17 ms·
New research says "blue zones" can be explained by flawed data
- closetkantian 2y agoSo what are the real Blue Zones if there are any? Where do people actually live the longest in other words?
- fnands 2y agoThe real Blue Zones are the friends we made along the way. The problem will always be that you need to find places that keep good records, and have done so for the last century. What they set out to do was to find correlations between lifestyle and longevity, and what they ended up finding was a great tool for spotting pension fraud.
- hieKVj2ECC 2y agoso no correlations between lifestyle and longevity? doubt
- yaris 2y agoThere is correlation (and maybe even causal relation) between lifestyle and longevity. It's just the lifestyle in those "Blue Zones" is not different from the lifestyle of surrounding areas (or as in Okinawa - gradient points in the wrong direction), so cannot serve as the sure way to longevity.
- simonh 2y agoThat is no way shape or form invalidates any actual link between lifestyle and longevity. It just means you can't simply assume that any given example of longevity, or data indicating longevity, must be due to lifestyle.
- resoluteteeth 2y agoThere are it's just the outlier blue zones where people are supposed to be reaching very hugh maximum ages at a surprising rate that are probably not real. There are still plenty of correlations between healthier lifestyles generally you just shouldn't attempt to live past 100 by emulating what people in an alleged blue zone do.
- giantg2 2y agoThe levels of fraud aren't that rampant. Focusing on life expectancy in those regions still seems to have some valid correlation. It was a mistake from the beginning to try to focus on outliers (people living over 100).
- lolinder 2y agoPart of the research shows that when you drop the outliers these regions have a lower than average life expectancy.
- giantg2 2y agoYeah, it does show that for some of the areas, but not others. The problem with these population studies is they do not give you answers, only new variables. In my view, the whole blue zone study is moot, at least in the way it is typically applied. What it does give us are new variables to study. Those smaller studied can control for variables that the population level cannot. They can also apply those studies to populations of different decent (genetics). The glass of wine recommendation has had many studies done and the results are conflicting. The eating guidelines like heavy in plants, mederteranian, eating to 80% full all have multiple studies showing benefits over the typical western diet and especially the typical American diet. It's a no brainer that if you want to live a long life you have a better chance of doing that if you have a reduced risk of heart attack, stroke, diabetes, etc.
- lolinder 2y agoRight, I have no problem with dietary recommendations that are inspired by "blue zones" and then validated with research in other populations.
- simiones 2y agoMost of these guidelines are based on the same sort of flawed population-level studies that can't control for many other aspects. For example, the "Mediterranean diet" is consumed in countries that have all sorts of other specific lifestyle differences that are just as likely to influence health and longevity - siesta, a general tendency not to stress or work in exaggerated amounts, a month or more of vacation per year, significant sun exposure, good social healthcare, and many others. All of these together have certain (mild) effects on longevity and health, but there is virtually no way to isolate any one from all of the others. There are also many studies that suggest other kinds of diets are beneficial, and many populations that consume significantly different diets and have even better health than the average person around the Mediterranean. For example, inuit populations also display generally low obesity and risks of heart attack, stroke, diabetes etc - while consuming almost the opposite of a Mediterranean diet or of plant heavy diets.
- mcphage 2y ago> what they ended up finding was a great tool for spotting pension fraud I mean, that’s not nothing, y’know?
- 93po 2y agoi mean there are studies that show good socialization leads to longer life expectancy so you're not wrong
- dsq 2y agoI wonder if there was anything historically equivalent to the Antediluvian lifespans described in the Old Testament. If, for example, there was something in the food a few thousand years ago in the area of the Persian/Arabian Gulf, now underwater, that could extend lifespan.
- tsimionescu 2y agoYou're wondering if there was any ancient food that allowed people to live to 800 or 900 years old. There wasn't.
- dsq 2y agoI also don't think there was, its more of a scifi kind of musing.
- quesera 2y agoPossibly a parallel in New Orleans? Anne Rice documents unusual individuals that can live well into the hundreds of years.
- nradov 2y agoIn some ancient cultures around that region, stating that someone was hundreds of years old was a sign of respect for their wisdom, authority, and line. The numbers weren't meant to be taken literally.
- Terr_ 2y agoIt's likely the most significant zones simply aren't geographical. The numbers probably look better in the Affluent Alliance versus the Protectorate of Poverty, for starters.
- meindnoch 2y agoReminds me of the South Park episode where they discover Magic Johnson's secret for curing his HIV.
- gregwebs 2y agoThere’s extensive literature on the lack of modern disease in hunter gatherers. Frontier doctors could get a case report published when they found cancer. Some lived long but on average their lives were short because they didn’t have antibiotics or emergency medicine and lived in harsh environments that few of us would be able to survive today. Their wisdom appropriately coupled to a modern less harsh environment might lead to greater longevity. But the harshness is what ensures exercise, movement, unprocessed food, etc.
- meindnoch 2y agoTheir "wisdom" of avoiding cancer amounts to dying young. Cancer rates shoot up well beyond 50 years.
- gregwebs 2y agoDo you have any evidence you can point to for this assertion? The book Good Calories Bad Calories has a section that reviews the literature on the subject. Disease and Western Civilization reviews specific populations in detail. Nutrition and Physical Degeneration for a geographically diverse primary source although it’s not about cancer or longevity.
- dmurray 2y agoThe assertion that older people get cancer more than young people? You could try any medical source whatsoever that deals with cancer or longevity, instead of picking one that doesn't, e.g. [0] > Advancing age is the most important risk factor for cancer overall and for many individual cancer types. The incidence rates for cancer overall climb steadily as age increases, from fewer than 25 cases per 100,000 people in age groups under age 20, to about 350 per 100,000 people among those aged 45–49, to more than 1,000 per 100,000 people in age groups 60 years and older. [0] https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/age https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/a...
- gregwebs 2y ago
- bluepizza 2y agoHighly developed countries with access to affordable or free healthcare seem to be real blue zones. Especially in highly urban areas. Hong Kong, Singapore, and the big cities of some countries (Tokyo, Sydney) have very high life expectancy numbers. Seems like getting treatment when you're sick, and having regular check ups to induce lifestyle changes are what makes a place a blue zone.
- giantg2 2y ago"having regular check ups to induce lifestyle changes" More likely that those areas have society level positive lifestyles by default, especially relating to foods (eg Okinawa eating until 80% full, Italy and the mederteranian diet, Loma Linda plant heavy diet, etc). Plenty of people get at least an annual covered checkup, but that doesn't mean they will make lifestyle changes. Even the ones that try end up like a new years resolution - not being strict about it or giving up after a month or two. Edit: why disagree?
- bglazer 2y agoIsn’t the whole point of this research that people Okinawa and Italy probably don’t live any longer. In fact these areas have shorter average life span? So, all the stories about the benefit of the Mediterranean fish heavy diet are post-hoc rationalizations of bad data?
- giantg2 2y ago"Isn’t the whole point of this research that people Okinawa and Italy probably don’t live any longer." I didn't see that claim in the article. What I did see is that the data on centarians was shown to be invalid. It's certainly possible that the overall life expectancy stats could be distorted. In most cases (excluding Okinawa), I doubt that the mistakes or fraud are that rampant. The problem with the blue zone studies is that they explicitly focused on outliers from the beginning. Any mistakes or fraud become a big impact in a small population like that. If you use population level life expectancy, the impact should become much smaller, or at the very least any systemic fraud and mistakes should become readily visible and be able to be corrected in the numbers if further studies are done to measure it. The article is very emotional and seems to mischaracterize some things, such as claiming that every blue zone must fit each piece of the suggestions. The idea of drinking every day is probably not a good suggestion as there is some research contesting the benefits of a glass of wine a day. But let's take Okinawa as an example. It's uncontested that the records have problems, it's trending in the wrong direction (younger generations, probably better records), and it doesn't fit all the practices (eg religion). But does this invalidate the longevity recommendation of eating to 80% full that comes out of the blue zone recommendation? No. There are independent studies showing the benefits of this practice to reduce cardiovascular disease, insulin resistance, and obesity. So even if the blue zone centarian data is wrong (it is), that doesn't say anything about the suggested practices. Those have always needed their own studies to validate the suggested practices anyways. Fot example, there are numerous studies on the mederteranian diet that shows it is beneficial compared to a typical western diet and especially compared to the typical American diet.
- Eumenes 2y agoA marketing term to push TV shows, books, Business Insider articles, clicks/engagement, etc.
- fire_lake 2y agoLongevity is a poor metric anyway - we need to emphasize quality * years
- melling 2y agoYes, someone always says this. Health span is the term. Maybe we can all use the term and skip this discussion https://www.merriam-webster.com/wordplay/what-is-health-span https://www.merriam-webster.com/wordplay/what-is-health-span
- ImaCake 2y agoQuality of Life Years, QALYs, is a commonly used term in epidemiology/biostatistics.
- Mistletoe 2y agoBlue Zones were supposed to be examples of that too.
- tsimionescu 2y agoThe two are greatly correlated, so at a population level it's a distinction without a difference. There's no population of people all living to be 100 but spending their 90s on a respirator. The distinction matters for individual health decisions, and for comparing different interventions, where you can extend someone's life at the cost of their quality of life.
- resoluteteeth 2y agoIn theory that is a reasonable distinction (and that type of trade-off can come up in very specific situations like treatment of terminal disease in elderly people) but in terms of lifestyle choices there is currently no known difference between lifestyle choices that increase expected longevity and lifestyle choices that increase expected quality years.
- brushfoot 2y agoThis doesn't really address Loma Linda, California, the Adventist blue zone. The researcher's criticism of Loma Linda isn't that people don't live longer there; it's that Adventist Health purchased Dan Buettner's marketing company Blue Zones LLC in 2020. Adventists are teetotalers, so he questions why they'd want to be associated with the Blue Zones guideline of drinking "every day at twice the NHS heavy drinking guidelines." Which is a fair question -- but it doesn't have anything to do with whether Loma Linda is an area with greater longevity.
- neaden 2y agoThis seems pretty explainable by Seventh Day Adventists' behavioral factors leading to increased life, a group with very little smoking and drinking living longer isn't surprising.
- vitorfblima 2y agoFrom the paper: For example, the Centres for Disease Control generated an independent estimate of average longevity across the USA: they found that Loma Linda, a Blue Zone supposedly characterised by a ‘remarkable’ average lifespan 10 years above the national average, instead has an unremarkable average lifespan29 (27th-75th percentile; Fig S6).
- brushfoot 2y agoThis misses the forest for the trees. The CDC looked at average life expectancy in Loma Linda across all demographics. Purely geographical and on average. The blue zones focused on the greater longevity specifically of Adventists in Loma Linda. It wasn't a question of whether living inside the municipal boundaries of Loma Linda automatically conferred some special health benefits -- clearly it doesn't. It was, "Why is there an unusually high concentration of outliers living here, and what behaviors cause them to live longer than average?"
- mcphage 2y ago> It was, "Why is there an unusually high concentration of outliers living here, and what behaviors cause them to live longer than average?" Blue Zones LLC also provided a set of answers to that question, and one of those answers (“drinking 1-2 glasses of wine per day”) is clearly not true in this case. And honestly, it’s just Bayesian statistics—if they present 5 data points, and 4 of those data points are floating somewhere between data errors and fraud, then odds are, that last data point is flawed somehow as well. Certainly they would need to do some extra work to prove that it isn’t.
- FollowingTheDao 2y agoThe whole Blue Zone thing cracks me up. They think everyone will live longer on a plant based diet? Tell that to the Inuit and Sami who have genetically adapted after generations of eating very few, if any, plants. If they Blue Zones do exists, they exist because people are eating their traditional genetic diet. And if they eat plants, what plants? Should someone of Irish decent eat wheat even though they are more likely to have Celiac? I have Sami heritage. I was also a Vegan at one time. A healthy Vegan. The plant based diet was literally killing me with hyperglycemia and immune issues. These people who think there is one true diet are dangerous adn do not know the first thing about nutritional genetics.
- InMice 2y agoFor all the nutrition wars raging these days about plant based vs animal etc I really agree with you. Modern transportation of the industrial age shuffled humans around the globe everywhere. Prior to this distinct groups were adapting in distinct biomes for thousands upon thousands of generations. Some were pure carnivore, some were high carb almost all plants, some in between.
- FollowingTheDao 2y agoIf you search for a nutritional genomics, I think you’ll be pleasantly surprised. There are plenty of researchers who are trying to do the hard work or telling people how important genetics is to our personalized health. The University of North Carolina at Kannapolis has a very good program.
- InMice 2y agoThanks, I wouldnt really know where to begin but Im more and more interested after spending hours and hours watching both camps on youtube for awhile. Id also think maybe reading anthropology too
- coffeefirst 2y agoRight, the hype is nuts. My read is regardless of the flaws in demographic data, one observation does seem told hold up: if you go somewhere that's been slower to adapt modernity, and introduce western levels of inactivity and hyperprocessed food, you get all the same maladies. Which I think is a good sign? It suggests you don't need island magic, you don't need to settle these purist debates or figure out The Answer™. The only thing that matters is addressing the two really bad things that are obviously pathogenic. And then we can argue about moderate drinking until the end of time.
- dghughes 2y agoMy guess is blue zones are countries that have good social programs and medical systems. Also helpful are regions where the environment isn't going to kill you.
- nradov 2y agoAlso helpful are regions where the people aren't going to kill you. Either directly, or by selling you fentanyl.
- cs702 2y agoPaper: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/704080v1 https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/704080v1 Abstract: > The observation of individuals attaining remarkable ages, and their concentration into geographic sub-regions or ‘blue zones’, has generated considerable scientific interest. Proposed drivers of remarkable longevity include high vegetable intake, strong social connections, and genetic markers. Here, we reveal new predictors of remarkable longevity and ‘supercentenarian’ status. In the United States, supercentenarian status is predicted by the absence of vital registration. The state-specific introduction of birth certificates is associated with a 69-82% fall in the number of supercentenarian records. In Italy, which has more uniform vital registration, remarkable longevity is instead predicted by low per capita incomes and a short life expectancy. Finally, the designated ‘blue zones’ of Sardinia, Okinawa, and Ikaria corresponded to regions with low incomes, low literacy, high crime rate and short life expectancy relative to their national average. As such, relative poverty and short lifespan constitute unexpected predictors of centenarian and supercentenarian status, and support a primary role of fraud and error in generating remarkable human age records. Nice work. It just won a 2024 Ig Nobel Prize. Well-deserved, I'd say: https://improbable.com/ig/winners/#ig2024 https://improbable.com/ig/winners/#ig2024
- comboy 2y agoSo there's this short little book "Food rules" by Michael Pollan. Not much content but seems like the author went through a lot of research. He comes to conclusion based on this tons of data that all we really know for sure is that people living in these blue regions are living much longer and it seems to be related to what they eat. That it is basically the only solid and stable data point we have. Welp. (I'm overstating it a bit, but not by that much)
- mannykannot 2y agoThe one thing that this paper does is demolish the claim that people living in these blue regions are living much longer than average.
- lolinder 2y ago
- CareerAdvice01 2y agoI come from one of these blue zones on the southern coast of Europe. That low income low literacy people live longer, provided they have good genetics seems plausible to me. These people tend to lead a semi-agrarian life and remain active well into their 80s. Their more educated higher income counterparts will probably have spent their life being sedentary and their retirement in a coffee shop indulging themselves. If food plays a role, it's only insofar as them being less indulgent. Otherwise I believe the obsession on diet is only because it is one factor that is relatively easy for people to change. Genetics plays a huge role, because if your body betrays you early on, you won't be able to remain active and focused on life in your later years. Climate probably also plays a role because again, you need good climate to remain active all year round. So does family. Seeing your family everyday keeps you planted in life. Healthcare might also play a role. Our healthcare is much more caring than the one in the northern European states. They should make a study focusing on northern European retirees who decide to live here on the coast. We have quite a few of those and I wonder whether they tend to live longer compared to their counterparts back home. The allegation that its simply fraud is ridiculous. If someone in the village dies, the whole village would know before sunset, and pretty much nobody dies at home anyway. And what about inheritance? Or paying rent? No, that's completely ridiculous. Not to mention that pretty much everyone is highly religious around those parts and not giving your relatives a proper Catholic burial is one of the worst things you could do. Not even a staunch atheist would stoop that low.
- fn-mote 2y ago> The allegation that [it is] fraud is ridiculous. No? Even the writeup gives specific examples. Number of pension payouts to Greek 100+ year olds was cut by 72% after an audit. Even if they had a proper Catholic burial. Never underestimate the power of greed. In a predominantly low-income area great-grandpa's pension might be what is keeping you from losing your home.
- lolinder 2y ago> That low income low literacy people live longer, provided they have good genetics seems plausible to me. That it seems plausible is why the story has circulated for so long, but that doesn't make it true. We do research precisely to check what seems plausible against actual data. Since you're using a throwaway anyway, can you share which part of the Southern coast of Europe you live in? Maybe together we can find data that would help.
- eadmund 2y ago> drinking 1-2 glasses of wine per day > the astounding thing is that one of the guidelines is that you should drink every day at twice the NHS heavy drinking guidelines. That is a recipe for alcoholism. Say what? The article implies that 1 glass of wine every day or two (i.e., half of 1–2 per day) is heavy. That seems frankly insane to me.
- mike_hearn 2y ago> The UK government's guidelines on how much it is safe to drink are based on numbers "plucked out of the air" by a committee that met in 1987. According to The Times newspaper, the limits are not based on any science whatsoever, rather "a feeling that you had to say something" about what would be a safe drinking level. This is all according to Richard Smith, a member of the Royal College of Physicians working party who produced the guidelines. [1] One might think that having admitted this Smith would be circumspect, apologetic and more careful with his claims about health in future. Of course he did the exact opposite: > However, Mr Smith says this doesn't mean alcohol is not dangerous. He later told The Guardian that this would be a "serious misinterpretation" of his comments. He also argued that the figures were "in the right ball park", and called for heavier taxes to cut consumption The numbers were based on no evidence but also amazingly in the right ballpark. No contradiction there if you work in public health. Sure enough, ten years later the guidance had become even more extreme [2], with men and women now becoming biologically identical and the government telling citizens that even one drop of alcohol was dangerous: > The report recommend an upper limit of 14 units per week for both adult men and women, and then included the much-derided “no safe limits” observation. This highly ideological guidance might have been because: > Members of the expert group include prohibitionists and anti-alcohol campaigners [1] https://www.theregister.com/2007/10/22/drinking_made_it_all_up/ https://www.theregister.com/2007/10/22/drinking_made_it_all_... [2] https://www.theregister.com/2016/01/22/stats_gurus_open_fire_on_bogus_booze_guidelines/ https://www.theregister.com/2016/01/22/stats_gurus_open_fire...
- Schiendelman 2y agoAre you saying that defining half of 7-14 (or 3.5.7) drinks per week as heavy seems insane to you? Current science proposes that even 2 drinks a week significantly increases cancer rate, and is the current suggested limit for health - I suspect it would be lower but for reactions like you're having. It seems likely that double or triple that is indeed unsafe. Media is very careful not to shame their readers: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alcohol-cancer-risk-what-to-know/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alcohol-cancer-risk-what-to-kno...
- Aerroon 2y agoWhat always seemed questionable to me about Blue Zones is how they account for unnatural causes of death. A decade ago centenarians would've had to live through two world wars and the devastation and famine they caused. How do you compare a population that went through that to a population that didn't?
- seydor 2y agoWhy hasn't the Ignoble Paper been published somewhere? Note that it was first drafted in 2019
- stonethrowaway 2y agoTechnically speaking (the best kind of speaking) you didn’t need new research to conclude this. All you had to do was ask “is this a pop science book?” and “will I hear about it at my next family gathering from the one person who thinks of themselves as qualified on subject matter but is in fact the furthest from the truth?” If you answer yes to both, you may safely discard the material as simply a means for the author to advance their career. Other greatest hits from this genre: Grit, Deep Work, Why We Sleep, Thinking Fast and Slow, How Not to Die.
- mywacaday 2y agoInterview with the author from an Irish national radio station here: https://www.goloudplayer.com/episodes/what-are-blue-zones-and-are-they-ZGE3ZjU1ZGZkYWQ4MWYwNDExYzdiZjgxZjMyMTZlM2E= https://www.goloudplayer.com/episodes/what-are-blue-zones-an... Starts at 1:10, also the radio slot is a light hearted one, not serious scientific discussion.
- Rocka24 2y agoAbsolutely incredible. I've seen a number of byproducts of the "Blue Zone trend" namely in youtube videos and dinner party conversations from so called health experts. The creator of Blue Zones (Dan Buettner) does seem to profit off of this as well, one quick look at the website shows a Blue Zone cooking course sale and other marketing schemes that could trap the unwary. https://www.bluezones.com/about/history/ https://www.bluezones.com/about/history/ I'm not questioning whether or not the intent was malicious but he does stand to gain quite a lot. Happy to see this being exposed. In a semi related sense I highly recommend checking out Bryan Johnson's (founder of Braintree Venmo) Blueprint protocol, I've been following his work for a number of years now and it is scientifically backed although the for profit arm of his initiative just reared its (ugly?) head recently with him selling supplements and dietary goods that are vetted by his agency. https://protocol.bryanjohnson.com/ https://protocol.bryanjohnson.com/
- jf22 2y agoWhat's the difference between Johnson and the other 40,000 wellness hackers who make the same claims?
- BobbyJo 2y agoThe extreme to which he is taking things and the level of rigor he is (seemingly) applying, are the differences I see. He has a lot more time and resources at his disposal than most wellness hackers.
- poulsbohemian 2y agoI live in a community that was part of the Blue Zones project, that has cultural ties to one of the original Blue Zones geographies. While I think there is something to the general idea - eat well, limit stress, have a sense of community, keep moving physically - it was always clear that there was a lot of pseudoscience going on. The videos put out by the project in particular (I think maybe it was a Netflix program for a while?) had a lot of unsubstantiated but authoritative sounding statements. Regardless, I felt like the overall message was positive and got people thinking about how they were living. That said, there was a merchandise angle on it, and thinking back there are ideas we've talked about as a community that Blue Zones could have stewarded - but they would have been outside their established game plan.
- Flatcircle 2y agoBeen saying this for years. It's so obvious.
- throwawaymaths 2y agoAnecdata, but the plural of anecdote is data: If you go to Hawaii where there are japanese-style graves with YOB and YOD inscribed, the centenarians all seem to have Okinawan names (and there are quite a few).
- lucidguppy 2y agoYay that there's research into adding nuance to results. Science should sharpen science. Deep down we know how we should eat and live. Society and the economy, though has different plans.