
The exact duration of human life is
unknown, although there is presumably a maximum life span for the human race
established in the genetic material. At first thought, this statement seems
irrational. Surely no human being can live 1,000 years. Even though all may
agree that the likelihood of an individual living 1,000 years is infinitesimal,
there is no scientific proof that this statement is or is not true. The
indeterminacy of the maximum limit of human life is made more comprehensible if
one chooses a number that may appear to be a more reasonable limit.
Since there is no verified instance
of a person having lived 150 years, this number may, for purposes of
illustration, be arbitrarily accepted as the maximum limit of the span of human
life. But if the possibility is admitted that an individual may live exactly
150 years, there is no valid reason for rejecting the possibility that some
other individual may live 150 years and one minute. And if 150 years and one
minute is accepted, why not 150 years and two minutes, and so on? Thus, based
on existing knowledge of longevity, a precise figure for the span of human life
cannot be given.
Studies on longevity
Much information concerning the
inheritance of longevity has come from the study of genealogical records of nobility
and landed gentry. The early genealogical studies were criticized on the
grounds that the downward trend in the death rate (attributable generally to
scientific advancements) introduced a spurious correlation in statistics
derived from records extending over long periods of time. It was argued that in
some instances records were included of persons who, at the time of the study,
had not had the opportunity of living out their possible life span. The general
finding of such investigations was that the expectation of life of sons of
long-lived parents (i.e., those living to age 70 years or older) was greater
than that of sons of shorter-lived parents (i.e., those having attained less
than age 50 at the time of death).
An American biostatistician attempted
to avoid the defects of genealogical studies by collecting records of the
family histories of 365 nonagenarians (90-year-old persons) and of a comparison
group of 143 individuals of varying ages, selected because all of their six
immediate ancestors were dead. The study introduced the concept of “total
immediate ancestral longevity,” or TIAL—the sum of the ages at death of the two
parents and the four grandparents of a given person—as a measure of longevity.
This number is unlikely to be greater than 600 or less than 90. The average
TIAL of the nonagenarians and centenarians definitely exceeded that of the
comparison group. This held true not only for the six immediate ancestors as a
group but also for each category—father, mother, paternal and maternal grandparents.
In the same study, investigators also computed the expectation of life for sons
of fathers as classified in three groups by age at death: (1) under age 50, (2)
from age 50 to age 79, and (3) age 80 or over. The expectation of life for the
three groups at birth was 47.0, 50.5, and 57.2 years, respectively. The same
relative ranking continued through the lifetime of the sons, their expectation
of life at age 40 being 27.3, 28.9, and 32.0 years, respectively.
While certain doubts have been raised
about the validity of these as well as earlier studies, taken at their face
value, these data show clearly that long-lived persons had parents and
grandparents who lived longer than the parents and grandparents of shorter
lived persons.
Since longevity is important in life
insurance underwriting, several studies have been made of the relationship
between heredity and the life span by an analysis of life insurance records.
Such analyses showed that policyholders both of whose parents were living when
the policy was written live longer than those whose parents were dead when the
policy was written. These results are in conformity with those obtained from
genealogical records and family histories.
Each of the various types of studies
of the inheritance of longevity—genealogical records, life insurance records,
and family histories of the general population—has limitations that restrict
the applicability of the findings. The principal studies indicate,
nevertheless, that the children of long-lived parents are more likely to be
long-lived than are the children of short-lived parents. Conversely, the
immediate ancestors—parents and grandparents—of long-lived persons on the
average are older at death than are the immediate ancestors of persons who die
at a relatively young age. These studies support the conclusion, mentioned
earlier, that longevity is determined in part by heredity.
Actual versus possible life span
It should be observed that this
conclusion relates to the inheritance of longevity—the observed expression of
the span of life—and not to the span of life itself. The actual length of life
itself is shorter than the possible life span since the former reflects the
effect of unfavourable environmental factors. In the absence of any biological
data from which the maximum limit of the span of life can be determined
precisely, an estimate of the limit must be obtained from observation of the
actual length of life of persons who already have died. But such observations
cannot establish a fixed limit for the span of life.
The estimation of the length of the
span of life from observed data is a form of sampling from a large but
incomplete population. The tabulation of the ages at death of a large number of
persons from a large general population of the United States will give an
asymmetrical frequency distribution with two modes, or peaks, of highest
frequency: the first at age less than one year and the second between ages 75
and 80 years. The frequency distribution is bounded by age zero at the lower
limit but there is no boundary at the upper limit. The number of deaths of
persons whose length of life is near the upper limit of this frequency
distribution (e.g., 100 years or more) varies from year to year. The age of the
oldest person dying also varies from year to year.

The number of deaths of centenarians
(100-year-old persons) depends in part upon the number of deaths counted. Ages
at death are frequently unverified, so that the true numbers of centenarians
almost certainly deviate from those given in official vital statistics.
Moreover, only a very small proportion of the deaths that have occurred
throughout the history of the human race have been registered. The potential
number of future deaths greatly exceeds the number that already has occurred.
Statistical theory supports the expectation that as the total number of deaths
continues to increase, the death of a person whose length of life will be
longer than that of any person previously known will be recorded.
Observation of the length of life of
persons who have died can show that it is possible for a human being to live to
the oldest age recorded as of any specified date and can provide an estimate of
the relative frequency or probability of that event. But such observations do
not provide a logical basis for fixing any age as the maximum possible limit of
the life span.
The continuation of the worldwide
decline in the death rate will naturally result in an increase in the number of
persons who live until age 100 years or more. Since the number of persons who
may live to an advanced age, such as 110 or 115 years, is directly related to
the number of persons who live to age 100, an increase in the latter number
will increase the probability that the death of an individual attaining some
greater age (e.g., 115 years) will be recorded at some future date.
Many instances of persons alleged to
have died at an age considerably greater than 100 years have been recorded.
Statements concerning the age at death of biblical characters such as
Methuselah can be dismissed, since scientific verification is impossible. Three
of the most frequently cited cases of more recent times are: Thomas Parr, who
died in November 1635 at the alleged age of 152 years; Henry Jenkins, who died
in December 1670 at the alleged age of 169 years; and Catherine, countess of
Desmond, who died in 1604 at the alleged age of 140 years. William Harvey, a
famous English physician, performed an autopsy on Thomas Parr and the account
of the autopsy was cited for many years as evidence that Harvey—in his
paper—had confirmed Parr’s age. Quite apart from the fact that it is impossible
accurately to determine the age of a person by an autopsy, Harvey made no
attempt to verify Parr’s age but merely referred to the current estimates.
Subsequent investigations have revealed that no proof exists of the age at
death of any of these three individuals and that their reported ages were based
solely upon hearsay.
An example with more definite
documentation is that of Christian Jacobsen Drakenberg, stated to have been
born on November 18, 1626, and to have died on October 9, 1772, aged 145 years
and 325 days. Although the authenticity of his age was attested to by many
persons, including two celebrated Scandinavian actuaries, later investigations
cast doubt upon the record. It is difficult to accept the statements concerning
Drakenberg’s age at death, since this age is more than 30 years greater than
the next oldest verified age at death—a difference that in itself casts doubt
on its authenticity.
Of eight individuals for whom records
substantiate the fact that each had lived more than 108 years, seven were
females. Six of the eight were more than 110 years old at death. The oldest was
Pierre Joubert, who was born July 15, 1701, and died November 16, 1814, aged
113 years and 124 days. Discounting the Drakenberg record, this is the oldest
age at death that has been generally accepted as authentic.
It may be concluded that the span of
human life is at least 114 years, but that this is not the maximum upper limit.
This does not mean the span of life of each individual now living or to be born
in the future is at least 114 years. The span of life, since it is determined
by heredity, varies from one individual to another as do other genetically
determined traits.
A significant proportion of human
embryos and fetuses die before birth. Other infants at birth have defects that
limit their span of life to a few years. Some malformations (e.g., certain
cardiovascular defects) are developmental rather than genetic in the strict
sense of the word and can be corrected so that the length of life of such
persons is extended.

In the past the length of life of
most individuals has been considerably shorter than their possible span of life
because of unhealthful environmental factors. As these factors are increasingly
brought under control or eliminated, the actual length of life will approach
more closely the span of life. At the end of the 18th century the expectation
of life at birth in North America and northwestern Europe was about 35 or 40
years. By 1970 it exceeded 70 years, and at some future date the death of a
person at an authenticated age of more than 114 years can be expected.
There is no evidence that the span of
human life has increased since the beginning of recorded history. Neither is
there any evidence that the death rate of centenarians has decreased. The
expected increase in the number of centenarians results from a decrease in the
death rate at ages under 100 years and not from any demonstrable increase in
the maximum length of the span of life. The remarkable increase in the average
length of life during the past 2,000 years—from 20–25 years to 70 years under
favourable conditions—has increased the likelihood that a person may live to
the maximum limit of his span of life.
Comments
Post a Comment