Breaking the Age Code is burdened with both the demands of scientific rigor and the need to support the author's thesis that “negative age beliefs that dominate in the US and other ageist countries.” (Amazon blurb) And it apparently aims to do so in a way that will appeal to mass market readers. In other words, it sets out to accomplish a nearly impossible task.
It is hard to write a book on science aimed at the popular market. Science is all about detail and logical exposition, and good science is generally messy. We saw that as we watched science play out in real time and headlines during the first year of COVID. Explaining science accurately in the language of average readers is difficult, and few are good at it (Stephen Hawking springs to mind). A common approach is to break the complex story into nuggets of information and to use personal stories to humanize difficult-to-digest data This reaches bottom in Internet sales pitches of health products that keep the reader stringing along until the price tag finally comes clear (“but today you get two for one”). But it’s a tried and true technique that has made self-help books popular. Which makes it an editor’s go-to option. I can’t help but imagine the meeting between the author and her agent or publisher:
Pub: Doctor, what an exciting project you have brought us. Every oldster will want a copy.
Doc: Yes, we are excited to present our research—and, uhh, "oldster" is an example of the endemic ageism in—
Pub: (nods impatiently) We’ll need somewhat more, uhh, punchy text. You see, people want to read stories, not just facts and logic. People … we need real people. And famous people or unusual stories.
Doc: But single instances don’t make the case. The 100-year-old Japanese woman is an outlier, as is the iron nun.
Pub: Yeah, but people will love them. They can relate to them.
Doc: But the data …
Pub: You mean footnotes, bibliography, that kind of stuff? Definitely convincing. But too complex. Basically, you need to cut a lot of the rationale, get to the point quicker. But I like the graphs, particularly the ones with straight lines. Worry not. This is a killer concept. I’ll have Marketing work through the text … I think they’ve got Morgan Freeman on the hook for an interview.
That's not to belittle the research that went into this, and the old guy in me is tempted to believe the conclusion (oops. Ageism.) Had it been presented in 100 pages or so with all the bibliography attached, it would have been strong. But the selective presentation, for example, of the glories of centenarian worship in Japan without much mention of the fish and vegetables based diet and low level of obesity in the periods studied raised questions. Yes, there was passing mention of epigenetics, but more or less as a way of excusing the need to address that fish and vegetable diet. Larding the text with examples of remarkable old people (yes, there are old healthy old people, and the ones mentioned are statistical outliers) makes good reading but poor science. Levy notes (p. 95) the average age of Nobel Laureates is 65 (so, there!). Surely she knows Nobels usually arrive as the result of work being evaluated over decades. She goes on to as support for old age being “not the result of a single gene” (to which the appropriate scientific answer is “Duh”) and is presumably aware that one of the breakthroughs in the study that supports her point is that of telomeres, but possibly unaware that the original research was done in 1975 and resulted in a Nobel thirty-four years later in 2009. Many of the hard sciences are this way.
All in all, a lot of interesting research that the author has made available through notes and bibliography, but which is diluted by selective presentation. One can only assume that an editor without much scientific background made cuts and tucks to make the idea more “punchy.” But that just may be the suspicious nature of an older reader at work.