Are people really living longer?
Discussion
I know there has been some remarkable progress in medical science meaning many can live through what previously would’ve killed em.
But those people don’t seem to go on to live to 90+
We used to have huge wars that killed thousands. That would hugely depress life expectancy stats.
Many used to die before their first birthday and mother’s died giving birth.
Huge numbers died on the roads and in industrial accidents. So again these would reduce life expectancy.
People who got beyond there first year back in the day often got to a similar age as people now.
It strikes me that if you get to 80 we still say you’ve had a good innings.
Why aren’t we living routinely to 120?
Even the bible quotes three score years and 10 (70) So are all the efforts really showing an improvement?
But those people don’t seem to go on to live to 90+
We used to have huge wars that killed thousands. That would hugely depress life expectancy stats.
Many used to die before their first birthday and mother’s died giving birth.
Huge numbers died on the roads and in industrial accidents. So again these would reduce life expectancy.
People who got beyond there first year back in the day often got to a similar age as people now.
It strikes me that if you get to 80 we still say you’ve had a good innings.
Why aren’t we living routinely to 120?
Even the bible quotes three score years and 10 (70) So are all the efforts really showing an improvement?
The improvement is that we have a better chance of living to old age, and then manage to struggle on through it a bit longer. The number of centenarians in the UK has almost doubled in the last 20 years.The biological limit still seems to be around 110-120 but we now tend to get closer to it.
It's an interesting question, but I'm sure that life expectancy stats are corrected to exclude things such as wars and premature deaths by industrial/road traffic accidents etc. so the changes over the past 100 years are more like comparing apples with apples.
A more interesting discussion in my opinion is the almost unbelievable differences in the expectancy of "years of good health" in different parts of the UK. This was in the news earlier in the week, and really highlights the inequalities between wealthy and poor areas in this country, and not just the usual north South divide, but even some.fairly huge differences between suburbs in the same town. I think the biggest difference was 47yrs v 83yrs!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-43317918
A more interesting discussion in my opinion is the almost unbelievable differences in the expectancy of "years of good health" in different parts of the UK. This was in the news earlier in the week, and really highlights the inequalities between wealthy and poor areas in this country, and not just the usual north South divide, but even some.fairly huge differences between suburbs in the same town. I think the biggest difference was 47yrs v 83yrs!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-43317918
No statistics but to me it seems like plenty of people made it thru the war and lived in rude health until their 80s, like my grandad, who made it to 89.
No processed food or huge portions.
These days everyone seems to be dropping in their 50s and 60s.
More pollution, crap food, mega portions. Hardly anyone does a labour intensive job too.
No processed food or huge portions.
These days everyone seems to be dropping in their 50s and 60s.
More pollution, crap food, mega portions. Hardly anyone does a labour intensive job too.
parabolica said:
condor said:
I don't think so- it's a pretend excuse of why the government is increasing pension age.
I had to double check to make sure this wasn't a Yipper post.
I do think that it's a ridiculous claim - people from much earlier generations are living to a ripe old age ie. those born around 1920-30.
Baby boomers have a high rate of cancer - breast and prostate, possibly due to processed meats, and cigarette smoking being the norm.
Youngsters are now at high rate of obesity, and more prone to drug temptations.
Edited by condor on Sunday 11th March 19:00
Again, no stats but I'd be very surprised at that. Most smoked and / or ate ahitloads of fried food.
Manual labour / industry fcked many people far before their time... Lungs, backs, pre h + s stuff
Manual labour / industry fcked many people far before their time... Lungs, backs, pre h + s stuff
croyde said:
No statistics but to me it seems like plenty of people made it thru the war and lived in rude health until their 80s, like my grandad, who made it to 89.
No processed food or huge portions.
These days everyone seems to be dropping in their 50s and 60s.
More pollution, crap food, mega portions. Hardly anyone does a labour intensive job too.
No processed food or huge portions.
These days everyone seems to be dropping in their 50s and 60s.
More pollution, crap food, mega portions. Hardly anyone does a labour intensive job too.
TeaNoSugar said:
I'm sure that life expectancy stats are corrected to exclude things such as wars and premature deaths by industrial/road traffic accidents etc.
I rather doubt that.My F-i-L had a heart attack in his 60s which in early decades would probably have finished him off. He lasted until he was 99.
M-i-L had a serious illness when she was about 70, which again would have been untreatable a generation earlier. She's still going strong at 98.
croyde said:
No statistics but to me it seems like plenty of people made it thru the war and lived in rude health until their 80s, like my grandad, who made it to 89.
No processed food or huge portions.
These days everyone seems to be dropping in their 50s and 60s.
More pollution, crap food, mega portions. Hardly anyone does a labour intensive job too.
Sounds like surviorship bias - counting those that lived to old age but ignoring those who died early.No processed food or huge portions.
These days everyone seems to be dropping in their 50s and 60s.
More pollution, crap food, mega portions. Hardly anyone does a labour intensive job too.
croyde said:
No statistics but to me it seems like plenty of people made it thru the war and lived in rude health until their 80s, like my grandad, who made it to 89.
No processed food or huge portions.
These days everyone seems to be dropping in their 50s and 60s.
More pollution, crap food, mega portions. Hardly anyone does a labour intensive job too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Smog_of_LondonNo processed food or huge portions.
These days everyone seems to be dropping in their 50s and 60s.
More pollution, crap food, mega portions. Hardly anyone does a labour intensive job too.
My granny made it to 94 (died 5 years ago this year), she lived in her own house on her own in the centre of town, slept upstairs (no stairlift), walked to church every Sunday (1/4 mile); very sharp till her last days; ultimately cancer got her.
My grandma is still going strong, both mentally and physically; 97 (98 this year but looks at least a decade younger), lives in her own self contained flat in a warden assisted block, she can easily walk into her town by herself (she has a trolley thing on wheels to help her), she frequently takes her grandkids (adults), out for lunch and will always have a large glass of wine with her meal. Sad thing is I think she's just waiting to go, all her friends are popping off and I think ultimately she's had enough of life, she has an aortic aneurysm which cannot be operated on due to her age and I know she hopes it will take her as it will be very quick, she is very worried she'll be a burden and end her days suffering.
I remember the last time we saw my grandma, we had a laugh as the wife takes 5 tablets a day; my grandma takes 1!
Then you have my dad, died at 65, 3 years ago due to heart issues; he just didn't wake up and there was no warning, however he wasn't the healthiest person.
My mum is 70 next month, fit as a fiddle and no signs of letting up but she does look after herself; eats well, rarely drinks, active and busy.
My grandma is still going strong, both mentally and physically; 97 (98 this year but looks at least a decade younger), lives in her own self contained flat in a warden assisted block, she can easily walk into her town by herself (she has a trolley thing on wheels to help her), she frequently takes her grandkids (adults), out for lunch and will always have a large glass of wine with her meal. Sad thing is I think she's just waiting to go, all her friends are popping off and I think ultimately she's had enough of life, she has an aortic aneurysm which cannot be operated on due to her age and I know she hopes it will take her as it will be very quick, she is very worried she'll be a burden and end her days suffering.
I remember the last time we saw my grandma, we had a laugh as the wife takes 5 tablets a day; my grandma takes 1!
Then you have my dad, died at 65, 3 years ago due to heart issues; he just didn't wake up and there was no warning, however he wasn't the healthiest person.
My mum is 70 next month, fit as a fiddle and no signs of letting up but she does look after herself; eats well, rarely drinks, active and busy.
Edited by HTP99 on Sunday 11th March 19:55
Think it's also a bit of a 'postcode lottery' with life expectancy in some deprived areas being very much lower.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2006/jan/21/he...
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2006/jan/21/he...
Edited by drainbrain on Sunday 11th March 20:28
Child mortality rates have plummeted over the last 80 years meaning life expectancy at birth is much higher than it was. It has always been the case that if you survive into adulthood without any major illnesses you stand a pretty good chance of reaching a ripe old age (by that i mean 70 -80).
Any increases in life expectancy over the next 80 years is going to be more difficult to realise, as those gains are going to come from increasing actual longevity rather than eliminating the premature deaths of children.
A case in point; my father reached 80 having not seen a Dr since he left the army in the late 50s. He then had to have a heart valve replaced, had a pacemaker fitted and is now reasonably well at 82, but has required a huge amount of medical intervention to maintain that. In days gone by he would have maybe made 81, now he could be with us another 10 years or more (which is great).
However the amount of effort and resource to extend his life by 10-15 years is much greater than extending a child's life by 60-70 years by supplying clean water or vaccinations.
Without some pretty major break-throughs in re-generational medicine and long term prophylactic treatment of terminal diseases (heart disease, cancer neurodegeneration) life expectancy probably won't increase a lot more. i.e. I have a good statistical chance of reaching 80 but i doubt by 9 year old son will have a much greater chance than me.
Any increases in life expectancy over the next 80 years is going to be more difficult to realise, as those gains are going to come from increasing actual longevity rather than eliminating the premature deaths of children.
A case in point; my father reached 80 having not seen a Dr since he left the army in the late 50s. He then had to have a heart valve replaced, had a pacemaker fitted and is now reasonably well at 82, but has required a huge amount of medical intervention to maintain that. In days gone by he would have maybe made 81, now he could be with us another 10 years or more (which is great).
However the amount of effort and resource to extend his life by 10-15 years is much greater than extending a child's life by 60-70 years by supplying clean water or vaccinations.
Without some pretty major break-throughs in re-generational medicine and long term prophylactic treatment of terminal diseases (heart disease, cancer neurodegeneration) life expectancy probably won't increase a lot more. i.e. I have a good statistical chance of reaching 80 but i doubt by 9 year old son will have a much greater chance than me.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff