Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Real_Topic_7655 t1_j713aq5 wrote

Is that 210 in human years?

6

Mkengine t1_j71vw3n wrote

According to this paper, the conversion is not linear but logarithmic, following the formula: human age = 16*ln(dog_age) + 31 Which brings his age to 85.8 human years. Here you can see this in a graphic, taken from the first figure of the publication.

2

theelljar OP t1_j74r14o wrote

i don't think I'm buying that calculation. 85 really isn't that old in human years. if that were really the equivalent, one would expect dogs to be living into their 20s on a regular basis.

3

Mkengine t1_j7ao77h wrote

I also thought about it again and took a closer look at the paper. Their sample includes dogs in the age of 0 to 15 years, so our calculated age is extrapolated. Probably the formula works in their range quite well, but at twice the age of their maximum age, the formula is perhaps no longer applicable. His age is probably somewhere between this result and the conventional formula.

1