[FRIAM] Friday AM

[Frank Wimberly]

  >For people it’s somewhere in the 70-80 ...

As I approach 80 I'm not happy about this.  I read or heard that a person
over 80 has about a 0.3 probability of dying each year.  I calculated,
possibly using incorrect assumptions, that that means that the conditional
probability of living to 90 given that you've lived to 80 is 0.02.


---
Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
Santa Fe, NM 87505

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Tue, Jan 3, 2023, 5:14 PM glen <gepropella at gmail.com> wrote:

> Interesting paper. I'll have to read it more closely. But it doesn't
> strike me that they address *premature* mortality, whatever that is. I
> can't help but get a Theseus' Ship vibe. Even if the canalizing risks
> (welding, sky diving, cholesterol, dehydration, etc.) are all hammered
> down, I'd expect the noise to overwhelm the signal as the focus tightens.
> Anyway, I'll try to read this over the next few days. Thanks.
>
>
> On 1/3/23 12:31, David Eric Smith wrote:
> > Long a favorite topic of mine.
> >
> > Let me send you a link; almost-surely not the best, but done with ~1min
> of google searching images:
> >
> https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0233384
> <https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0233384
> >
> > See the 5th figure for actual data, rather than models.
> >
> > But my understanding is that Gompertz mortality statistics are
> unbelievably universal across metazoans.  The parameters can be shifted by
> lots of factors, but the functional form (which takes only a couple of
> parameters) is absurdly more robust than one would expect given all that
> varies.
> >
> > Anyway, to the extent that there is Gompertz mortality, there is a
> natural associated age for age-associated-death.  For people it’s somewhere
> in the 70-80 range, and I think there can be as much as a 10-year
> difference across different world gene pools (Japanese being at the upper
> end, and maybe some other group in Central Asia east of the Caucasus; I
> forget).
> >
> > A thing I remember being told by a guy who does this kind of work, there
> seem to be two modes between development-linked diseases (think, childhood
> leukemias), and age-associated diseases.  We have made remarkable progress
> on many of the former, and very little on many of the latter.  Also (and I
> got this from researchers at Einstein college in Yeshiva some years ago, or
> from a stack of their papers), if one avoids rather specific risk factors,
> like welding or smoking for lung cancers, or dioxin exposures for male
> breast cancers or the like, the leading predictor for most of the old-age
> diseases is just your age.  So it has (to me) the look of what Holmse’s
> Wonderful One-Hoss Shay would be if redone with Poisson statistics, to
> become a minimum-information process.  The nail that stuck up got hammered
> down (extra resources for any disease that becomes visible to selection)
> that now all the nails are at about the same height, and there is some kind
> of ambivalence frontier.
> >
> > My own anecdotal experience suggests that my previous paragraphs can’t
> possibly be right, since there clearly are common and rare diseases of the
> old.  But I didn’t make this stuff up, and got it from some serious
> literature.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Eric
> >
> >
> >
> >> On Jan 3, 2023, at 1:01 PM, glen <gepropella at gmail.com <mailto:
> gepropella at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>
> >> ">144 mmol/l with 21% elevated risk of premature mortality". My last
> test a week ago showed 144! Whew! I guess I have a normal risk for
> premature mortality. 8^D
> >>
> >> The concept of "premature death" is flat out ridiculous. But our
> inability to well-define it raises some interesting questions.
> >>
> >> • deprivation (by the dead, by the rest of us) - is the death of
> Ramanujan at 32 *more* premature than the death of some rando at 32?
> >> • life expectancy seems like yet another instance of people not
> understanding statistics
> >> • quality of life - is the death of a 20 year old born into and likely
> to live in poverty *as* premature as the death of a 20 year old born with a
> silver spoon?
> >> • natural selection - is it premature for a 35 year old who's bred,
> say, 10 children to die?
> >>  · or is it premature for them to die before their children have
> children? I.e. is being a grandparent a necessary element of a breeder's
> life?
> >> • consequentialism - had Hitler dyed at age 35, would that have been
> premature?
> >>
> >> I know this seems like a tangent upon tangents. But it's not. It's
> nonsense to relate serum Na to premature mortality because premature
> mortality is nonsense. Prevalence of chronic disease seems, to me, a little
> more well-formed ... but not by much. Biological age just seems like
> pseudoscience to me, the flip side of Vampirism. I'd welcome an education,
> though.
> >>
>
> --
> ꙮ Mɥǝu ǝlǝdɥɐuʇs ɟᴉƃɥʇ' ʇɥǝ ƃɹɐss snɟɟǝɹs˙ ꙮ
> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom
> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
> archives:  5/2017 thru present
> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
>   1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20230103/fb4a9dc4/attachment.html>