Meet Jasmina
Exploring how health, technology, and human potential evolve together
Integrating science, compassion, and purpose to shape a more intelligent and humane future.
Jasmina Denner’s work is driven by a simple but urgent question: how do humans adapt, decide, and live well as our lives grow longer and the systems around us grow more complex. Rather than treating health, technology, or personal development as separate pursuits, she approaches them as interconnected forces shaping how we think, act, and evolve over time.
Trained as a scientist, Jasmina holds a Ph.D. in Chemical Engineering from Yale University, a B.S. in Biochemical Engineering, and executive training in Sustainable Business Strategy at Harvard Business School. She has spent her career working across environments where complexity, uncertainty, and long-term consequences are unavoidable. Her experience spans academic research, nonprofit leadership, and investing in science-driven initiatives—each offering a different vantage point on how decisions ripple across biological, technological, and social systems. Moving between these environments shaped her ability to see patterns across domains and to think beyond isolated problems toward the systems that produce them.
Extending this integrative approach beyond traditional professional boundaries, Jasmina works across health, education, entrepreneurship, and high-performance athletics—bringing her perspective into thought leadership in action. She serves in select advisory and nonprofit leadership roles across science and culture, while also building ventures of her own. She’s also an internationally ranked saber fencer, a licensed pilot, and co-founder of a private fencing club—demonstrating her discipline, resilience, and commitment to pushing boundaries.
A Conversation with Jasmina
An Intimate Chat on Science, Sports, Investing, and the Art of Transformation
If your career were a scientific experiment, what hypothesis are you testing?
I’m testing the hypothesis that life itself is a long game—that human health and potential depend on how well we train for it. By combining scientific rigor, long-term thinking, strategic investing, and competitive sport, I explore how people adapt, learn, perform, and evolve over time—especially in the context of longer lives. Like any sport, you’re only as good as your last decision, your last practice, and your willingness to keep learning as conditions change.
How do you define longevity—and why does it need to be redefined today?
I define longevity not as how long we live, but how well we adapt across time. We’ve extended lifespan, but we haven’t trained for longer lives—biologically, cognitively, or socially. Longevity needs to be redefined because living longer without the capacity to learn, recover, decide, and evolve simply stretches fragility. In a world shaped by accelerating technology and constant change, longevity is no longer just a biological outcome—it’s a human capability that must be developed.
What is Longevity Intelligence—and how did the concept emerge from your work?
Longevity Intelligence emerged as I kept seeing the same gap across science, investing, and lived experience: we’re extending life faster than we’re upgrading the human capacity to navigate it. I realized that longevity wasn’t just a health or technology problem—it was a human capability problem. Longevity Intelligence names the ability to think, decide, and adapt well across longer, more complex lives. It’s not about optimization or life hacks; it’s about developing the capacities—agency, coherence, adaptability—that allow people to evolve with time rather than be overwhelmed by it.
How do you make decisions when the systems are complex, the signals are incomplete, and the consequences unfold over time?
I tend to slow things down before I speed them up when systems are complex and signals are incomplete. More data doesn’t automatically create clarity. I leave room to adapt as new information unfolds—asking what really matters, what I’m assuming, and which decisions can be adjusted versus locked in. When possible, I choose paths that allow learning and course correction over time. For me, good decisions aren’t about certainty upfront, but about staying oriented as conditions change.
How do you make decisions when the systems are complex, the signals are incomplete, and the consequences unfold over time?
I tend to slow things down before I speed them up when systems are complex and signals are incomplete. More data doesn’t automatically create clarity. I leave room to adapt as new information unfolds—asking what really matters, what I’m assuming, and which decisions can be adjusted versus locked in. When possible, I choose paths that allow learning and course correction over time. For me, good decisions aren’t about certainty upfront, but about staying oriented as conditions change.
How have science, investing, and sport shaped the way you think?
Science taught me how to ask better questions and respect evidence and uncertainty. Investing taught me to think in probabilities, time horizons, and trade-offs. Sport trained me to decide in real time, under pressure, when feedback is immediate and information incomplete. What connects all three is learning through action—testing, adjusting, and carrying insight from one domain into another. Moving between them sharpened my ability to recognize patterns and stay adaptable rather than attached to any single way of thinking.
If longevity were an investment portfolio, how would you diversify it?
I wouldn’t diversify longevity by chasing the next intervention alone—but I’m not against optimization either. I’d start by investing in resilience: healthspan fundamentals that compound over time, adaptability that helps navigate change, strong social ties, and a sense of purpose that sustains engagement. From there, smarter tools and interventions can add leverage when built on those foundations. In a long life, the real risk isn’t volatility—it’s fragility. Optimization works best when it’s built on resilience, not instead of it.
What do you believe the future of health and technology requires from humans—not just from innovation?
The future of health technology will require humans to evolve alongside it, not outsource responsibility to it. Tools can extend capacity, but they can’t replace judgment, agency, or the willingness to change behavior over time. As technology accelerates, the real work becomes internal: learning how to update how we think, decide, and adapt across longer lives and greater complexity. Without that human evolution, even the most advanced innovation risks increasing dependence rather than capability.
What do you believe the future of health and technology requires from humans—not just from innovation?
The future of health technology will require humans to evolve alongside it, not outsource responsibility to it. Tools can extend capacity, but they can’t replace judgment, agency, or the willingness to change behavior over time. As technology accelerates, the real work becomes internal: learning how to update how we think, decide, and adapt across longer lives and greater complexity. Without that human evolution, even the most advanced innovation risks increasing dependence rather than capability.
How has competitive fencing influenced your professional journey?
Fencing taught me something early on: you don’t train for perfect conditions—you train for disruption, fatigue, misreads, recovery, and return. There’s no autopilot. Every bout demands presence, adaptation, and agency under pressure. Over time, that shaped how I approach life and work. Healthspan matters, but health alone doesn’t teach you how to navigate a long, complex life. What fencing really trained was the ability to recalibrate—body under stress, identity under change, purpose under pressure. That’s where Longevity Intelligence lives for me: not in permanent optimization, but in the practiced ability to recover, reorient, and re-enter the arena again and again.
What lesson about decision-making or agency has repeated itself most consistently in your life?
The lesson that repeats for me is to make decisions with my future self in mind—and to pay attention to the patterns that keep showing up along the way. When a choice aligns with who I’m becoming, the signal is usually clear. When I ignore recurring patterns or dismiss that perspective, I tend to end up correcting courses later. Recognizing those patterns helps me filter noise, avoid distraction, and act with intention over time.
If you could change one thing about how we approach longevity, what would it be?
I would shift longevity from something we try to extend to something we learn how to live. Today, we treat it as a medical or technological problem—how to add years, optimize biomarkers, delay decline. But longevity is really a design challenge. It asks how we build the capacities to adapt, make sense of change, and stay engaged across longer lives. If we approached longevity as a trainable human skill—rather than a passive outcome—we’d stop chasing fixes and start building futures we actually know how to inhabit.
If you could change one thing about how we approach longevity, what would it be?
I would shift longevity from something we try to extend to something we learn how to live. Today, we treat it as a medical or technological problem—how to add years, optimize biomarkers, delay decline. But longevity is really a design challenge. It asks how we build the capacities to adapt, make sense of change, and stay engaged across longer lives. If we approached longevity as a trainable human skill—rather than a passive outcome—we’d stop chasing fixes and start building futures we actually know how to inhabit.
Step Into the Future with Jasmina
Jasmina’s voice cuts through the noise, making complex ideas accessible and inspiring action. Book her for your next event, podcast, or feature, and bring a fresh perspective to the conversation.