Re: 40 Year Old Vs 65 Year Old American Hitting 90
 

[ QUOTE ]
mortality rates have increased (due in part to advancements in medicine)

[/ QUOTE ]

That's discouraging. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Re: 40 Year Old Vs 65 Year Old American Hitting 90
 

[ QUOTE ]

Ah. So you just wanna troll?

Well then, by all means... Carry on.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think it is trolling to suggest that these wannabe exercises in thought approach being just the opposite.

Re: 40 Year Old Vs 65 Year Old American Hitting 90
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
mortality rates have increased (due in part to advancements in medicine)

[/ QUOTE ]

That's discouraging. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Ugh.

Re: 40 Year Old Vs 65 Year Old American Hitting 90
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It amuses me how much we can talk about such things and even purport to do so logically and intelligently without referring to life tables.

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, they're not that significant. The great majority of 40 yos make it to 65, so the question becomes one of medical advancement and the avoidance of large scale threats to survival.

I have to go with medicine. 25 years will see many of the aging related diseases cured or at least well managed, particularly the big killers of cancer and heart disease.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you've reviewed life tables and watched how they've changed as mortality rates have increased (due in part to advancements in medicine) and you've found they have little to bear on the present question that isn't eclipsed by your ability to predict watershed advancements in medicine radically affecting mortality rates in the next 25 years. Fascinating.

As long as we are bloviating, I predict changes in preventative medicine will have a greater affect on mortality rates in the next 40 years than advancements in chronic care.

[/ QUOTE ]
Fine, if you want to be an [censored] about it, then I'll show that the numbers are exactly as everyone suspects without looking at your tables.

95.3% remain alive at 40.
80% remain alive at 65.
17% remain alive at 90.

Just as everyone knows from common experience, mortality goes way up after 65 or so. Just as everyone also knows, the proportion of people making it to 90 has gone up greatly over time. See the graph below, page 6:
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr54/nvsr54_14.pdf

Monster increase even from the 1950s.

Just as everyone also knows, drugs and better medical/emergency care have played a big part in increasing the longevity of the old, and there is little reason to think that's going to stop and every reason to think it's going to accelerate.

I agree with you on preventative medicine obviously, but it won't matter. By the time we're messing with genes sufficiently to prevent things like the majority of cancer and heart disease, we'll have some pretty advanced treatments.

None of these tables were necessary...this stuff is everyday knowledge for most people.

Re: 40 Year Old Vs 65 Year Old American Hitting 90
 

[ QUOTE ]
None of these tables were necessary...this stuff is everyday knowledge for most people.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please. It is more compelling to say, "I think our progress on the genome and advancements in fractional friggeroftery make today's 40 year old a solid favourite to live more total years on the planet than today's 65 year old" than to say, "Comparing the migration in 50 years of life tables of 40 and 65 year old male life expectancies indicates..." Not only is it more compelling, but it is compelling because everybody knows what is in the life tables.

Re: 40 Year Old Vs 65 Year Old American Hitting 90
 

I admire your turn of phrase but Mr. Sklansky had a question which is still going unanswered.

Re: 40 Year Old Vs 65 Year Old American Hitting 90
 

[ QUOTE ]
It amuses me how much we can talk about such things and even purport to do so logically and intelligently without referring to life tables.

[/ QUOTE ]

I found some life tables. The stupid site put my computer into an infinite loop.

Re: 40 Year Old Vs 65 Year Old American Hitting 90
 

[ QUOTE ]

95.3% remain alive at 40.
80% remain alive at 65.
17% remain alive at 90.


[/ QUOTE ]

Those numbers seem awfully high. What about wars and
auto accidents? Or just random violence. That ought
to kill off a few.

Re: 40 Year Old Vs 65 Year Old American Hitting 90
 

[ QUOTE ]
I admire your turn of phrase but Mr. Sklansky had a question which is still going unanswered.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll take the 65 year old.

Happy?

Re: 40 Year Old Vs 65 Year Old American Hitting 90
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

95.3% remain alive at 40.
80% remain alive at 65.
17% remain alive at 90.


[/ QUOTE ]

Those numbers seem awfully high. What about wars and
auto accidents? Or just random violence. That ought
to kill off a few.

[/ QUOTE ]

Those crazy actuaries consider exposure to risk, too.