Average age of death

MalMonroe

hugheskevi said:

ukdw said:

A bit like average life expectancy getting later the older you get (as averages are dragged down by people who die young)
 I suspect that healthy life expectancy works in the same way.

And it is important to remember that around 70% of those aged about 60 are overweight, whilst about 15% smoke. Only about 60% of those aged about 60 are active, Only about 30% are eating 5+ portions of fruit and vegetables per day. So a lot of the pool of people for whom the averages are calculated are not in good health and not looking after themselves.

So if you are alive and well at 60, are active with a healthy weight and diet, although there are never any guarantees, you have much better chances of many years of healthy life expectancy than the very large numbers who are not looking after themselves. The average number of years of healthy life expectancy at that point would be about 13 for a man.

A guy in his 60s in a 5 mile trail race I ran on Wednesday night finished in 37 minutes - running faster than 7 and a half minute miles over trails and hills at that age is impressive, and I would say he looked like he was in his 40s from his appearance.

Please can you provide a link to the research for the figures and data you quote above (in bold)?  How on earth can you state that 'around 70% of those aged about 60 are overweight and 15% smoke'?  Who says that only about 30% are eating 5+ portions of fruit and vet a day?? And who actually says that fruit - with its hidden sugar content and tendency to cause type 1 diabetes if eaten too often - is actually good for anyone? Research and facts, as well as professional opinions, are changing all the time. I'd like to see which reports you have been reading.

I'm 71 and resent your inference that people who are older than 60 are way past it. Not all of us are. Many of us now don't 'look our age' - because what is any age supposed to look like? I know people of 51 who look older than me. 

One of my friends who was extremely fit, never smoked, didn't drink much alcohol, taught yoga and was slim throughout his life suddenly died of a heart attack a few years ago, aged 60. Similar story with someone I was at school with, who was teetotal, fit and active and never smoked. Collapsed and died when we were 59. Yet a relative of mine who has smoked since she was 15 and drinks like a fish has reached the age of 70 with only minor health problems. 

It does not follow that if people look after themselves and stay fit, they will live longer. Sadly life just doesn't work like that and it's naive of anybody to think it does.

A prime example of fit and healthy people sometimes dying too soon is the ironic case of the American James F. Fixx - who started a jogging craze in the 1970s with his best-selling books about running and preached the gospel that active people live longer who died of a heart attack while on a solitary jog in Vermont. He was 52.

MalMonroe

sevenhills said:

Just reading about the £1,000 per week for a care home and a poster thinking about downsizing by the age of 80.

Down-sizing at 80 sounded quite optimistic to me.

"From 2017 to 2019 healthy life expectancy (HLE) at birth in the UK for males was 62.9 years, showing no significant change since 2014 to 2016; however, HLE for females showed a significant decrease from 63.7 years in 2014 to 2016 to 63.3 years in 2017 to 2019

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/healthandlifeexpectancies/bulletins/healthstatelifeexpectanciesuk/2017to2019

That 62.9 figure is quite shocking, since I only have 3 years to go, with UK life expectancy at 81.2 perhaps we should take the figure with a pinch of salt!

It does make you think about what we should plan for?

Just enjoy your life. Who says you're going to need to go into a care home anyway? And if you do, then you won't have to pay if you can't afford it. But let's just say you won't need to. 

Don't believe everything you read, either. Yes, let's just take those figures with a pinch of salt. What should we plan for? Me, I'm planning on travelling again, as soon as I feel it's safe to do so. I'm 71 now and intend to carry on enjoying myself. You should too.

hugheskevi

MalMonroe said:

hugheskevi said:

ukdw said:

A bit like average life expectancy getting later the older you get (as averages are dragged down by people who die young)
 I suspect that healthy life expectancy works in the same way.

And it is important to remember that around 70% of those aged about 60 are overweight, whilst about 15% smoke. Only about 60% of those aged about 60 are active, Only about 30% are eating 5+ portions of fruit and vegetables per day. So a lot of the pool of people for whom the averages are calculated are not in good health and not looking after themselves.

So if you are alive and well at 60, are active with a healthy weight and diet, although there are never any guarantees, you have much better chances of many years of healthy life expectancy than the very large numbers who are not looking after themselves. The average number of years of healthy life expectancy at that point would be about 13 for a man.

A guy in his 60s in a 5 mile trail race I ran on Wednesday night finished in 37 minutes - running faster than 7 and a half minute miles over trails and hills at that age is impressive, and I would say he looked like he was in his 40s from his appearance.

Please can you provide a link to the research for the figures and data you quote above (in bold)?  How on earth can you state that 'around 70% of those aged about 60 are overweight and 15% smoke'?  Who says that only about 30% are eating 5+ portions of fruit and vet a day?? And who actually says that fruit - with its hidden sugar content and tendency to cause type 1 diabetes if eaten too often - is actually good for anyone? Research and facts, as well as professional opinions, are changing all the time. I'd like to see which reports you have been reading.

There were hyperlinks against each statistic. Maybe need a few more carrots for the eyesight

MalMonroe said:

I'm 71 and resent your inference that people who are older than 60 are way past it. Not all of us are. Many of us now don't 'look our age' - because what is any age supposed to look like? I know people of 51 who look older than me.

Which statement are you taking as an inference that those aged 60 are way past it? I don't see anything in my text which suggests such an inference, quite the reverse in fact.

One of my friends who was extremely fit, never smoked, didn't drink much alcohol, taught yoga and was slim throughout his life suddenly died of a heart attack a few years ago, aged 60. Similar story with someone I was at school with, who was teetotal, fit and active and never smoked. Collapsed and died when we were 59. Yet a relative of mine who has smoked since she was 15 and drinks like a fish has reached the age of 70 with only minor health problems.

Anecdotes are not evidence. Unless you actually think health outcomes are random, and not explained by lifestyle choices which is unlikely. Probability distributions have outliers.

It does not follow that if people look after themselves and stay fit, they will live longer. Sadly life just doesn't work like that and it's naive of anybody to think it does.

Quite a statement, I guess you do think health outcomes are not explained by lifestyle choices after all. On that basis, I am happy to be naive (although I'd change 'will' to 'are likely to').

A prime example of fit and healthy people sometimes dying too soon is the ironic case of the American James F. Fixx - who started a jogging craze in the 1970s with his best-selling books about running and preached the gospel that active people live longer who died of a heart attack while on a solitary jog in Vermont. He was 52.

Anecdotes are not evidence. Probability distributions have outliers.

Aretnap

Linton said:

Average life expectancies are not a good basis on which to plan retirement.  You have a 50% chance of living longer... 

Nitpick alert!

That would be true of median life expectancy. However the standard "life expectancy" that is quoted is the mean figure, so it's not necessarily true that you have a 50% chance of exceeding the mean. I suspect that your chances of exceeding the "average" life expectancy are significantly higher than 50/50 as the mean is skewed by a small number of people who die very young. (Someone who dies as a child has a bigger impact on the average that someone who lives to 100). However I can't find figures for median life expectancy in a quick Google so I can't check that my assumption is correct.

(By a similar token, nearly everyone has more than the average number of legs...) 

cfw1994

Aretnap said:

Linton said:

Average life expectancies are not a good basis on which to plan retirement.  You have a 50% chance of living longer... 

Nitpick alert!

That would be true of median life expectancy. However the standard "life expectancy" that is quoted is the mean figure, so it's not necessarily true that you have a 50% chance of exceeding the mean. I suspect that your chances of exceeding the "average" life expectancy are significantly higher than 50/50 as the mean is skewed by a small number of people who die very young. (Someone who dies as a child has a bigger impact on the average that someone who lives to 100). However I can't find figures for median life expectancy in a quick Google so I can't check that my assumption is correct.

(By a similar token, nearly everyone has more than the average number of legs...) 

I’m stealing that last one!
I’m often reminded by social media that half the people around us are of below average intelligence 🤣
Of course, 87.3% of all statistics are made up on the spot 🤪

Back on topic…lifestyle can clearly have a bearing on things, but bad luck can strike anyone of us.….the trick is to be happy, healthy and try to become on of the ‘positive’ outliers, as hugheskevi describes them.  

If you want the sad but true picture, check out the grey wedge of death approaching us all up here….

LLAP, as Leonard Nimoy used to sign off 🖖

ex-pat_scot

sevenhills said:

hugheskevi said:

A guy in his 60s in a 5 mile trail race I ran on Wednesday night finished in 37 minutes - running faster than 7 and a half minute miles over trails and hills at that age is impressive, and I would say he looked like he was in his 40s from his appearance.

Some older cyclists just keep going and going, I was in the top 20% in some races in my 40s, now I struggle to do a park run due to arthritis, but not given up hope of running some more.

I'm a quarter of the way through my 50s.
I'm still competitive in these things- cycling and running - but the recovery is getting longer after each hard session.
My plan, such as it is, is to continue in these endeavours to keep the unhealthy away for as long as possible.
i am getting slower - I'll never hit a sub 3 marathon again - but I'm still fairly nippy when I push myself.

There are plenty of anecdotes of early healthy deaths and old age smokers, but this is about personal choice and responsibility.
I know (we all know!) that exercise, diet, sleep are three important foundations for making the most of your life chances.
Most seem to avoid this uncomfortable truth and revert back to the convenient anecdote that "justifies" inertia and laziness.

Linton

If you are interested in life expectancies I suggest you spend time looking at the data in https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/lifeexpectancies

In particular the "ex" values give you life expectancy at each age and the "lx" values are the number of people alive at that age starting from 100000 at age 0. 

You will see reference to period and cohort life expectancies - period being based on current death data and cohort based on expectations of future population health and medical advances.  Cohort is arguably more relevent since people dying now are far more likely to have smoked or worked in life shortening jobs for a significant amount of time than those dying in say 30 years time.  Sadly cohort data is only available for people born after 1980 however it is probably good enough for retirement planning purposes.

Terron

This is a rather confusing post. You seem to be taking the difference between average total life expectancy and average healthy life expectancy and saying that is how long people should plan for being in care. But not being in good health is not the same as needing care. Also there are different levels of care.

Health status estimates are based on the following survey question; ‘How is your health in general; would you say it was… very good, good, fair, bad, or very bad’. If a respondent answered ‘very good’ or ‘good’ they were classified as having ‘good’ health. Those who answered ‘fair’, ‘bad’, or ‘very bad’ were classified as having ‘not good’ health and equate to those in ’poor’ health in this chapter.

I would not expect someone who considers themselves to be fairly healthy to need care.

My mother spent more than 5 years before she died needing to use an oxygen concentrator for most of each day as her lungs were clogged up with tar. She was given a life expectancy of 3 years when she started. Certainly poor health, but she did not need to go into care. At the end she spent a month in hospital, then came home with twice daily visits after they said they could do nothing more for her.

My father had to retire with a heart condition when he was 60. He lived another 22 years, only receiving care in the last year, after my mother died.

Brenster

Well this is a cheery thread !!!

Terron

Brenster said:

Well this is a cheery thread !!!

OK. Here is a graph showing how life expectancy has increased.