[Brown1anPantal0ons (OP)]

Morning all!
I've noticed that a good deal of supercentenarian individuals happen to be lifelong smokers, which is odd given the proven detriments of the carcinogens,carbon monoxide, arsenic etc found in cigarette smoke. The question is this; are there any potential benefits in controlled smoking that may favour longevity, or do these people simply have lucky genetics?
If the latter, does that mean that non-smokers could potentially break the record for longest lifespan due to having lower wear and tear from cancer/COPD?

[evan_au]

a good deal of supercentenarian individuals happen to be lifelong smokers

This probably reflects the prevalence of smoking 100 years ago, rather than any health-promoting characteristics of cigarettes.
- Most of the people who were smoking 100 years ago have died
- A tiny fraction who have more efficient DNA auditing capability (or are just plain lucky) have managed to dodge the cancer bullet.

non-smokers could break the record for longest lifespan?

Average life expectancies have increased significantly over the past couple of decades
- Partly due to reduced smoking, enforced seatbelts, pollution regulation, etc
- But maximum life expectancy is not increasing nearly as much as average life expectancy - by age 120, there are so many organ systems wearing out simultaneously that one of them is going to kill you.

There are suggestions that due to over-nutrition, increases in life expectancy may plateau, and perhaps fall, due to increases in diabetes and heart disease.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_expectancy#Life_expectancy_vs._maximum_life_span

[vhfpmr]

"a good deal of" is not an objective way of measuring things. Relevant questions are how many smokers vs non-smokers reach the age of 100, and what proportion of centenarians are smokers compared with nonagenarians, octogenarians and septuagenarians.

[paul cotter]

I will probably be accused of heresy here when I state there can be health benefits associated with the use of nicotine products. Nicotine protects against ulcerative colitis in those genetically susceptible. It unfortunately has the opposite effect in the other inflammatory bowel disease, crohn's disease. HOWEVER the harm associated with the carbon monoxide, tars and polycyclic aromatics present in cigarette smoke would far outweigh any benefits(nicotine is probably the least toxic component of the smoke). The possibility of a benefit is further reduced by a likely toxic effect on the pancreas, this case caused by the nicotine. Overall not a good longevity protocol.

[Origin]

I've noticed that a good deal of supercentenarian individuals happen to be lifelong smokers, which is odd given the proven detriments of the carcinogens,carbon monoxide, arsenic etc found in cigarette smoke. The question is this; are there any potential benefits in controlled smoking that may favour longevity, or do these people simply have lucky genetics?

I think there are individuals that just live a long time, no matter (within reason of course) what they do.  Reporters love to ask ancient old farts what their secret to a long life is, and the answer is always different.  I think the secret to a long life is genetics and luck.

[chiralSPO]

The key to a long life is not dying. (*groan*)

[alancalverd]

The French woman who passed 120 a few years ago, ascribed her long life to giving up smoking when she reached 100. She sued to work in a tobacconist's shop.

[bezoar]

My Mom, who will be 100 this month, is a non-smoker.  She grew up on a Mediterranean diet, if that counts for anything.  She became a little forgetful starting 97; she’s still ambulatory with a walker or hand to hold.  She will be zip lining to celebrate her birthday.  The last time she ziplined she was 95.  But I think Origin got it right.  It’s genetics and luck.