Centenarian data is most likely largely fake, actually, especially in the so-called "blue zones". Have a look at this guy's research: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/ioe/news/2024/sep/ucl-demographers-work-debunking-blue-zone-regions-exceptional-lifespans-wins-ig-nobel-prize
People in blue areas aren't even more healthy than the general population of their country, but usually less. These are usually fairly poor and remote areas, and general life expectancy isn't particularly high, either - they just supposedly have more people who get extremely old, but even in these areas, people who get >100 years old are quite rare.
On top of that, studies that look at biological markers for old age found that with these markers you can predict the person's official age quite accurately until they're about 90, but when they're 110 or older, the markers consistently report that they're 8-20 years younger than they are officially. The mainstream explanation is that the markers just don't work the same way on extra-old people (i.e. they biologically age slower), but the alternative explanation is that most or all of these extremely old people have misrecorded ages (intentionally or unintentionally).