trillion per year in "hidden" costs not reflected in food prices — over 70% of which is attributable to unhealthy diets driving non-communicable disease, with the remainder split between environmental and social/economic costs.

A distinct estimate from the UCS figure above (different methodology, global rather than U.S.-specific, and about system-wide externalities rather than an individual behavior change) — cited separately rather than combined, since summing two differently-scoped trillion-dollar estimates would imply a false precision.

UN Food and Agriculture Organization, "The State of Food and Agriculture 2023" (154-country analysis).

Individual dietary access (U.S.)

If Americans ate the USDA-recommended amount of fruits and vegetables, the resulting gain in longevity — valued using standard economic methods — would be worth over $11 trillion, alongside more than 127,000 lives saved and $17 billion in annual heart-disease healthcare costs avoided.

This is a projection using standard value-of-a-statistical-life-year economic methods, not a direct measurement — the underlying dietary-longevity relationship itself is well-established, but the dollar figure is a derived valuation, not a market transaction.

Union of Concerned Scientists, "The $11 Trillion Reward," 2013.