J’Accuse…! Why Jeanne Calment’s 122-year old longevity record may be fake

https://medium.com/@yurideigin/jaccuse-why-122-year-longevity-record-may-be-fake-af87fc0c3133

For many gerontologists, Jeanne Calment is almost what Joan of Arc is for the French. A symbol, a legend, a saint. The longevity record of Jeanne of Arles, set at 122 years and 164 days, is known to every true aging fighter. Since Jeanne set it in 1997 nobody managed to break it or even get close — the second place barely exceeds 119 years, and the third stands at 117. Of those contenders who stand any chance — i.e. those who are presently alive — the oldest ones are just 115 years old. Given that after age 100 the annual probability of dying is about 1/2, the chances of a centenarian living to 122 are incredibly small. But in gerontological circles nobody doubts the authenticity of Jeanne’s record. On the contrary, she is referred to as the “most validated centenarian”. Indeed, her documents are impeccable: she was born and lived her entire life in one place — the city of Arles in the south of France — and, coming from a well-known bourgeois family, Jeanne appears in many official sources. However, impeccable documents are no guarantee against fraud, as those documents could be used by someone else, someone younger. For example, your daughter.

dv said:

J’Accuse…! Why Jeanne Calment’s 122-year old longevity record may be fake

https://medium.com/@yurideigin/jaccuse-why-122-year-longevity-record-may-be-fake-af87fc0c3133

For many gerontologists, Jeanne Calment is almost what Joan of Arc is for the French. A symbol, a legend, a saint. The longevity record of Jeanne of Arles, set at 122 years and 164 days, is known to every true aging fighter. Since Jeanne set it in 1997 nobody managed to break it or even get close — the second place barely exceeds 119 years, and the third stands at 117. Of those contenders who stand any chance — i.e. those who are presently alive — the oldest ones are just 115 years old. Given that after age 100 the annual probability of dying is about 1/2, the chances of a centenarian living to 122 are incredibly small. But in gerontological circles nobody doubts the authenticity of Jeanne’s record. On the contrary, she is referred to as the “most validated centenarian”. Indeed, her documents are impeccable: she was born and lived her entire life in one place — the city of Arles in the south of France — and, coming from a well-known bourgeois family, Jeanne appears in many official sources. However, impeccable documents are no guarantee against fraud, as those documents could be used by someone else, someone younger. For example, your daughter.

There are dozens of fake claims to extreme age.

mollwollfumble said:

dv said:

J’Accuse…! Why Jeanne Calment’s 122-year old longevity record may be fake

https://medium.com/@yurideigin/jaccuse-why-122-year-longevity-record-may-be-fake-af87fc0c3133

For many gerontologists, Jeanne Calment is almost what Joan of Arc is for the French. A symbol, a legend, a saint. The longevity record of Jeanne of Arles, set at 122 years and 164 days, is known to every true aging fighter. Since Jeanne set it in 1997 nobody managed to break it or even get close — the second place barely exceeds 119 years, and the third stands at 117. Of those contenders who stand any chance — i.e. those who are presently alive — the oldest ones are just 115 years old. Given that after age 100 the annual probability of dying is about 1/2, the chances of a centenarian living to 122 are incredibly small. But in gerontological circles nobody doubts the authenticity of Jeanne’s record. On the contrary, she is referred to as the “most validated centenarian”. Indeed, her documents are impeccable: she was born and lived her entire life in one place — the city of Arles in the south of France — and, coming from a well-known bourgeois family, Jeanne appears in many official sources. However, impeccable documents are no guarantee against fraud, as those documents could be used by someone else, someone younger. For example, your daughter.

There are dozens of fake claims to extreme age.

Yet only one of those is widely accepted as the oldest person ever.

dv said:

J’Accuse…! Why Jeanne Calment’s 122-year old longevity record may be fake

https://medium.com/@yurideigin/jaccuse-why-122-year-longevity-record-may-be-fake-af87fc0c3133

For many gerontologists, Jeanne Calment is almost what Joan of Arc is for the French. A symbol, a legend, a saint. The longevity record of Jeanne of Arles, set at 122 years and 164 days, is known to every true aging fighter. Since Jeanne set it in 1997 nobody managed to break it or even get close — the second place barely exceeds 119 years, and the third stands at 117. Of those contenders who stand any chance — i.e. those who are presently alive — the oldest ones are just 115 years old. Given that after age 100 the annual probability of dying is about 1/2, the chances of a centenarian living to 122 are incredibly small. But in gerontological circles nobody doubts the authenticity of Jeanne’s record. On the contrary, she is referred to as the “most validated centenarian”. Indeed, her documents are impeccable: she was born and lived her entire life in one place — the city of Arles in the south of France — and, coming from a well-known bourgeois family, Jeanne appears in many official sources. However, impeccable documents are no guarantee against fraud, as those documents could be used by someone else, someone younger. For example, your daughter.

The probability of an event with probability 1/2 happening 22 times in a row is about 1 in 4.2 million.

How many centenarians are there in the World?

The Rev Dodgson said:

How many centenarians are there in the World?

TATE says about 455,000 in 2009 (and increasing fast)

The Rev Dodgson said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

How many centenarians are there in the World?

TATE says about 455,000 in 2009 (and increasing fast)

Oh, we want 1997.

About 170,000

The Rev Dodgson said:

dv said:

J’Accuse…! Why Jeanne Calment’s 122-year old longevity record may be fake

https://medium.com/@yurideigin/jaccuse-why-122-year-longevity-record-may-be-fake-af87fc0c3133

For many gerontologists, Jeanne Calment is almost what Joan of Arc is for the French. A symbol, a legend, a saint. The longevity record of Jeanne of Arles, set at 122 years and 164 days, is known to every true aging fighter. Since Jeanne set it in 1997 nobody managed to break it or even get close — the second place barely exceeds 119 years, and the third stands at 117. Of those contenders who stand any chance — i.e. those who are presently alive — the oldest ones are just 115 years old. Given that after age 100 the annual probability of dying is about 1/2, the chances of a centenarian living to 122 are incredibly small. But in gerontological circles nobody doubts the authenticity of Jeanne’s record. On the contrary, she is referred to as the “most validated centenarian”. Indeed, her documents are impeccable: she was born and lived her entire life in one place — the city of Arles in the south of France — and, coming from a well-known bourgeois family, Jeanne appears in many official sources. However, impeccable documents are no guarantee against fraud, as those documents could be used by someone else, someone younger. For example, your daughter.

The probability of an event with probability 1/2 happening 22 times in a row is about 1 in 4.2 million.

How many centenarians are there in the World?

Approximately half a million. But given that we are talking about the oldest ever, it would be fairer to ask, how many people have ever reach 100.

But it should be noted that is a pretty rough yard stick. The annual risk of death for someone who is 100 is much lower than for someone who is 115.

(Obviously there may be many people who reached great ages who don’t appear in these lists because they lack documentation but I’ll set that aside)

There are 46 people who have reached the age of 115. To my mind, Calment’s age is not all that extraordinary.

dv said:

J’Accuse…! Why Jeanne Calment’s 122-year old longevity record may be fake

https://medium.com/@yurideigin/jaccuse-why-122-year-longevity-record-may-be-fake-af87fc0c3133

For many gerontologists, Jeanne Calment is almost what Joan of Arc is for the French. A symbol, a legend, a saint. The longevity record of Jeanne of Arles, set at 122 years and 164 days, is known to every true aging fighter. Since Jeanne set it in 1997 nobody managed to break it or even get close — the second place barely exceeds 119 years, and the third stands at 117. Of those contenders who stand any chance — i.e. those who are presently alive — the oldest ones are just 115 years old. Given that after age 100 the annual probability of dying is about 1/2, the chances of a centenarian living to 122 are incredibly small. But in gerontological circles nobody doubts the authenticity of Jeanne’s record. On the contrary, she is referred to as the “most validated centenarian”. Indeed, her documents are impeccable: she was born and lived her entire life in one place — the city of Arles in the south of France — and, coming from a well-known bourgeois family, Jeanne appears in many official sources. However, impeccable documents are no guarantee against fraud, as those documents could be used by someone else, someone younger. For example, your daughter.

The full article is a good read. There are enough pieces of evidence there to doubt the claim of being the oldest person.

On the other hand, for someone like me, my evidence of age would be considerably more flimsy than that. I have only one photograph surviving of my teen years, and have a name that is common enough that other scientific papers on similar topics have been written by someone else of the same name.

Happily, I think I am the only person in the entire world with my name.

dv said:

Happily, I think I am the only person in the entire world with my name.

Is your surname that uncommon?

Although thinking about it I don’t remember meeting anyone with your surname.

sibeen said:

dv said:

Happily, I think I am the only person in the entire world with my name.

Is your surname that uncommon?

Although thinking about it I don’t remember meeting anyone with your surname.

I do have a friend who can say that with some surety. His surname was made up by a Maltese forebear when he landed in Australia and he knows everyone with that surname :)

sibeen said:

dv said:

Happily, I think I am the only person in the entire world with my name.

Is your surname that uncommon?

Although thinking about it I don’t remember meeting anyone with your surname.

It’s fairly uncommon, and most of the people with my surname have German first names, and my first name is extremely uncommon.

dv said:

sibeen said:

dv said:

Happily, I think I am the only person in the entire world with my name.

Is your surname that uncommon?

Although thinking about it I don’t remember meeting anyone with your surname.

It’s fairly uncommon, and most of the people with my surname have German first names, and my first name is extremely uncommon.

I didn’t realise the spelling of your forename was uncommon, then I realised that I have no idea how you do spell it :) There ya go.

sibeen said:

dv said:

sibeen said:

Is your surname that uncommon?

Although thinking about it I don’t remember meeting anyone with your surname.

It’s fairly uncommon, and most of the people with my surname have German first names, and my first name is extremely uncommon.

I didn’t realise the spelling of your forename was uncommon, then I realised that I have no idea how you do spell it :) There ya go.

Weren’t you on the old forum ever, back in the day?

dv said:

sibeen said:

dv said:

It’s fairly uncommon, and most of the people with my surname have German first names, and my first name is extremely uncommon.

I didn’t realise the spelling of your forename was uncommon, then I realised that I have no idea how you do spell it :) There ya go.

Weren’t you on the old forum ever, back in the day?

Yes. I know how to pronounce your name, unless you’re a ghoti freak, but never took much notice of how you spelt it.

Peak is an extremely uncommon first name.

I thought dv’s first name was a very common one. Where did I go wrong?

Back to Jeanne, I’d be interested in whether you considered the evidence in the linked article definitive? Or not? Or whether the original viewpoint of her being 122 is definitive?

Peak Warming Man said:

Peak is an extremely uncommon first name.

But have we yet reached Peak Peak?

mollwollfumble said:

Back to Jeanne, I’d be interested in whether you considered the evidence in the linked article definitive? Or not? Or whether the original viewpoint of her being 122 is definitive?

The photographic evidence is persuasive, but the author has not addressed one big problem: how did a 36 year old woman replace her 59 year old mother in a town where both of them have lived their whole lives, without anyone noticing it?

The Rev Dodgson said:

Peak Warming Man said:

Peak is an extremely uncommon first name.

But have we yet reached Peak Peak?

some people have twin Peaks

dv said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Peak Warming Man said:

Peak is an extremely uncommon first name.

But have we yet reached Peak Peak?

some people have twin Peaks

And here they are:

dv said:

mollwollfumble said:

Back to Jeanne, I’d be interested in whether you considered the evidence in the linked article definitive? Or not? Or whether the original viewpoint of her being 122 is definitive?

The photographic evidence is persuasive, but the author has not addressed one big problem: how did a 36 year old woman replace her 59 year old mother in a town where both of them have lived their whole lives, without anyone noticing it?

It’s a big town (population 52,697 (2014)).

Tamb said:

dv said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

But have we yet reached Peak Peak?

some people have twin Peaks

And here they are:

cute doggies those

dv said:

mollwollfumble said:

Back to Jeanne, I’d be interested in whether you considered the evidence in the linked article definitive? Or not? Or whether the original viewpoint of her being 122 is definitive?

The photographic evidence is persuasive, but the author has not addressed one big problem: how did a 36 year old woman replace her 59 year old mother in a town where both of them have lived their whole lives, without anyone noticing it?

This does seem very difficult to pull off.

transition said:

Tamb said:

dv said:

some people have twin Peaks

And here they are:

cute doggies those

Twin Pekes.

Have We Reached The Plateau Of Human Longevity

Cymek said:

Have We Reached The Plateau Of Human Longevity

“Have We Reached the Limit of Human Longevity? New Study Says No”

Have We Reached the Limit of Human Longevity? Old study says Yes.

I’m inclined to agree with the Yes. Humans are not like other animals because other animals don’t live long enough to hit their limit. Even with the best possible vetinary care in zoos, animals almost all die off in middle age.

Even our recent long-lived spider story had a tragic end with the spider falling prey to a parasitic wasp rather than reaching the natural end of its life.

Humans are the only species of vertebrates that I know of that doesn’t die off in middle age. We wear out, like planned obsolescence.

As for the Corsican centenarians, just how reliable are the records?

Cymek said:

Have We Reached The Plateau Of Human Longevity

The other viewpoint is here.
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/10/humans-wont-ever-live-far-beyond-115-years/502967/

For years, people have been saying that the first human who will live to 150 has already been born. That’s unlikely, say Jan Vijg, Xiao Dong, and Brandon Milholland, from the Albert Einstein College of Medicine. After looking at demographic data from the last century, they think that human lifespan has a hard ceiling at around 115 years. A few rare individuals like Calment may surpass that limit, if only slightly, but on average, our species will not.

That seems counter-intuitive. For centuries, our average life expectancy has been going up and up. Our maximum lifespan has too: Although claims of extreme age can be hard to verify, one reliable set of figures from Sweden showed that the very oldest people reached just 101 years in the 1860s but 108 years in the 1990s. “Demographers said that if there’s an end in sight, they couldn’t see it,” says Vijg, who led the new study. “When Calment died at 122, everyone said it’ll only be a matter of time before we have someone who’s 125 or 130. But after Calment, there was no one else. It was 115 … 115 … 115.”

mollwollfumble said:

Cymek said:

Have We Reached The Plateau Of Human Longevity

The other viewpoint is here.
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/10/humans-wont-ever-live-far-beyond-115-years/502967/

For years, people have been saying that the first human who will live to 150 has already been born. That’s unlikely, say Jan Vijg, Xiao Dong, and Brandon Milholland, from the Albert Einstein College of Medicine. After looking at demographic data from the last century, they think that human lifespan has a hard ceiling at around 115 years. A few rare individuals like Calment may surpass that limit, if only slightly, but on average, our species will not.

That seems counter-intuitive. For centuries, our average life expectancy has been going up and up. Our maximum lifespan has too: Although claims of extreme age can be hard to verify, one reliable set of figures from Sweden showed that the very oldest people reached just 101 years in the 1860s but 108 years in the 1990s. “Demographers said that if there’s an end in sight, they couldn’t see it,” says Vijg, who led the new study. “When Calment died at 122, everyone said it’ll only be a matter of time before we have someone who’s 125 or 130. But after Calment, there was no one else. It was 115 … 115 … 115.”

We need to get people’s living brains out of their bodies before the latter expire, and keep them alive in tanks or whatever. It’s not rocket science.

mollwollfumble said:

For years, people have been saying that the first human who will live to 150 has already been born. That’s unlikely, say Jan Vijg, Xiao Dong, and Brandon Milholland, from the Albert Einstein College of Medicine. After looking at demographic data from the last century, they think that human lifespan has a hard ceiling at around 115 years. A few rare individuals like Calment may surpass that limit, if only slightly, but on average, our species will not.

That seems counter-intuitive. For centuries, our average life expectancy has been going up and up. Our maximum lifespan has too: Although claims of extreme age can be hard to verify, one reliable set of figures from Sweden showed that the very oldest people reached just 101 years in the 1860s but 108 years in the 1990s. “Demographers said that if there’s an end in sight, they couldn’t see it,” says Vijg, who led the new study. “When Calment died at 122, everyone said it’ll only be a matter of time before we have someone who’s 125 or 130. But after Calment, there was no one else. It was 115 … 115 … 115.”

The point is that people are anticipating a medical revolution in the form of genetic modification or therapy. They are not anticipating business as usual, but a very rapid leap in life expectancy due to new technology. I have no idea whether that is a reasonable projection: to me it seems optimistic and speculative. It’s possible, I suppose.

dv said:

mollwollfumble said:

For years, people have been saying that the first human who will live to 150 has already been born. That’s unlikely, say Jan Vijg, Xiao Dong, and Brandon Milholland, from the Albert Einstein College of Medicine. After looking at demographic data from the last century, they think that human lifespan has a hard ceiling at around 115 years. A few rare individuals like Calment may surpass that limit, if only slightly, but on average, our species will not.

That seems counter-intuitive. For centuries, our average life expectancy has been going up and up. Our maximum lifespan has too: Although claims of extreme age can be hard to verify, one reliable set of figures from Sweden showed that the very oldest people reached just 101 years in the 1860s but 108 years in the 1990s. “Demographers said that if there’s an end in sight, they couldn’t see it,” says Vijg, who led the new study. “When Calment died at 122, everyone said it’ll only be a matter of time before we have someone who’s 125 or 130. But after Calment, there was no one else. It was 115 … 115 … 115.”

The point is that people are anticipating a medical revolution in the form of genetic modification or therapy. They are not anticipating business as usual, but a very rapid leap in life expectancy due to new technology. I have no idea whether that is a reasonable projection: to me it seems optimistic and speculative. It’s possible, I suppose.

Not sure many people would want to live in a hundred plus year old body unless if could be rejuvenated some how

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_verified_oldest_people

Age-at-death Number-of-people

122 1 : Jeanne Calment
119 1 : Sarah Knauss
117 7
116 10
115 27
114 >62 ~83

On that scale, Jeanne Calment definitely doesn’t look right.

mollwollfumble said:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_verified_oldest_people

Age-at-death Number-of-people

122 1 : Jeanne Calment
119 1 : Sarah Knauss
117 7
116 10
115 27
114 >62 ~83

On that scale, Jeanne Calment definitely doesn’t look right.

I disagree. It looks just like the sort of variation that might be expected when you get down to a handful of survivors out of billions.

The Rev Dodgson said:

mollwollfumble said:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_verified_oldest_people

Age-at-death Number-of-people

122 1 : Jeanne Calment
119 1 : Sarah Knauss
117 7
116 10
115 27
114 >62 ~83

On that scale, Jeanne Calment definitely doesn’t look right.

I disagree. It looks just like the sort of variation that might be expected when you get down to a handful of survivors out of billions.

Yeah, like I said, 46 people reached 115. If we took the “half per year” risk rate as accurate, then the expected number of survivors to 122 would be 0.35. It’s not so zany that there was 1 that did.

dv said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

mollwollfumble said:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_verified_oldest_people

Age-at-death Number-of-people

122 1 : Jeanne Calment
119 1 : Sarah Knauss
117 7
116 10
115 27
114 >62 ~83

On that scale, Jeanne Calment definitely doesn’t look right.

I disagree. It looks just like the sort of variation that might be expected when you get down to a handful of survivors out of billions.

Yeah, like I said, 46 people reached 115. If we took the “half per year” risk rate as accurate, then the expected number of survivors to 122 would be 0.35. It’s not so zany that there was 1 that did.

Working out how she did would be hard and would you want to live to that age and could you even afford to do so

dv said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

mollwollfumble said:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_verified_oldest_people

Age-at-death Number-of-people

122 1 : Jeanne Calment
119 1 : Sarah Knauss
117 7
116 10
115 27
114 >62 ~83

On that scale, Jeanne Calment definitely doesn’t look right.

I disagree. It looks just like the sort of variation that might be expected when you get down to a handful of survivors out of billions.

Yeah, like I said, 46 people reached 115. If we took the “half per year” risk rate as accurate, then the expected number of survivors to 122 would be 0.35. It’s not so zany that there was 1 that did.

But if you start at that 10 people at 116 and if it’s more than half per year, say 40% survive to the next year, That’s 4 people at 116, 2 people at 117, 1 person at 118, then it’s 0.02 person at age 122. Which looks a lot like zero to me.

mollwollfumble said:

dv said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

I disagree. It looks just like the sort of variation that might be expected when you get down to a handful of survivors out of billions.

Yeah, like I said, 46 people reached 115. If we took the “half per year” risk rate as accurate, then the expected number of survivors to 122 would be 0.35. It’s not so zany that there was 1 that did.

But if you start at that 10 people at 116 and if it’s more than half per year, say 40% survive to the next year, That’s 4 people at 116, 2 people at 117, 1 person at 118, then it’s 0.02 person at age 122. Which looks a lot like zero to me.

19 people who reached 116. So based on that you’d expect 0.25 to reach 122. Still not too outrageous.

• But if you start at that 10 people at 116 and if it’s more than half per year, say 40% survive to the next year, That’s 4 people at 116, 2 people at 117, 1 person at 118, then it’s 0.02 person at age 122. Which looks a lot like zero to me.

Put that data into a scatter chart and it is the 1 person at 119 that is the odd one out…

Biblical people got a lot older so theirs hope for us all

Cymek said:

Biblical people got a lot older so theirs hope for us all

The standard explanation for that is a mistranslation of months as years. If you figure out the ages ascribed in months, especially lunar months, it works out to the 75-80 range.

Cymek said:

good point well made

Perhaps nature culls everyone over a certain age to make way for new generations

I imagine biological machines especially ones as well used as the human body would have an upper limit no matter how good our medical science gets even with replacement body parts

party_pants said:

Cymek said:

Biblical people got a lot older so theirs hope for us all

The standard explanation for that is a mistranslation of months as years. If you figure out the ages ascribed in months, especially lunar months, it works out to the 75-80 range.

Heretic!

> But if you start at that 10 people at 116 and if it’s more than half per year, say 40% survive to the next year, That’s 4 people at 116.

I actually wrote that! Aagh!

For me, the most telling part of the story is the motive – tax evasion is a powerful motive, and one likely to be smiled on by friends and neighbours. That and why else did she deliberately destroy all her old photographs.

Time will tell. It may or may not be genuine.