In the realm of predicting unusual longevity, we shouldn’t forget to memorialize J.I. Rodale, who suffered a fatal heart attack during a 1971 taping of the Dick Cavett show.
About urine consumption: I haven’t seen much in the way of its promotion for “life extension” (though this article comes close). Is it possible that the urine-drinkers are onto something?*
*not really. 
Jack Lalane not only reached 96 (and indeed died of something very treatable) …
At 60 he swam from Alcatraz Island to Fisherman’s Wharf handcuffed, shackled and towing a 1,000-pound boat. At 70, handcuffed and shackled again, he towed 70 boats, carrying a total of 70 people, a mile and a half through Long Beach Harbor.
And …
began each day, into his 90s, with two hours of workouts: weight lifting followed by a swim against an artificial current or in place, tied to a belt.
A very impressive individual. His take, that a combination of endurance and strength training, along with a moderate diet of real foods, ups the odds of a long healthspan, by now has solid evidence behind it. To this day there is no substitute!
Re the 110 column on the right, every case requires more research than I will do on this, but:
The Blue Zone thing is oversold for a variety of reasons. Quantifying precisely how much is difficult but, for example, we know that alcohol is bad for you but the Blue Zone guy noticed that people on Blue Zone areas drink alcohol (like 100% of the rest of the planet), so now it’s one of his recommendations.
Otherwise, though, fitness, a good diet, and low stress are good for longevity as he suggests.
But more-so is inhabiting a proper shelter without malarial flies, not smoking, and getting vaccinated.
Paradoxically, fitness (well, getting and staying fit) requires some degree of (physical) stress.
So while low stress is good, no stress is not.
I’d suspect that this applies to the psychological kind, too. Most people who live long lives also live fulfilling lives, and it’s advantageous to be considered “useful” as one ages. That implies a certain degree of responsibility. Ergo, these people’s lives aren’t completely stress free.
I find that interesting.
At the end of this thread I’m currently seeing an ad for Bach homeopathic flower remedies.
Should guarantee you’ll live to at least 150.
I have said this in several threads across this board: stress is a good and necessary thing: when intermittent, moderate, and with periods of recovery. That is what results in growth and adaptation. Chronic unremitting stress that overwhelms without recovery periods is bad.
That’s true whether the stress is exercise or inflammation or mental.
I remember in the 1970’s there was this spate of articles about people from Georgia in the Soviet Union who lived extraordinarily long lives. (Also used to promote yoghurt as a health food). One article later that debunked this suggested that it was mainly attributable to men asuming their father’s identity to avoid the draft in WWI. (Also the article at the time noted that Tass encouraged the stories because it was one of the few topics where western media actual used and paid for articles from their press wire.)
Considering my father and uncles were born in England in the 1920’s and lived into their 90’s, despite regularly eating eggs and bacon and fried tomato for breakfast, not a lot of exercise or other attention the healthy living after their teens, etc. - I doubt that diet or vitamins really matter beyond the basic necessities. My grandmother looked like a little butterball but died at 94.
The only thing I will note is that I used to get splitting headaches fairly regularly - every 2 or 3 months - and have never had one since I started taking multi-vitamins daily almost 30 years ago. I’m in my late 60’s now and the major change I’ve noticed is that I pay closer attention to news items to hear how old someone was when they died. I noted for example that Henry Kissinger died at 100 last year, although “svelte” would not be the word I used to describe him.
I suspect age is as much a feature of healthy genes as it is lifestyle, although you can if you try shorten your allotted four score and ten…
What I’ve read definitely addresses this. If you have “the good genes” you can lead a moderately poor lifestyle and live surprisingly long. Of course, if you avoid the usual Bad Things you can live quite well still longer. But if you don’t have good genes (which is most people by far), doing the usual no-nos means you end up in your 60s or 70s in poor shape, if you live that long.
If you get to 80, have taken care of yourself and have the good genes, you might coast for a good while in decent shape. But keep in mind there are so many factors that a big YMMV is needed.
It’s not surprising that related people end up with similar longevity (be it long or short).
"Live fast, die young and have a good-looking corpse usually translates to “Live fast, die in advanced middle age with a bunch of serious chronic medical problems, leaving a bloated, wasted corpse”.
There also seems to a big difference between stress one can control and relieve and stress that is imposed by others. This is implied in your comment, but it’s worth emphasizing. The CEO often lives longer than the line workers (production and service) and has much less harmful stress because he is an order-giver and not an order-taker.
Any word on refunds for customers who bought the supplements? 
I must admit though, they seem to have extended the life of this thread.
I had an in-law who didn’t want to waste away as an “old person”. Drank, ate, etc. Ended up at 60 in very poor health and unable to really do anything. Lived the last 15+ years as an “old person”.
That lifestyle doesn’t erase the last 10-20 years. It erases the middle 10-20 years.
Another early proponent of exercise and nutrition (and some other kooky ideas, too, like a lifetime of celibacy despite being married for 41 years) was Harvey Kellogg.
He died in 1943 at age 91 (although his brother, who wasn’t as much of a zealot, lived to the same age)
Running to mitigate health risk and as a “way of life” doesn’t always turn out to be foolproof.
Usually. 
The way I heard it expressed is that it’s not the conductor who has the heart attack, it’s second violin in the orchestra.
Also need to note (my experience with elderly relatives) the average arc of a senior citizen is that they’re fine until they’re not. Usually(!) after years of no problems it starts with some major incident (like a serious fall, flu, infection or similar medical event, and they never recover and are dead not long after.
It’s a zombie thread. Not something that humans can plan on being.
We could be heading for a planet controlled by “posh zombies”.
Imagine a world where future generations must perpetually deal with Elon Musk. 
This is one of the patterns that I notice in some of my patients (I’m a nursing home doctor). Based on my experience, the triggering event for those people who follow this pattern is more likely to be an effect of the body finally wearing out than the cause that triggers their final decline.
This really needs to be highlighted.
Jack Lalane is so aspirational not because he had such a long lifespan, but because he had such a long healthspan, and had to endure virtually no time with serious disability or pain.
And that’s what the data shows most. Regular exercise and a healthy nutritional pattern may slightly increase the chances of our living a very modest amount longer. And it dramatically increases the chances of our living the years we live better and with much less likelihood of living it disabled, either physically or cognitively. Or more likely both.
These stories of folk who do well until they suddenly don’t? Living fully functionally, then the whatever event, and rapidly to death? That’s the dream.