[FRIAM] Friday AM

Tue Jan 3 20:29:39 EST 2023

30% is much better assuming that being 90 is a reasonable goal.

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

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Tue, Jan 3, 2023, 6:27 PM Edward Angel <angel at cs.unm.edu> wrote:

> You can feel better: 0.7 ** 10 ~= 0.028. That's 40% better, although, it’s
> hard to believe that the 0.3 per year  is constant for 10 years. Or even
> correct.
>
> The charts from real data seem to show the probability of an 80 year old
> making it to 90 is 30%.
>
> Ed
> _______________________
>
> Ed Angel
>
> Founding Director, Art, Research, Technology and Science Laboratory
> (ARTS Lab)
> Professor Emeritus of Computer Science, University of New Mexico
>
> 1017 Sierra Pinon
> Santa Fe, NM 87501
> 505-984-0136 (home)   angel at cs.unm.edu
> 505-453-4944 (cell)  http://www.cs.unm.edu/~angel
>
> On Jan 3, 2023, at 5:33 PM, Frank Wimberly <wimberly3 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>   >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/
>>
> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
> 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/
>
>
> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
> 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/a5e3d430/attachment-0001.html>