7 ms·

Well if he's 100 year old and still active enough to do lobbying, he probably is doing something right diet-wise... (Did you know that the guy who invented LSD

Well if he's 100 year old and still active enough to do lobbying, he probably is doing something right diet-wise... (Did you know that the guy who invented LSD died at 102?)

sown 11y ago
Maybe just luck, along with good diet and exercise. He looks better than my grandpa did at 70.
- kyberias 11y ago
  Longevity is very hereditary.
nothrabannosir 11y ago
You're probably kidding, but just in case people take this seriously: this is a prime example of survivor's bias. A literal one, even.
- cynwoody 11y ago
  Kidding? LOL! 102†. Albert Hofmann survived. Will you? †https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Hofmann https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Hofmann
- romaniv 11y ago
  Survivor bias is ignoring the invisible failures in your correlation analysis. What we have in regards to health research is the opposite. Every single study I heard about is about (preventing) causes of death. What you're saying is, essentially, that this guy's age should be ignored because his longevity is due to luck. But I haven't seen anything that rules out other possibilities.
  - nothrabannosir 11y ago
    You're right, but: > What you're saying is, essentially, that this guy's age should be ignored because his longevity is due to luck. That is absolutely not what I was trying to say. Sorry for the confusion. I was responding to the "look, he's old! let's see what he did to get there," comment: it's a form of survivor bias. It's not about this man, or his life choices. Rather, it's about us, looking to survivors for lessons on survival. Wikipedia has a good page on it: Survivorship bias, or survival bias, is the logical error of concentrating on the people or things that "survived" some process and inadvertently overlooking those that did not because of their lack of visibility. This can lead to false conclusions in several different ways. The survivors may be actual people, as in a medical study, or could be companies or research subjects or applicants for a job, or anything that must make it past some selection process to be considered further. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias
kyberias 11y ago
Again, longevity is highly hereditary.
empiricus 11y ago
Like others said, beware selection bias. On the other hand, when someone gets to 100 there is a big chance someone did not do something wrong too often. In other words, if you do wrong things (diet, etc) your potential chances to get to 100 will drop significantly.

Well if he's 100 year old and still active enough to do lobbying, he probably is doing something right diet-wise... (Did you know that the guy who invented LSD died at 102?)

sown 11y ago

Maybe just luck, along with good diet and exercise. He looks better than my grandpa did at 70.

kyberias 11y ago
Longevity is very hereditary.

nothrabannosir 11y ago

You're probably kidding, but just in case people take this seriously: this is a prime example of survivor's bias. A literal one, even.

cynwoody 11y ago
Kidding? LOL! 102†. Albert Hofmann survived. Will you? †https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Hofmann https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Hofmann
romaniv 11y ago
Survivor bias is ignoring the invisible failures in your correlation analysis. What we have in regards to health research is the opposite. Every single study I heard about is about (preventing) causes of death. What you're saying is, essentially, that this guy's age should be ignored because his longevity is due to luck. But I haven't seen anything that rules out other possibilities.
- nothrabannosir 11y ago
  You're right, but: > What you're saying is, essentially, that this guy's age should be ignored because his longevity is due to luck. That is absolutely not what I was trying to say. Sorry for the confusion. I was responding to the "look, he's old! let's see what he did to get there," comment: it's a form of survivor bias. It's not about this man, or his life choices. Rather, it's about us, looking to survivors for lessons on survival. Wikipedia has a good page on it: Survivorship bias, or survival bias, is the logical error of concentrating on the people or things that "survived" some process and inadvertently overlooking those that did not because of their lack of visibility. This can lead to false conclusions in several different ways. The survivors may be actual people, as in a medical study, or could be companies or research subjects or applicants for a job, or anything that must make it past some selection process to be considered further. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias

kyberias 11y ago

Again, longevity is highly hereditary.

empiricus 11y ago

Like others said, beware selection bias. On the other hand, when someone gets to 100 there is a big chance someone did not do something wrong too often. In other words, if you do wrong things (diet, etc) your potential chances to get to 100 will drop significantly.