Posted by: @marco

↑

Recent validations, accepted on 30 and 31 March 2024:

Mauro Ambriz Tapia, MEX, 21 Nov 1897 - 18 Apr 2011, 113 years and 148 days.

Josephina da Conceição, BRA, 25 Sept 1910 - 8 Jan 2023, 112 years and 105 days.

If Horacio will become verified in the future, then 1897 will have an extraordinarily strong verified male top three, with an average age of around 114.75 or even slightly above that, if I recall correctly.

Posted by: @marco

↑

Two other validations from the past week:

Manoel Ogero Dias Júnior, BRA, 8 Jan 1899 - 26 June 2009, 110 years and 169 days.

With Michael DeSantis's recent debunking (age 109y,252d instead of age 110y,191d), courtesy of both Fish and myself, Mr. Dias becomes the fourth verified male SC born in 1899, replacing Mr. DeSantis.

@futurist Horacio's page was updated a few days ago and changed to "validated" but quickly changed back. My opinion is I think they accidentally released it to the public too soon. In other words, I'm about 99% confident in his case now, but we'll have to wait and see...

Posted by: @aq

↑

@futurist Horacio's page was updated a few days ago and changed to "validated" but quickly changed back. My opinion is I think they accidentally released it to the public too soon. In other words, I'm about 99% confident in his case now, but we'll have to wait and see...

Excellent news! I really do hope that he, Tomas P-F, and Anisio will all eventually end up getting validated. But of course the research and validation process absolutely cannot be rushed. I completely understand that.

I also hope that we will eventually be able to find and verify additional 1800s-born men who died in the 2010s, especially from Latin America. Was Latin America's third-oldest verifiable living man on January 1, 2010 really just 109 or less? Somehow I find that very unlikely.

As a side note, I wonder if Mauro's WWI draft registration card from September 1918 (age 19) helped verify his age. It's certainly a nice auxiliary early-life document to have.

Posted by: @futurist

↑

If Horacio will become verified in the future, then 1897 will have an extraordinarily strong verified male top three, with an average age of around 114.75 or even slightly above that, if I recall correctly.

It would be insane if the possible but unvalidated case of Mansoor Pazargard becomes validated too. That means that the span of 14 months between 21 September 1896 and 21 November 1897 produced 5 men all above 113!

Jiroemon Kimura - 116y & 54d

Horacio Celi Mendoza - 114y & 265d

Walter Breuning - 114y & 205d

Mansoor Pazargard - 114y & 10d

Mauro Ambriz Tapia - 113y & 148d

It would also mean that on 06 January 2011, we had 5 LIVING Men above 113, and 3 LIVING Men above 114!!!

Walter Breuning - 114y & 107d

Mansoor Pazargard - 114y & 9d

Horacio Celi Mendoza - 114y & 3d

Jiroemon Kimura - 113y & 262d

Mauro Ambriz Tapia - 113y & 46d

It would also mean that Mansoor Pazargard would be the only 114 year old man in history to not hold the title of the WOLM, but until he and Horacio get validated...

Futurist; I’m not questioning the available evidence, for Delphia Welford, I’m questioning what the GRG may have had at the time of their decision and the reasoning for their decision.

The whole point (as others picked up) was that the LQ decision significantly enhanced the likelihood (in my opinion) that Delphia did actually reach 117+.

@chrisr How long until all or most cases from the 1890s to 1910s are fully validated? It feels like this is taking forever ever since 2014.

Hi Metajore.

Whilst I’m definitely not the best equipped person on the forum to answer that, I think that one of the key issues was that the validation process basically dried up for at least a couple of years, before the likes of ESO, LAS and the LQ picked up the pieces and got thing moving again.

i personally think the teams will continue to find a fair few cases across this period for at least the next 1-2 years.

@chrisr How long does the average validation take for a 110-112 year old? Thank you for replying.

Hi Metajore.

Sorry but I don’t know much in this area. My functions tend to be support roles for research work, rather than research.

I’d imagine it may be hard to come up with a meaningful average though; with the accessibility, volume and clarity of the information being the key drivers in each case.

Also, some can happen very quickly when strong family support and data is provided.

It would be interesting to know if anyone else could add further to Metajore’s question.

@chrisr @metajore

Consider this,

LQ has existed for a short period of time and already has about 2,500 validations and new validations are added almost daily. A case application undergoes review quickly and it's only been a select few cases that have taken a longer time for validation (such as Delphia Welford) and in these instances they have been exceptionally old people, which require a higher burden of proof.

Remember that we aren't machines that can crank out validations. Each individual case needs to be analyzed and investigated thoroughly before it is ready for validation. We need to find documentation, potential media reports and reconstruct their family trees to ensure that the person is who they say they are. This takes time.

You are welcome to read my editorial on research practices when validating exceptional longevity here:

https://longeviquest.com/2023/11/the-importance-of-high-standards-for-age-validation/  

I agree with @chrisr. It doesn't seem like there's a certain time, but I would guess 1-2 years maybe for the average? I really don't know. I think every case I different. Some get validated quickly, and some take a long time. It seems that Anisio Rodrigues Alves has taken quite a long time, whereas I understand Maria Capovilla was an easy and quick case to validate. Of course, they are beyond 112, but I imagine a 112 year old being quicker to validate than a 116 year old. I'm not an expert in this field, but I hope that helps. 

Yeah Jimmy has a good point. Cases by LQ are sometimes added daily, but other can take years. Certain cases like Shigechiyo Izumi and that one 118 year old woman from Belarus may take decades, because as Jimmy points out the older the person, the higher the burden of proof. It seems to me that the majority of cases being validated are around 109-112, but that's a good thing because if some of those people reach 115+ they'll already be validated. I kinda don't think Izumi will ever get fully validated, but I'm sure we can expect many more 109, 110, 111, and 112 year olds to be validated soon. 

@aquanaut The reason as to why the majority of cases are around 109-112 is because they are more likely to be accurate and that the number of people reaching 109-112 is higher than the number of people that reach 115+.

The annual mortality for supercentenarians (and centenarians) is approximately fifty percent. So if you have 100 people aged 110, "only" three will reach 115+.

@930310 yeah I was agreeing with you when you said the higher the age, the more proof is needed

Posted by: @futurist

↑

Posted by: @aq

↑

Posted by: @ale76

↑

Delphia Welford (USA, 9 Sep 1875 - 14 Nov 1992, 117) validated by LQ on 28 Feb 2024.

Vincent Dransfield (USA, 28 Mar 1914 - Present, 110) validated by LQ on 6 Apr 2024.

 

Very excited to see these two! It's great that we have a previously unvalidated SC from LQ who was 117, and Vincent who is a 110 year old man, that's breaking all stereotypes. Congrats 

 

Here's hoping that Vincent will break Walter's record in slightly over 4.5 years' time! But I've unfortunately learned not to be too optimistic. Still, Vincent is probably out best chance for this in a while. Might become the first US-born white man since Walter to live past his 112th birthday in two years' time!

 

Way too optimistic, unfortunately. 🙁

Posted by: @aq

↑

and 3 LIVING Men above 114!!!

We almost had that in mid-April 2011, right before Walter Breuning's death. Walter failed to live for the necessary five extra days for this.

I hope that this man will turn out to indeed be 114 like he claimed to be:

https://longeviquest.com/2024/07/worlds-oldest-man-claimant-alvaro-jose-de-souza-dies-at-the-claimed-age-of-114/

But even if he can be verified as age 110-113, that would still be very good!

He was in amazing shape for a supercentenarian, that's for sure!

Posted by: @futurist

↑

FWIW, Ernest Peronneau's 1902 birth record incorrectly (likely due to a typo) gives his mother's maiden name (Florence *James* instead of Florence *Spencer*), but I and Fish have searched for plausible candidates for an identity switch for Ernest's parents and there were only one James and Florence Per-something living in Charleston, South Carolina in both 1900 and 1910. So, the odds of an identity switch were pretty low. We were also able to find birth records for all but one of Ernest's siblings (at least for those born before 1910; I didn't aggressively check the ones born later because they were less relevant to verifying Ernest) and based on the total number of children that Ernest's mother had in 1910, all of the children that she had are accounted for (Ernest's elder brother James Peronneau, born in 1898, died in 1909). In fact, there is even an extra child in 1910 relative to what was claimed, which, together with her absence on the Peronneau family's 1900 US Census entry, suggests that Ethel Peronneau might have been adopted (she was already born in 1900 but only living with the Peronneau family in 1910, not in 1900). The fact that all of the Peronneau siblings (at least those born before 1910) are accounted for on the 1910 US Census (James Peronneau's 1909 death record is an almost perfect match with his 1898 birth record and his 1900 US Census entry), the fact that there are no plausible candidates for an identity switch for Ernest Peronneau's parents, the fact that his parents lived in the same area (Charleston, South Carolina) between at least 1898 and at least 1910, and the fact that Ernest Peronneau claimed almost the same birth date for at least 70+ years (his WWII draft card gives March 6, 1903; his birth record gives March 7, 1902; he claimed March 6, 1902 very late in his life) does suggest that the 1902 birth record is indeed for him, in spite of his mother's maiden name being accidentally misspelled on it. We simply couldn't find any marriage or birth records for any other children for a James Peronneau and a Florence James (as opposed to a Florence Spencer), and given just how rare the names James Peronneau and Florence are, we strongly suspect that any kind of identity switch is unlikely, especially for it to be in the very same area while the original James and Florence Peronneau were still alive.

FWIW, I was able to confirm with 100% certainty that the WWII draft registration card for an Ernest Peronneau from New York is indeed for the very same man who died in 2014 because the other person listed on it, Gertrude Odems, is without a doubt one of his maternal aunts. Here is Gertrude Odems's documentation:

https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/sources/GJ5W-FC5