Well Ain't That a Kick in the Head?

Remove all ads!

104-year old strongman, still the picture of health, dies when he gets hit by a mini-van. What a way to go.

Story.

 

What a bitter, bitter irony.

 

Wait...you mean he didn't grab the van and toss it over his head?

What a shame, it would have been interesting to see how much longer a "model of health" would continue to live, and how he would eventaully die of natural causes.

It sounds like this guy wasn't done living.

 

There was a news article of a woman who run over an elderly woman (80yo) I found yesterday (I don't think it was on SP, I was a little out of it though) where the woman ran over this old woman, then drove home.

With the woman still stuck in the windshield. She then got out the car and went into her home. Her boyfriend saw the body embedded in the car and called the police.

She faces 17 years or a £13,500 fine.

Seemed to be the day for running down wrinklies

 

That doesn't really seem like even punishments... 17 years in jail or 13 grand? That's probably less than the car she hit the woman with!


It would have been cool to see how long he lived before he died naturally, to see how much exercise and diet can truly prolong your life.

 

17 years or £13,500 fine, that's like about £795 per year. Doesn't sound like justice.

 

The bizzaro part of the story with the 104-year old guy is that the mini-van that hit him, with the exception of a non-functioning horn, was in good condition. There wasn't a failure in brakes, the driver was not speeding, or under the influence of drugs or alcohol. The only charge police are intending to hand out to the driver is a citation for his horn not working. They are not anticipating levying any charges regarding the man's death. It sounds like it was just a freak accident.

 

Was it the man's fault for walking out in the middle of traffic/while the crossing light wasn't white?

 

I'd say this was more like a 'Knee to the Groin' type of incident.

 

Wow! This look like a Final Destination type of death! Like Saver said, it would have been nice to see him live out his life to see what a healthy lifestyle can do to your lifespan (although sure, one case isn't a study). At least he didn't die of a horrible disease or something. Gotta be grateful for that!

 

At 104 he could bend a quarter with his fingers. There is not a stronger case for genes being the strongest determining factor for whatever trait you wish to examine.....physical feats are just easier to quantify. The man was not able to bend a coin with his fingers as a centenarian because his parents treated him well or because he ate carrots at every meal and never had a coctail.

As for his end, it is no more tragic than anyone else's death who is caused by a soccer-mom mass-transit-device......I've never been one to mourn potential.

 

Nunsbane, that's a huge assumption. I'd assume he could bend quarters with his fingers because he regularly exercised his fingers. In order to show it was genetics, you'd have to show either that he did this without any out of the ordinary behavior (exercise, meditation, diets, anything) or that it was something that ran in the family (his father lived that long and could bend quarters, as could his father and his father, etc.

As for potential, my opinion is that we all have our time, and the end of that time isn't always expected.

 

NOG,
I propose a challenge for you. Excercise your fingers constantly for the next 10 years and then attempt to bend a quarter. You will fail.....and you will be only 35 years old.

I am stronger than most of the males that I know, at almost 6' 1" and currently 230 lbs. I can press 270 lbs. I personally know a man who is literally twice as strong as myself and he cannot bend a quarter with his fingers and figures that he could not even with training. And he claims that his father is the strongest man he ever knew....and he figures that his father could not bend a quarter with his fingers.

I once read of a 14 year-old girl who was 5' 10" 280 lbs. and could lift 300 lbs. over her head. There is no other explanation than that she had genes that made her exceptionally strong. I can lift 300lbs. from the ground but doubt that I could lift it over my head even with years of intensive training....that 14 year old girl is stronger than I am, even when I weighed 280 lbs.

With enough knowledge gained from experience my assumption is not that huge.

 

I tend to agree with Nunsbane. While strength can certainly be increased with training (or decreased due to lack of activity), I believe that there are individual minimums and maximums for each person, and that the ability to bend a quarter with one's fingers lies beyond the range of nearly everyone's personal maximum.

This guy also was able to squat 3200 pounds in his youth. I am activly involved in weight training, and have been for years. By your logic, since I've regularly excercised these muscle groups for the past couple of decades, I should be able to squat 3200 pounds, when in reality I can only do about 1/10th of that. Sure, if this guy didn't use these muscles regularly he would not have maintained the ability to do this as he advanced to very old age, but it seems absurd to think that the physical feats he was capable of performing were due solely to hard work on his part.

(I think the same applies to professional athletes. While they certainly work hard at their craft, they also possess genes that make them considerably bigger/stronger/faster than the average person.)

EDIT: Also, while traits are inherited, it's not like they're inherited in precise compnents. I don't know if this guy had any children, but if he does, chances are they cannot bend quarters with their fingers. Just like most professional athletes don't have children who become professional athletes. Ken Griffey Jr. (father Ken Griffey Sr.) and Peyton/Eli Manning (father Archie) are more the exception that the rule. Michael Jordon has teenage children, and none of them are exceptional basketball players.

 

My point is that both genetics and training come into effect. Yes, there are some peope with phenomenal physical advantages over the average, but muscles need to be exercised in order to develop. On top of that, how they're exercised durring the formative years can radically impact how the bones develop. For example, if you train with an English longbow from an age of 10, regularly, the stress on your bones will alter the way the bones in your arms and shoulders grow. If you start when you're 20, no matter how long you work at it, you can never get the same impact on your bones. A 20-year-old who's been doing it for 10 years is immensely better at it than a 30-year-old who's been doing it for 10 years.

My point is that the actual mechanics of muscle development are much more complex than simply one factor. The guy in question would not be able to do any of that if he spent most of his life sitting around doing nothing. Muscles would attrophy and he's be weak, no matter what his genetics said. Likewise, the average person will never be able to achieve such heights, no matter how much they exercise. This guy was a combination of exercise, genetics (probably on at least two levels), diet, and probably a couple dozen other factors.

That's wonderful, but that's arm strength, not finger strength, isn't it? My older brother is a big guy, and pretty strong, too. I don't know how much he can bench press, but it's probably around 220 or so. My mother-in-law is a typical small english woman, but she's been playing violin, viola, flute, piano, guitar, and every other instrument I know of for years, professionally. She isn't much in arm-muscle, but her fingers are like vices! Never play Mercy with a classically-trained musician, not unless they're a drummer.

 

He can bent a quarter with his fingers... I can bend 2 hundred dollar bills with just one of my little finger.

Seriously, was it truly 'defective horn' or he got problems with his hearing?