Lifestyle
The secret of ‘Blue Zones’ where people reach 100? Fake data, says academic
For a quarter-century, researchers and the general public have sought to understand why people in so-called “Blue Zones” live to 100 at far greater rates than anywhere else.
Saul Newman, a researcher at the University College London (UCL), believes he has the answer: actually, they don’t.
Despite being popularised in news articles, cookbooks and even a recent Netflix documentary series, the Blue Zones are really just a by-product of bad data, argues Newman, who has spent years debunking research about extremely elderly populations.
Rather than lifestyle factors such as diet or social connections, he says, the apparent longevity of people in five regions – Okinawa, Japan; Sardinia, Italy; Nicoya, Costa Rica; Ikaria, Greece; and Loma Linda, California – can be explained by pension fraud, clerical errors, and a lack of reliable birth and death records.
Dan Buettner, the American author and explorer credited with coining the term Blue Zone, did not respond to a request for comment.
For his research into the claims around Blue Zones, Newman, a senior fellow at UCL’s Centre for Longitudinal Studies, analysed reams of demographic data, including United Nations mortality statistics for 236 jurisdictions gathered between 1970 and 2021.
The figures, he found, were simply not believable.
Some of the places reported to have the most centenarians included Kenya, Malawi, and the self-governing territory of Western Sahara, jurisdictions with overall life expectancies of just 64, 65, and 71, respectively.
Similar patterns cropped up in Western countries, with the London borough of Tower Hamlets, one of the most deprived areas in the UK, reported to have more people aged over 105 than anywhere else in the country.
“I tracked down 80 percent of the people in the world who are aged over 110 and found where they had been born, where they died, and analysed the population level patterns,” Newman told Al Jazeera.
“It was absolutely striking because the more old age poverty means you get more 110-year-olds.”
Newman believes that clerical errors – whether intentional or inadvertent – have been compounded over the decades, severely undermining the reliability of statistics related to old age.
Some governments have acknowledged serious flaws in their record-keeping related to births and deaths.
In 2010, the Japanese government announced that 82 percent of its citizens reported to be over 100 had already died.
In 2012, Greece announced that it had discovered that 72 percent of its centenarians claiming pensions – some 9,000 people – were already dead.
Puerto Rico’s government said in 2010 that it would replace all existing birth certificates due to concerns about widespread fraud and identity theft.
More prosaic reasons can explain the apparent longevity of residents of jurisdictions such as Monaco, according to Newman, where low inheritance taxes are a draw for older Europeans, skewing the demographic data.
Still, the idea of Blue Zones has been hard to shift, even in the face of reliable data.
Japan’s Okinawa prefecture has often been lauded in the media for its diet and cultural practices.
Okinawans, however, have some of the worst health indicators in Japan, according to the Japanese government’s annual National Health and Nutrition Survey, which has been carried out since 1946.
While the traditional Okinawan diet is widely seen as healthy, a 2020 study found that the island prefecture today has a higher prevalence of obesity and higher rates of mortality among those aged 40–65 than mainland Japan.
Newman believes that the apparent longevity of Okinawans is the result of many deaths going unregistered.
“It’s almost like we are so determined that there is a secret to longevity that we’ll listen to anything – a secret to longevity that isn’t going to the gym, that isn’t giving up drinking,” Newman said.
“We want there to be some magic blueberries, and we want it so much that we can live in this sort of realm where cognitive dissonance is possible.”
Newman said that his research has not necessarily won him friends in academia, though he has been gratified with the support he has received from colleagues at UCL and Oxford, where he is a fellow at the Institute for Population Ageing.
He said that much of his work has received little notice from fellow academics and that a study he recently submitted for publication was subjected to nine peer reviews, instead of the usual two or three.
Newman did receive some notable recognition – and a legion of fans online – earlier this month, though, when he was awarded the first-ever Ig Nobel Prize in Demography for his work.
The Ig Nobel Prize was created in 1991 as a satirical award for unusual research “achievements that make people laugh, then think”.
The prizes are handed out by genuine Nobel Laureates at an annual ceremony in Boston.
“I’m very happy that it’s getting more attention, because I think, I think deep down, everyone also knows this smoothie is not going to save them,” Newman said.
“I think it’s the safety blanket that you cling onto, and so to have that overturned in a way that’s hopefully funny, I think that gets a lot of attention and people enjoy it.”
Despite drawing attention to the problem of pension fraud, Newman said he doesn’t fault people resorting to such measures.
“To be clear, I like that people are doing this because they’re being left behind by their governments in these places. They are not being given a sufficient pension. They’re not being given a sufficient retirement net,” he said.
“The fact that they are just saying, ‘Well, I’ll just keep collecting Barry’s pension from down the road.’ I think this is an indicator of the difficult pressures these people are under.”
Lifestyle
‘I Want You to Be Happy’ takes on modern-day dating
Farrar, Straus and Giroux
English writer Jem Calder’s debut novel, I Want You To Be Happy, reports from the frontlines of modern-day dating. His book is good – but the news is not.
A man in his mid-30s who recently broke off his engagement with his longtime girlfriend meets a young woman at a crowded London bar. He’s a copywriter, she’s a 23-year-old barista. Despite his intention not to talk about his breakup, he finds himself “shouting specific details directly in her ear.” “Pretty intense,” she yells back. He apologizes. “No-no, I like it,” she yells. “It’s like boarding a plane. You go baggage first.”
Neither can think what to say next. After an “interpersonal silence containing all the bar-noise,” they share a few drinks, their first names (Chuck and Joey), some quips about their 12 year age gap and her lack of what he calls “a real job.” They end up at his luxury apartment, which is far nicer than her crowded shared flat.
In other words, Calder’s characters have boarded a plane, baggage first — with no idea where it will land. Will it lead to an actual relationship, nevermind happiness?

Calder made a splash with his first book, Reward System, a collection of six interconnected short stories about young adults linked by social media yet adrift and alienated in today’s fragmented digital world. The title of one story, “Distraction from Sadness is Not the Same Thing as Happiness,” could also work for this closely observed, sad-but-sympathetic novel about the cagey, jittery dance that characterizes the modern-day mating game.
Chuck and Joey are guarded and uncertain. We get to know them better than they get to know each other — their insecurities and disappointments with themselves as well as others. Their fundamental imbalances — age, financial, commitment levels — lead to a wobbly connection. The discovery that they share literary aspirations (poetry for her, prose for him) and write around their day jobs opens up the potential for some sort of bond. Their nascent relationship stirs “a dormant feeling of possibility” in both of them. But a talent gap opens up an abyss. (I won’t say who has more.)
Joey is hopeful, always on stand-by for texts: “A new person finding you interesting makes you feel new,” she ruminates in this tight, third person narrative that alternates between the male and female perspective. Interestingly, although the author is male, the female character comes across as far more sympathetic.
Joey understands that she needs to wait before replying to texts, because responding too quickly betrays “an underlying neediness and desperation.” Chuck is generally avoidant in all aspects of his life — with alcohol as his chosen support system. It’s important to both of them to convey nonchalance. Neither wants to come across as a “tryhard.”
There’s nothing new about this, of course: Self doubts, waiting by the phone, playing hard to get, “acting noncommittal in the hopes of gaming his desire.” It’s a tale as old as time, with updated electronic devices.
Both characters are addicted to instant gratification: brand name status items, cyclist-delivered meals, push notifications, Instagram scrolling, podcasts, alcohol, smoking, vaping, sex, screens. They are constantly plugged in and online, compulsively checking their media feeds. One night, trying to distract herself from “recursive worries” about her finances and future, Joey spends “twenty of her non-refundable life minutes researching the relationship timeline of an actor she liked and a musician she didn’t like as much.”
Calder writes with precision, channeling his generation’s activities with a mix of interiority and verbs fabricated to convey the mechanical rote of their daily activities. These are people who routinely “gaze-unlocked” their phones, “V-60-ed” some coffee, and “escalatored” up to open plan spaces at work, where, lacking assigned cubicles, they “hot-desked” and then “sense-checked the work.” And at the end of the day, they “cheersed” drinks.
I Want You to Be Happy would have packed more punch at novella-length. Yet readers of all generations should be able to relate to these characters’ waves of disconsolate loneliness, if not how they deal with it. Older readers might recall their own anxieties about the future — but mostly feel relief that they’re no longer out there.
Lifestyle
L.A. Affairs: After losing our spouses, we found love again. But were we cheating on our children?
We’d progressed from walking in the park to perching across from each other in my living room to sitting side by side on the family room sofa. It was grief that drew us. A year earlier we’d both lost our beloved, vibrant spouses to cancer. Though his wife and I had been in the same women’s book group, I’d known Eric only through the wry gripes we’d all made about our husbands.
Now he took my face in his hands. Here it comes, I thought. Was I ready for this? Looking deep into my eyes he asked, “Would you nap with me?”
Apparently, this was what dating looked like in one’s 60s. As he snored companionably, I wondered how I’d handle our next progression, whatever that would be. My husband had devotedly nursed me through my own illness, only to be hit by one far worse. We and our two sons had been the closest of families, their father their best friend. As much as I knew they needed me, I was racked by survivor’s guilt — ashamed still to be alive. If I was mortified just to breathe, how could I even think about loving another man?
For months, Eric and I lurked about. Although he lacked the sense I had that we were cheating on our spouses, we both felt we were somehow cheating on our children. That his one child and my two were often at our respective homes made for tricky logistics. So we leased new life from the city.
Guided by Eric, we watched planes from the viewing deck at the Santa Monica Airport, where he explained Bernoulli’s principle. We wandered the Mar Vista Farmer’s Market, where he introduced me to the vendors he’d known for decades and taught me to top berry trays with tiny nets he’d made to hold the fruit in place. We saw L.A. Theater Works record plays at UCLA’s Melnitz Hall, where the primal storytelling of actors reading lines and Foley artists adding sounds riveted me more than a Broadway spectacle. On these outings, I learned not just about flight, farm-to-table and fabulism, but about Eric. He was a man fully engaged in life.
Guided by me, we took classes at Santa Monica Yoga, Eric treating himself afterward to a sandwich at Bob’s Market from the deservedly self-proclaimed Deli Lama. We walked our way through my L.A.-on-foot book, from Castellammare and Leimert Park to Pasadena, delighting in the architectural mashup Nathanael West derided in “The Day of the Locust” as “Mexican ranch houses, Samoan huts, Mediterranean villas” and “Egyptian and Japanese temples.” Eric especially admired the Witch’s House in Beverly Hills, the Shakespeare Bridge in Franklin Hills and the stained glass windows in Carthay Circle. He learned not just about poses, pastrami and parapets, but about me. I was a woman fully engaged in life.
We also learned we were both determined to seize the day after seeing the rest of our spouses’ days seized from them. My guilt persisted. But this good man had found a route from the sofa to the city to my heart.
We finally met each other’s children. The days we seized became weeks, months and years. Our sons, though forever brokenhearted, thrived. Mine had children of their own, all with names that begin with “A” to honor their father. The oldest, at four, understands from photos that she has another grandpa, understands that the man in the picture is her daddy’s daddy. Her parents and I tell her about him: his kindness, grace, humor, wisdom. “I wish I could have known him,” she says.
“I do too,” I say, “more than anything.” When the others are old enough, we’ll tell them, too, about him. They’ll feel his essence because their fathers are just like him. He’ll stay, this way, in and around us.
Ever-gracious, Eric holds this space for him, as I try to do for his wife with their son. But becoming a grandmother only increased my guilt. My husband, consummate family man, was born to be a grandfather. Yet here I was, without him, flying high on the joy of grandparenting. What could I do besides love the children and grandchildren fiercely and be grateful for the privilege?
I could do this: recognize that if it takes a village to raise a child, the more villagers who love the child the better. My lucky grandchildren will feel their grandfather’s love by proxy and Eric’s love firsthand. They can even enjoy the love of Eric’s son, who patiently helps them build Lego worlds and cooks them their favorite soup.
Even as he holds space for my husband, Eric affectionately fills his own. He’s a tall man with a deep voice, an easy laugh and a warm embrace. He marvels at the latest evidence of the grandchildren’s genius, like any grandfather should, and spoils them with treats and toys. He’s so handy around their houses that my grandson greets him with, “What’re you gonna fix today?”
His most recent project involved the crib my husband and I had saved from our sons’ infancy with the hope that grandchildren would one day use it. Since the distance between slats was now deemed unsafe, Eric transformed the crib into blocks. “I wanted to honor the spirit of what you’d both wished for,” he said.
Then and now. Loss and gain. Selfless love.
For years now, Eric and I have both lived in my house. There are still naps, but more bustle. Our sons live close enough that we’re together a lot, and my house tends to be the happy hub. The grandchildren play near photos of their grandpa. Their “A” names ring out in this home where we raised their fathers. Meanwhile, Eric pulls them around on a rug he rigged as a magic carpet and helps stack the blocks into towers. When the grandchildren leave, he hugs them tight. My guilt remains, like pain in a phantom limb, but the sofa holds us all.
The author is a law school professor, researcher and author of an upcoming book on the scientifically proven neural superpowers of grandmothers. She lives on the Westside. She’s on Instagram @rondafoxwrites, and her website is rondafox.com.
L.A. Affairs chronicles the search for romantic love in all its glorious expressions in the L.A. area, and we want to hear your true story. We pay $400 for a published essay. Email LAAffairs@latimes.com. You can find submission guidelines here. You can find past columns here.
Lifestyle
An eco-journalist takes on a Big Tech in this modern twist on the heist novel
George Orwell famously wrote that it takes a constant struggle to see what’s in front of one’s nose. That may be truer than ever. These days we barely register things that 20 years ago would’ve seemed downright bizarre — like people staring down at their phones in busy crosswalks. The unnatural comes to seem natural.
Until it doesn’t. This has happened with the proliferation of data centers all over America. After years of ignoring their mushrooming growth — there are over 4,000 in the U.S. — the public now sees them clearly and doesn’t like what they represent, be it soaring energy bills or the advent of job-killing AI. People now oppose having data centers in their communities. In real life — and in movies like Eddington — politicians are now pulled between their constituents’ desires and the devouring needs of Big Tech.
The hatred of data centers ignites the action in Cloudthief, a boisterous new novel that’s equal parts heist thriller and cry in the digital wilderness. It was written by novelist Nathaniel Rich, who may be best known for ecological non-fiction such as his 2019 book Losing Earth. Setting his story back in 2014 — when tech billionaires were still considered visionaries, not bullying moguls — Cloudthief centers on a brainy young man who, like the guy in the Leonard Cohen song, is just some Joseph looking for a manger.
Our narrator “Tim” — a pseudonym he says — is a freelance writer who’s gone broke doing magazine articles about climate change. He’s lonely and lost until he stumbles upon Virginia (also not her real name), who could be the American cousin of dragon-tattooed Lisbeth Salander.

Tech-savvy and paranoid and scarily elusive, Virginia lives off the grid in a Manhattan mini-storage unit and has plans for a blow against Big Tech. Evidently, Tim has never seen a noir movie because he doesn’t merely fall for this 21st-century fantasy of a femme fatale, he dreamily goes along with her plans to rob a data center in Pryor, Okla., and make off with the sellable information their servers contain.
Once they drive off to Pryor — Rich describes their road trip wonderfully — Cloudthief kicks into high gear, serving up the juicy stuff that we all love in a heist story. We see the baroque planning. We watch them case their target, a silver-smoke spewing behemoth that has the majestic size of two futuristic airport terminals but is actually as tacky as a boondocks mini-mall.
And we learn how things work. While data centers contain the records of major corporations and government departments — each building contains tens of thousands of servers fat with documents — they’re protected by a smattering of minimum wage guards.
“Nobody knows about them,” Tim says of these gigantic repositories. “But they are the foundation of life on earth. … If every data center went dark tomorrow, we would be plunged into the Middle Ages.”
As Virginia and the lovestruck Tim prepare for the robbery, Cloudthief is a blast. They philosophize, have sex, don silly disguises, bristle with suspicion and constantly argue, often quite wittily — she’s aghast at his amateur mistakes that could get them caught. They often seem like teenagers playing at committing a crime. But commit it they do.
Of course, if you’ve ever read or watched a heist tale, you know that things never go as planned, and that the setup is more fun than the aftermath. And so it is here. But rather than spoil things, I’ll merely note that Rich’s ending earnestly tells us what we already know.
No matter. Filled with sharp descriptions and terrific dialogue, Cloudthief stuck with me. I’ve read no other novel that captures so neatly what it means to be a data-center nation — the blighting of the physical landscape, the voracious use of fossil-fuel energy, the way that these huge, bland buildings, owned by private companies like Google and Amazon, now house, and thereby control, nearly all aspects of all our lives.
Leading a life of garrulous desperation and powerless analysis — he’s the very soul of defeated idealism — Tim can kid himself into believing that robbing the Pyror data center might be a meaningful gesture. In fact, he’s just chasing a woman — and trying to escape his own thwarted life. But his blindness helps us see our world.
Early in the novel, Tim ruminates on “the Cloud,” a term whose vague innocence seduces us into not thinking about its power. “The goal of any technology,” he says, “is to make itself both essential and invisible, like air.” In Cloudthief, Rich does the opposite. He helps us see the actual, earthbound workings of the magical-sounding cloud, and he gets us thinking about the perils of our needing it so badly.
-
Lifestyle16 minutes ago‘I Want You to Be Happy’ takes on modern-day dating
-
Technology28 minutes agoApple’s plot to crush OpenAI
-
World34 minutes agoLeaked Iran report finds record public anger as regime focuses on holding power
-
Politics40 minutes agoWhite House dishes out new election security jab over Olive Garden’s pasta pass ID policy
-
Health46 minutes agoDoctors warn your ‘stomach bug’ may actually be a parasite that’s harder to detect
-
Sports52 minutes agoAEW star Kenny Omega blasts social media user over Charlie Kirk comment
-
Technology58 minutes agoNew bank scam laws could stop suspicious payments
-
Business1 hour agoEnvironmental groups press to halt Imperial Valley lithium venture