To my mind far too much effort is expended on trying to figure out the epidemiology of the tiny fraction of humans who manage to live a fair way past one hundred years of age. For one, there just aren’t enough of them to generate truly robust data from which conclusions can be drawn. People are still arguing over the legitimacy of many of the cases, including Jeanne Calment. Gathering and vetting data on the age of very old people is inherently challenging in its own ways. As the authors of today’s paper point out, we should be more suspicious than we are of claims of extreme longevity. You might compare their position with another recent discussion on this topic that presents similar conclusions – the quality of the data on ages of extremely old people just isn’t great. But beyond legitimacy, small data sets naturally come with all sorts of other problems. The law of small numbers applies: a low number of data points tends to exhibit false trends that will vanish given more data points.
The more important issue here, however, is that this simply doesn’t matter! It really