I stumbled onto this issue through an unlikely source: a podcast by Bryan Johnson, the Silicon Valley entrepreneur who reportedly spends $2 million-plus annually fine-tuning his biology. Johnson tracks hundreds of biomarkers in his quest to reverse aging and recently described how an international trip with a colleague disrupted his body.
What caught my attention wasn’t his extreme approach, but his findings about travel’s impact on performance. If someone with unlimited resources and scientific support struggles to maintain peak function while traveling, what does that mean for the rest of us?
It reminded me of my own years flying monthly between New York and Australia. I pushed through the fatigue, fog, and constant sense of being slightly off. It felt normal. Part of the territory. Only when COVID grounded me did I realize the toll: clarity returned, energy steadied, and the jet lag haze lifted. It was like waking from a years-long stupor.
The Real Cost of Travel Culture
Here’s what most companies miss: business travel has become a systemic health hazard with financial and legal consequences.
For years, we’ve treated frequent travel as a necessary burden; proof of ambition. The data says otherwise.
According to a World Bank study published in the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, male business travelers filed 80% more medical claims and female travelers 18% more than their non-traveling colleagues. Those making four or more international trips a year showed the highest claim rates across multiple health categories.
This isn’t just about catching bugs on planes. These patterns mirror shift-work research: chronic circadian disruption, metabolic dysfunction, and cardiovascular stress. Studies show shift workers face a 10% increased risk of diabetes, with heightened risks for obesity and cardiovascular disease.
An Emory University study found employees traveling more than 20 days per month had significantly higher obesity rates, body fat, and abdominal fat. Men on international trips gained more weight than peers traveling domestically. These aren’t lifestyle choices; they’re physiological responses to repeated biological stress.
Bryan Johnson’s Framework
Johnson’s ‘Blueprint’ protocol tracks more than 200 biomarkers, offering precise evidence of how travel disrupts human function. Despite custom sleep equipment, elaborate supplement regimens, and tightly controlled nutrition, travel consistently undermined the very systems he works to optimize. The performance implications extend beyond labs and data.
In a YouTube interview, Bryan Johnson and Dr. Mike Mallin, his lead physician, discussed research on 173 Olympic teams across 15 Games. The findings were striking: athletes who hadn’t fully recovered from circadian disruption didn’t just lose a step—they lost medals. Competitors who might have taken gold often slipped to silver simply because their bodies never adjusted.
Thoughts on Travel Frequency
Some organizations are beginning to treat frequent travelers like professional athletes. They know peak performance requires careful management of stress and recovery. Most business trips don’t allow enough recovery. The standard rule of one day per time zone crossed means a London–New York traveler needs five days each way to fully adapt. Monthly international travel creates chronic partial adaptation—persistent biological stress with no reset.
- International trips crossing six or more time zones: limit to one per quarter
- Significant domestic trips (3–5 time zones): similar limits
- Short-duration trips without time to adapt: no more than once monthly, with 60–to-90 day gaps
On a personal note, I’ve been experimenting with small adjustments to make travel easier on my body. I stay on top of hydration, often using a zero-sugar electrolyte mix. When crossing multiple time zones, I’ll sometimes take a low-dose melatonin supplement to help my body clock reset. And lately, I’ve been testing a blackout eye mask to reduce some of the visible fatigue from long flights. These aren’t cures, but they’re part of how I manage the stress on my body that comes with long haul travel.
The Bottom Line
COVID-19’s travel pause provided an unexpected natural experiment. Former frequent travelers reported improved health, energy, and focus. The lesson: our pre-pandemic model undermined the very employees it relied on.
Bryan Johnson’s quarterly travel rule offers a science-backed framework for sustainable performance. The business case is becoming compelling: companies with robust wellness programs cut healthcare costs while boosting engagement and profitability. But those gains are at risk if outdated travel policies persist.
We’re approaching a tipping point where frequent travel may be legally, financially, and biologically unsustainable.
It’s worth pointing out the environmental dimension to this equation. Each extra flight carries a carbon cost that contributes to long-term risks we all share. Reducing flights safeguards employee wellbeing and signals real commitment to sustainability. It also reinforces the message that wellbeing, both human and planetary, is a strategic priority.
Organizations that act now, by treating travel as an occupational health risk, setting evidence-based limits, and investing in recovery protocols, will gain healthier, more productive teams and a competitive edge.
The evidence is persuasive: sustainable peak performance and frequent travel may be fundamentally incompatible. The companies that recognize this first will be best positioned for the future of work.