Slashdot Mirror


Study Suggests There's No Limit On Longevity (smithsonianmag.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Smithsonian: The science of longevity is surprisingly controversial, mainly because there are so few people of extreme old age -- defined at 110 years or older -- around to study. So researchers look to statistics to try and figure out how long people can live. [Ben Guarino reports via The Washington Post] that in 1825, actuary Benjamin Gompertz put forth the idea that the odds of dying grow exponentially as we age. Further research bears that out. Between the age of 30 and 80, the odds of dying double every 8 years. What happens after that, however, is not completely figured out. According to a controversial study released in 2016, which analyzed data from 40 different countries, the average person could make it to 115 with the right genes and interventions, and a few genetic superstars would be able to make it to 125. But that was it, they argued. There was a wall of mortality that medicine and positive thinking simply cannot overcome.

But not everyone is convinced by that data. That's why for the new paper in the journal Science, researchers looked at the lifespans of 3,836 people in Italy who reached the age of 105 or older between 2009 and 2015, with their ages verified by birth certificates. What they found is that the Gompertz law goes a little haywire around the century mark. According to a press release, a 90 year old woman has a 15 percent chance of dying in the next year, and an estimated six years left to live. At age 95, the chance of dying per year jumps to 24 percent. At the age of 105, the chance of dying makes another leap to 50 percent. But then, surprisingly, it levels off, even past 110. In other words, at least statistically, each year some lucky person could flip the coin of life, and if it comes up heads every time, they could live beyond 115 or 125.

10 of 151 comments (clear)

  1. Seems odd by alvinrod · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Is that a consequence of biology or the result of a mathematical oddity arising as a result of so few people living that long and those who do being exceptional cases? The results seem somewhat counter-intuitive, so I'm inclined to think it's the latter case.

    I'm more interested in seeing what the interventions that are currently available (and those that will become available over the next several decades) will do in the long run. Maybe they won't extend the total amount of time all that much, but if I can feel like I'm 40 when I'm 90, I won't complain too much if I still check out at 100.

    1. Re: Seems odd by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 5, Funny

      skewing the results.

      Then, a "big data analyst" will conclude that issuing a birth certificate extends our life span.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    2. Re:Seems odd by postbigbang · · Score: 4, Informative

      Or mowing a lawn in a white neighborhood while being black in the USA. Or being a journalist in a newsroom when someone has a grudge. Or simply being a kid in school when someone gets a hold of family weapons and slaughters you.

      Perhaps going to a wedding in Yemen. Being on a 747 that moves accidentally in to Russian airspace. Or dying in the Arizona desert to escape the brutality of puppet Central American regimes.

      Maybe it was black lung disease, asbestos, benzene. Decades of nicotine or alcohol addiction. Something's going to get you, and nihilistic surveys on Italians means only that they escaped these things and ate well and exercised.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
  2. A Simple Explanation by JayTech · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Genesis 6:3

    Then the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, because he also is flesh; nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.”

    Ok, problem solved. Quick, some tell Elisabetta Barbi, Francesco Lagona, Marco Marsili, James W. Vaupel, and Kenneth W. Wachter! With all the free time they'll have now, maybe they can come up with a formula that explains why humans need sleep.

  3. 50% chance by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Informative

    So a 50% chance of dying every year? Wow, that's just the comfort I needed on these long, cold, dark nights.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  4. I plan to live forever by Major_Disorder · · Score: 5, Funny

    So far so good.

    --
    First law of people: People are generally stupid.
  5. Dictators... by Mats+Svensson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Oh PLEASE let Donald, Vlad, Kim, and all the other assholes die well before the cure for aging is rolled out.
    Can you Imagine having those monsters around for all eternity?

  6. Re:the study is wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Jeanne Calment 122 years, 164 days -- beats your 115.

  7. Just once by ArchieBunker · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'd like to read something where Trump was not the topic and was not mentioned. Let it fucking go already.

    --
    Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    1. Re:Just once by gijoel · · Score: 4, Informative

      . Donald Trump could bring about world peace, socialized healthcare, and give out his entire fortune to orphans. They still would despise him and deny he did anything positive at all.

      Trump is never going to do any of those things.So far he's destabilized world peace, has made it harder for people to access health care in the US, and separated children from their parents. Hell if he did only one of those things you mention I'd nominate him for a Nobel.