Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Judi Lynn

(160,527 posts)
Thu Dec 13, 2012, 03:35 PM Dec 2012

We’re living longer, but sicker: Study finds life expectancy rising but so is disability

We’re living longer, but sicker: Study finds life expectancy rising but so is disability
Article by: MARIA CHENG , Associated Press
Updated: December 13, 2012 - 11:45 AM

LONDON - Nearly everywhere around the world, people are living longer and fewer children are dying. But increasingly, people are grappling with the diseases and disabilities of modern life, according to the most expansive global look so far at life expectancy and the biggest health threats.

The last comprehensive study was in 1990 and the top health problem then was the death of children under 5 — more than 10 million each year. Since then, campaigns to vaccinate kids against diseases like polio and measles have reduced the number of children dying to about 7 million.

Malnutrition was once the main health threat for children. Now, everywhere except Africa, they are much more likely to overeat than to starve.

With more children surviving, chronic illnesses and disabilities that strike later in life are taking a bigger toll, the research said. High blood pressure has become the leading health risk worldwide, followed by smoking and alcohol.

More:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/dec/13/senate-pressure-cia-interrogation-torture

6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
We’re living longer, but sicker: Study finds life expectancy rising but so is disability (Original Post) Judi Lynn Dec 2012 OP
I'm not surprised PopeOxycontinI Dec 2012 #1
The Ancient Greek myth of Tithonius comes to mind. Odin2005 Dec 2012 #2
I don't think that you have to worry about that! Sam1 Dec 2012 #3
Of course not. Igel Dec 2012 #4
Perhaps it's because more men than women having given up smoking in the last 40 years muriel_volestrangler Dec 2012 #6
A correct link: muriel_volestrangler Dec 2012 #5

PopeOxycontinI

(176 posts)
1. I'm not surprised
Thu Dec 13, 2012, 05:09 PM
Dec 2012

I'm not knocking longer lives...but I don't I wanna live to be 90 if that last decade consists largely
of shitting a diaper and being barely mobile. 75-80 reasonably healthy years is good, thanks.

Odin2005

(53,521 posts)
2. The Ancient Greek myth of Tithonius comes to mind.
Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:11 AM
Dec 2012

He falls in love with the goddess Eos, and she begs Zeus to give Tithonius immortality. He gets it, but she forgot to ask for eternal youth, too.

Sam1

(498 posts)
3. I don't think that you have to worry about that!
Fri Dec 14, 2012, 11:25 AM
Dec 2012

The stuff that I have read indicates that life expectancy when measured at say age 65 hasn't changed that much in the last 40 or 50 years. The dramatic increases in life expectancy have come form the fact that more individuals make it out of childhood not that 65year olds are living longer.

Igel

(35,300 posts)
4. Of course not.
Fri Dec 14, 2012, 08:10 PM
Dec 2012

The term you want is "expectation of life."

The primary reason to worry about expectation of life in current political discourse is because of wrangles over Social Security.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005140.html seems reasonable. I found one at Berkeley a few weeks ago, but it's not popping up in my list of Google hits this time.

In 1940, expectation of life at age 60 for white males was a little over 15 years. In 2004, it was 20.9. By 2010 it was probably a solid 6 years greater. If we just deduct 5 years from those numbers for aged 65 (probably close enough for argument's sake), then we'd be looking at a difference of 10 years (1940) versus 16 years (2004). It may not be decades, but that's a hefty addition to the post-retirement years. And that's white males. It's around 7 additional years for white females.

For the last 50 years, that would be around 5 years (white males) and 4 years (white females). Odd asymmetry there for males and females, not sure I really understand it.

muriel_volestrangler

(101,315 posts)
6. Perhaps it's because more men than women having given up smoking in the last 40 years
Sat Dec 15, 2012, 10:33 AM
Dec 2012

The smoking rates, 40 years ago, could have been putting the male expectancy a year lower than it 'ought' to be.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»We’re living longer, but ...