I could see all 4 pages. Try clearing NYT cookies. It seems the opposite conclusion may be just a difference in reporting. Most of the 2006 article deals just

I could see all 4 pages. Try clearing NYT cookies. It seems the opposite conclusion may be just a difference in reporting. Most of the 2006 article deals just with "normally" long lived people (80-90 years vs. their shorter living relatives). About 100+ year olds they wrote: "A woman whose sister lived to be 100 has a 4 percent chance of living that long, Dr. Christensen says. That is better than the 1 percent chance for women in general, but still not very great because the absolute numbers, 1 out of 100 or 4 out of 100, are still so small. For men, the odds are much lower. A man whose sister lived to be 100 has just a 0.4 percent chance of living that long. In comparison, men in general have a 0.1 percent chance of reaching 100." So even then, they found 4x higher relative chance for extreme longevity for people with extremely long lived siblings.