Sihai network

What's the upper limit of human life? Is it 115 recently an American expert named piggy published an article about human life span, which said that the upper limit of human life span is 115 years old, causing widespread doubts. Some experts pointed out that how to explain the fact that many Guinness world record holders even live to 120 years old? What is the ultimate life span of human beings?

A group of researchers led by Yang middot Vicky, a geneticist at Einstein Medical College in New York, USA, who claimed that the upper limit of human natural life is 115 years old, were questioned by five research teams from Germany, Denmark, the Netherlands, the UK and Canada. This article is compiled by and reprinted with the source. The original link:

These five questions were published online in the journal Nature, refuting the conclusions of the original paper, believing that the data are not convincing and there are some suspects such as circular argumentation. However, the research team led by the original author Yang middot Vicky refuted five questions one by one, believing that the questions were "nitpicking" and "misinterpretation" of their research, and insisting that the conclusion of the original paper was reliable. At the moment, the one-on-five scientific debate does not seem to persuade either side.

Original paper: the upper limit of human life is 115 years old

In October 2016, the research paper of young & middot; Vicky's group was published in nature. Because of its topicality, it immediately became the target of various major media around the world. With the improvement of health care and food, the life span of human beings continues to extend. The centenarian Rui (people over the age of 100) is no longer a myth.

When people think about how to continue the miracle of longevity through the increasingly developed medical technology, the statistical report of Jan Middleton's team inadvertently splashed a basin of cold water. This article is compiled by and reprinted with the source. The original link:

At first, they found a trend in the 'human mortality database' which collected data from more than 40 countries: the survival rate of the elderly continued to increase before 1980, but after 1980, the victory of the elderly over the age of 99 over the 'God of death' no longer increased significantly, it seems to enter a stable period.

Furthermore, they analyzed the data of the maximum age of death reported annually in the International Longevity database, covering the period from 1968 to 2006. The selected samples were France, Japan, the United States and the United Kingdom, four countries with the largest number of centenarians. They found that between the 1970s and the early 1990s, the longevity of the oldest people increased, but entered a "stable period" around 1995, and the average age of death of the oldest people remained around 114.9 years old.

According to the 'maximum age of death reported annually' in the 'International Longevity database' (1968-2006, France, Japan, the United States and the United Kingdom), the young & middot; wigi team believes that after 1995, the life span of the oldest people has entered a 'stable period'.

There are also some special cases. For example, at present, the oldest person on record is Jeanne & middot; carmond, a French woman who was 122 years old when she died in 1997. But young middot's team believes that this is a discrete case, and that the natural life limit of human beings should be around 115 years old. This article is compiled by and reprinted with the source. The original link:

Query: the ceiling of human life will not stop here

Different from the determination of young & middot; vigil's team, five research teams who published questions believed that young & middot; vigil's team had no convincing evidence for the existence of "ceiling" in human life span. To put it another way, five disproved research teams believe that the natural life limit of human beings will not stop at 115.

According to segfield hekimi, a professor at McGill University in Canada, who is the corresponding author of one of the questions, according to the data used by young's team, a variety of different life limit trend models can be deduced, not only pointing to the conclusion that the highest human life begins to "step in place" after the mid-1990s.

On the contrary, hekimi suggested that in a statistical hypothesis, human life expectancy would continue to rise steadily, and the highest life expectancy of 2300 years might live to 150 years.

In terms of data processing, hekimi believes that the young middot wiggie group has made a big mistake of circular argument. In his view, the analysis of young middot Vicky's team is based on visual review. It is because of the stable trend after 1995 that the period from 1968 to 2006 is divided into two sections with 1995 as the dividing line.

"They thought they found a pattern that fits the trend of data, so they put forward a set of theories to explain this pattern. Later, they found that the data did match the theory, of course, because the theory was derived from the data, and the same data was used to verify the theory. 'Nick Middleton brown, a doctoral student at the University of Groningen in the Netherlands, is one of the authors of another challenge, and holds similar questions to those of herkimi.

It is worth mentioning that in statistics, when a series of numbers are segmented, sometimes there is a problem of misjudging the overall trend. In the overall upward trend, segmentation may over highlight some of the original temporary 'stable period' or even 'declining period'.

In the face of the challenge of "circular argument", young middot wiggie's team responded that they did not put forward hypothesis and test through the same database, but actually analyzed two independent databases. This article is compiled by and reprinted with the source. The original link:

'it has to be said that what is known in statistics is that you can see the data. There was a long time when statisticians didn't want to look at the data because they didn't think it was objective. But that idea has changed in the last few decades, and people realize that you should look at the data, deduce it, and then validate it. '