Board index » weights » Identical twins die on average 10 years apart

DZ

Registered User

Identical twins die on average 10 years apart

2006-09-09 02:58:28 AM
www.nytimes.com/2006/08/31/health/31age.html
Identical twins' lifespans differ by 10 years on average. Is that a
lot? If the statement is taken at its face value, it implies that if
your twin lived to 110 years you have VERY good chances to live past
110. But a random person doesn't.
-
 
Charles

Registered User

2006-09-09 06:47:20 AM

Re:Identical twins die on average 10 years apart

On Fri, 8 Sep 2006 18:58:28 +0000 (UTC), DZ
<30601@151262979.32512176.28632.24222.20769>wrote:
Quote
www.nytimes.com/2006/08/31/health/31age.html

Identical twins' lifespans differ by 10 years on average. Is that a
lot? If the statement is taken at its face value, it implies that if
your twin lived to 110 years you have VERY good chances to live past
110. But a random person doesn't.
Not if you were travelling in the same aircraft as your twin, when it
crashed with no survivors. This also proves the rule concerning
"random" persons who were fellow travellers. They will have no chance
of making 110 if they haven't already achieved such age before said
fatal air crash.
Have a great weekend - I intend to! ;o)
TFIF!
-
Shute

Registered User

2006-09-09 04:38:12 PM

Re:Identical twins die on average 10 years apart

On Fri, 8 Sep 2006 18:58:28 +0000 (UTC), DZ
<30601@151262979.32512176.28632.24222.20769>wrote:
Quote
www.nytimes.com/2006/08/31/health/31age.html

Identical twins' lifespans differ by 10 years on average. Is that a
lot? If the statement is taken at its face value, it implies that if
your twin lived to 110 years you have VERY good chances to live past
110. But a random person doesn't.
So which Olsen will die first? The fat one or the thin one?
-

fitness weights

David Cohen

Registered User

2006-09-09 04:51:04 PM

Re:Identical twins die on average 10 years apart

Charles wrote:
Quote
DZ wrote:
>Identical twins' lifespans differ by 10 years on average. Is that a
 >lot? If the statement is taken at its face value, it implies that if
 >your twin lived to 110 years you have VERY good chances to live past
 >110. But a random person doesn't.
Not if you were travelling in the same aircraft as your twin, when it
crashed with no survivors. This also proves the rule concerning
"random" persons who were fellow travellers. They will have no chance
of making 110 if they haven't already achieved such age before said
fatal air crash.
Two brothers, born to the same mother and the same father. Born within
minutes of one another. They look identical. They are genetically
identical.
But they are NOT twins.
How can this be?
David
-
ranieri

Registered User

2006-09-10 09:44:14 PM

Re:Identical twins die on average 10 years apart

"David Cohen" <sammiesdad@gmail.com>wrote in message
Quote

Charles wrote:
>DZ wrote:
 >>Identical twins' lifespans differ by 10 years on average. Is that a
 >>lot? If the statement is taken at its face value, it implies that if
 >>your twin lived to 110 years you have VERY good chances to live past
 >>110. But a random person doesn't.
 >
 >Not if you were travelling in the same aircraft as your twin, when it
 >crashed with no survivors. This also proves the rule concerning
 >"random" persons who were fellow travellers. They will have no chance
 >of making 110 if they haven't already achieved such age before said
 >fatal air crash.
Two brothers, born to the same mother and the same father. Born within
minutes of one another. They look identical. They are genetically
identical.

But they are NOT twins.

Part of a triplet package?
-
David Cohen

Registered User

2006-09-10 10:35:58 PM

Re:Identical twins die on average 10 years apart

"ranieri" <not now>wrote in message
Quote
"David Cohen" <sammiesdad@gmail.com>wrote>>
>Charles wrote:
 >>DZ wrote:
 >>>Identical twins' lifespans differ by 10 years on average. Is that a
 >>>lot? If the statement is taken at its face value, it implies that if
 >>>your twin lived to 110 years you have VERY good chances to live past
 >>>110. But a random person doesn't.
 >>
 >>Not if you were travelling in the same aircraft as your twin, when it
 >>crashed with no survivors. This also proves the rule concerning
 >>"random" persons who were fellow travellers. They will have no chance
 >>of making 110 if they haven't already achieved such age before said
 >>fatal air crash.
 >
 >Two brothers, born to the same mother and the same father. Born within
 >minutes of one another. They look identical. They are genetically
 >identical.
 >
 >But they are NOT twins.
 >
 Part of a triplet package?
You get a star on your classwork and a candy bar!
David
-
DZ

Registered User

2006-09-11 02:07:33 AM

Re:Identical twins die on average 10 years apart

Charles <jrh@msn.com>wrote:
Quote
DZ wrote:
>www.nytimes.com/2006/08/31/health/31age.html
 >
 >Identical twins' lifespans differ by 10 years on average. Is that a
 >lot? If the statement is taken at its face value, it implies that if
 >your twin lived to 110 years you have VERY good chances to live past
 >110. But a random person doesn't.
Not if you were travelling in the same aircraft as your twin, when it
crashed with no survivors. This also proves the rule concerning
"random" persons who were fellow travellers. They will have no chance
of making 110 if they haven't already achieved such age before said
fatal air crash.
Good point, Charles. I find it that when I'm pontificating about
"nature vs. nurture", nothing is more enlightening than a gun muzzle
tightly pressed against my forehead by a desperate crack addict.
-
DZ

Registered User

2006-09-11 02:11:36 AM

Re:Identical twins die on average 10 years apart

David Cohen <sammiesdad@earthlink.net>wrote:
Quote
"ranieri" <not now>wrote:
>"David Cohen" <sammiesdad@gmail.com>wrote>>
 >>Charles wrote:
 >>>DZ wrote:
 >>>>Identical twins' lifespans differ by 10 years on average. Is that a
 >>>>lot? If the statement is taken at its face value, it implies that if
 >>>>your twin lived to 110 years you have VERY good chances to live past
 >>>>110. But a random person doesn't.
 >>>
 >>>Not if you were travelling in the same aircraft as your twin, when it
 >>>crashed with no survivors. This also proves the rule concerning
 >>>"random" persons who were fellow travellers. They will have no chance
 >>>of making 110 if they haven't already achieved such age before said
 >>>fatal air crash.
 >>
 >>Two brothers, born to the same mother and the same father. Born within
 >>minutes of one another. They look identical. They are genetically
 >>identical.
 >>
 >>But they are NOT twins.
 >>
 >Part of a triplet package?
You get a star on your classwork and a candy bar!
Several generations of sister chasing would make two brothers
identical.
There is also a non-zero chance of that in an outbred mating. The
number of crossover events per 33 Morgan human genome is approximately
Poisson distributed with the mean 33, so the probability of no
recombination is about exp(-33). Probability of passing on the same
non-recombinant set twice to two children is then roughly
1/(2 * exp(33) * 2^46).
-
DZ

Registered User

2006-09-11 02:13:37 AM

Re:Identical twins die on average 10 years apart

Shute <Shute@nowhere.com>wrote:
Quote
DZ wrote:

>www.nytimes.com/2006/08/31/health/31age.html
 >
 >Identical twins' lifespans differ by 10 years on average. Is that a
 >lot? If the statement is taken at its face value, it implies that if
 >your twin lived to 110 years you have VERY good chances to live past
 >110. But a random person doesn't.
So which Olsen will die first? The fat one or the thin one?
Forgive me for being so pedantic but they're not identical twins.
-
Curt James

Registered User

2006-09-11 02:14:50 AM

Re:Identical twins die on average 10 years apart

Shute wrote:
re
www.nytimes.com/2006/08/31/health/31age.html
Quote
So which Olsen will die first? The fat one or the thin one?
Ouch!
I suspect the so-called "fat one" if she happens to read MFW. ;o)
--
Curt
-
Curt James

Registered User

2006-09-11 02:23:17 AM

Re:Identical twins die on average 10 years apart

DZ wrote:
Quote
Shute wrote:
>DZ wrote:
 re Identical twins' lifespans differing by 10 years on average
Quote
>So which Olsen will die first? The fat one or the thin one?
Forgive me for being so pedantic but they're not identical twins.
So the fat one's safe?
Whew!
--
Curt
-
Charles

Registered User

2006-09-11 03:56:14 AM

Re:Identical twins die on average 10 years apart

On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 18:07:33 +0000 (UTC), DZ <sc13nc3d@gmail.com>
wrote:
Quote
Charles <jrh@msn.com>wrote:
>DZ wrote:
 >>www.nytimes.com/2006/08/31/health/31age.html
 >>
 >>Identical twins' lifespans differ by 10 years on average. Is that a
 >>lot? If the statement is taken at its face value, it implies that if
 >>your twin lived to 110 years you have VERY good chances to live past
 >>110. But a random person doesn't.
 >
 >Not if you were travelling in the same aircraft as your twin, when it
 >crashed with no survivors. This also proves the rule concerning
 >"random" persons who were fellow travellers. They will have no chance
 >of making 110 if they haven't already achieved such age before said
 >fatal air crash.
Good point, Charles. I find it that when I'm pontificating about
"nature vs. nurture", nothing is more enlightening than a gun muzzle
tightly pressed against my forehead by a desperate crack addict.
You also stand a good chance to not advance in age, for much the same
reason, albeit a different route, as the ill-fated "identical twins"
you originally introduced!
Your "nurturing" instinct will guide you through the ordeal - or not,
dependent entirely upon the "nature" of the "crack addict." So it then
becomes a conjoined "nature vs. nurture" scenario with variant
priorities!
-
David Cohen

Registered User

2006-09-11 04:19:28 AM

Re:Identical twins die on average 10 years apart

"DZ" <534@514122.158604463.22783.8497.29374>wrote
Quote
David Cohen <sammiesdad@earthlink.net>wrote:
>"ranieri" <not now>wrote:
 >>"David Cohen" <sammiesdad@gmail.com>wrote>>
 >>>Charles wrote:
 >>>>DZ wrote:
 >>>>>Identical twins' lifespans differ by 10 years on average. Is that a
 >>>>>lot? If the statement is taken at its face value, it implies that if
 >>>>>your twin lived to 110 years you have VERY good chances to live past
 >>>>>110. But a random person doesn't.
 >>>>
 >>>>Not if you were travelling in the same aircraft as your twin, when it
 >>>>crashed with no survivors. This also proves the rule concerning
 >>>>"random" persons who were fellow travellers. They will have no chance
 >>>>of making 110 if they haven't already achieved such age before said
 >>>>fatal air crash.
 >>>
 >>>Two brothers, born to the same mother and the same father. Born within
 >>>minutes of one another. They look identical. They are genetically
 >>>identical.
 >>>
 >>>But they are NOT twins.
 >>>
 >>Part of a triplet package?
 >
 >You get a star on your classwork and a candy bar!
Several generations of sister chasing would make two brothers
identical.

There is also a non-zero chance of that in an outbred mating. The
number of crossover events per 33 Morgan human genome is approximately
Poisson distributed with the mean 33, so the probability of no
recombination is about exp(-33). Probability of passing on the same
non-recombinant set twice to two children is then roughly
1/(2 * exp(33) * 2^46).
Yeah, I was...uh...thinking the same thing. Funny, that.
David
-
Charles

Registered User

2006-09-11 05:53:04 AM

Re:Identical twins die on average 10 years apart

On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 20:19:28 GMT, "David Cohen"
<sammiesdad@earthlink.net>wrote:
Quote

"DZ" <534@514122.158604463.22783.8497.29374>wrote
>David Cohen <sammiesdad@earthlink.net>wrote:
 >>"ranieri" <not now>wrote:
 >>>"David Cohen" <sammiesdad@gmail.com>wrote>>
 >>>>Charles wrote:
 >>>>>DZ wrote:
 >>>>>>Identical twins' lifespans differ by 10 years on average. Is that a
 >>>>>>lot? If the statement is taken at its face value, it implies that if
 >>>>>>your twin lived to 110 years you have VERY good chances to live past
 >>>>>>110. But a random person doesn't.
 >>>>>
 >>>>>Not if you were travelling in the same aircraft as your twin, when it
 >>>>>crashed with no survivors. This also proves the rule concerning
 >>>>>"random" persons who were fellow travellers. They will have no chance
 >>>>>of making 110 if they haven't already achieved such age before said
 >>>>>fatal air crash.
 >>>>
 >>>>Two brothers, born to the same mother and the same father. Born within
 >>>>minutes of one another. They look identical. They are genetically
 >>>>identical.
 >>>>
 >>>>But they are NOT twins.
 >>>>
 >>>Part of a triplet package?
 >>
 >>You get a star on your classwork and a candy bar!
 >
 >Several generations of sister chasing would make two brothers
 >identical.
 >
 >There is also a non-zero chance of that in an outbred mating. The
 >number of crossover events per 33 Morgan human genome is approximately
 >Poisson distributed with the mean 33, so the probability of no
 >recombination is about exp(-33). Probability of passing on the same
 >non-recombinant set twice to two children is then roughly
 >1/(2 * exp(33) * 2^46).
Yeah, I was...uh...thinking the same thing. Funny, that.

I suspect most of us were there before you...
-
Robert Schuh

Registered User

2006-09-11 06:08:37 AM

Re:Identical twins die on average 10 years apart

DZ wrote:
Quote
www.nytimes.com/2006/08/31/health/31age.html

Identical twins' lifespans differ by 10 years on average. Is that a
lot? If the statement is taken at its face value, it implies that if
your twin lived to 110 years you have VERY good chances to live past
110. But a random person doesn't.
My father is an identical twin and he brother died in 1988.
--
Robert Schuh
"Everything that elevates an individual above the herd and
intimidates the neighbour is henceforth called evil; and
the fair, modest, submissive and conforming mentality,
the mediocrity of desires attains moral designations and honors"
- Nietzsche
www.hardbopdrums.com/
<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
DZ wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE><a href="www.nytimes.com/2006/08/31/health/31age.html</a>
<p>Identical twins' lifespans differ by 10 years on average. Is that a
<br>lot? If the statement is taken at its face value, it implies that if
<br>your twin lived to 110 years you have VERY good chances to live past
<br>110. But a random person doesn't.</blockquote>
<p><br>My father is an identical twin and he brother died in 1988.
<br> 
<p>--
<br>Robert Schuh
<br>"Everything that elevates an individual above the herd and
<br> intimidates the neighbour is henceforth called evil; and
<br> the fair, modest, submissive and conforming mentality,
<br> the mediocrity of desires attains moral designations and honors"
<br> - Nietzsche
<p><A HREF="www.hardbopdrums.com/">www.hardbopdrums.com/</A>
<br> </html>
-
Curt James

Registered User

2006-09-11 06:31:13 AM

Re:Identical twins die on average 10 years apart

Robert Schuh wrote:
[...]
Quote
My father is an identical twin and he brother died in 1988.
And? AND?
Well, is your father still alive? How was 1998 for him?
Wishing him and, yeah, you continued good health.
[...]
Quote
--------------2E068075C2CFF245CDE412D2
Content-Type: text/html
X-Google-AttachSize: 1124
-=snip line after line of frigging html=-
So, what's up with that anyway? It's not entirely unusual for you
either.
What? What gives?!
I like html like you like spam, okay?
--
Curt
-
ranieri

Registered User

2006-09-11 07:43:44 AM

Re:Identical twins die on average 10 years apart

"Charles" <jrh@msn.com>wrote in message
Quote
>>There is also a non-zero chance of that in an outbred mating. The
 >>number of crossover events per 33 Morgan human genome is approximately
 >>Poisson distributed with the mean 33, so the probability of no
 >>recombination is about exp(-33). Probability of passing on the same
 >>non-recombinant set twice to two children is then roughly
 >>1/(2 * exp(33) * 2^46).
 >
 >Yeah, I was...uh...thinking the same thing. Funny, that.
 >
I suspect most of us were there before you...
Foolishly I had it pegged at 1/(2*exp(33)*2^32).
(too much time doing armadillo research!)
-
David Cohen

Registered User

2006-09-11 08:55:55 AM

Re:Identical twins die on average 10 years apart

"ranieri" <not now>wrote
Quote
"Charles" <jrh@msn.com>wrote in message
>>>There is also a non-zero chance of that in an outbred mating. The
 >>>number of crossover events per 33 Morgan human genome is approximately
 >>>Poisson distributed with the mean 33, so the probability of no
 >>>recombination is about exp(-33). Probability of passing on the same
 >>>non-recombinant set twice to two children is then roughly
 >>>1/(2 * exp(33) * 2^46).
 >>
 >>Yeah, I was...uh...thinking the same thing. Funny, that.
 >>
 >I suspect most of us were there before you...
Foolishly I had it pegged at 1/(2*exp(33)*2^32).
I'd be embarrassed to admit that.
Quote
(too much time doing armadillo research!)
I didn't think one could do too much armadillo research.
David
-
Charles

Registered User

2006-09-11 03:18:34 PM

Re:Identical twins die on average 10 years apart

On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 18:43:44 -0500, "ranieri" <not now>wrote:
Quote

"Charles" <jrh@msn.com>wrote in message

>>>There is also a non-zero chance of that in an outbred mating. The
 >>>number of crossover events per 33 Morgan human genome is approximately
 >>>Poisson distributed with the mean 33, so the probability of no
 >>>recombination is about exp(-33). Probability of passing on the same
 >>>non-recombinant set twice to two children is then roughly
 >>>1/(2 * exp(33) * 2^46).
 >>
 >>Yeah, I was...uh...thinking the same thing. Funny, that.
 >>
 >
 >I suspect most of us were there before you...
Foolishly I had it pegged at 1/(2*exp(33)*2^32).
(too much time doing armadillo research!)

An understandable equation miscalculation; you have much to commend
your integrity by admitting the error!
Ugh! It's Monday! ;o)
-
David

Registered User

2006-09-11 04:43:46 PM

Re:Identical twins die on average 10 years apart

"Charles" <jrh@msn.com>wrote in message
Quote
On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 18:43:44 -0500, "ranieri" <not now>wrote:

>
 >"Charles" <jrh@msn.com>wrote in message
 >
 >>>>There is also a non-zero chance of that in an outbred mating. The
 >>>>number of crossover events per 33 Morgan human genome is approximately
 >>>>Poisson distributed with the mean 33, so the probability of no
 >>>>recombination is about exp(-33). Probability of passing on the same
 >>>>non-recombinant set twice to two children is then roughly
 >>>>1/(2 * exp(33) * 2^46).
 >>>
 >>>Yeah, I was...uh...thinking the same thing. Funny, that.
 >>>
 >>
 >>I suspect most of us were there before you...
 >
 >Foolishly I had it pegged at 1/(2*exp(33)*2^32).
 >(too much time doing armadillo research!)
 >
An understandable equation miscalculation; you have much to commend
your integrity by admitting the error!
It is also highly commendable for you to have commended his integrity in
this way!
Quote

Ugh! It's Monday! ;o)
-