Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Economic Exile

Do You Think Life Expectancy Is Increasing?

Recommended Posts

I read somewhere today that some millionaire, Lord Turner I think, says that pension age will have to be 70 sooner than "we" thought. The gist of it was that we were all living longer blah blah blah and that 60 is the new 40.

I think the man is seriously deluded about a huge whack of the UK population. I understand that there are people who enjoy their work and want to work but also that there are others who are bored, stressed and becoming increasingly unfit to carry out their job. My guess is that a majority would like some retirement time. There's also the question about where all these jobs are that are going to make us all workers.

I wonder though about life expectancy. My hunch is that it will go into decline. One reason I think this is because of food. I'm 56 and was brought up on local meat, fish,local and home grown veg and all home cooking. Nowadays when I go into a supermarket I think that most of it is chemical ridden crap. Even meat and veg is suspect with rearing and growing procedures. It's reported that there is an obesity epidemic and I think lots of us are overweight even a bit.

I think all these synthetic chemicals in the food chain might be doing untold harm to bodies.

My guess is that life expectancy will go down.

Thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there are two competing factors - and it's not clear which will win out.

If you have decent genes, are relatively wealthy, have access to great healthcare and take care of yourself, live a fulfilling life etc I reckon the opportunity is there to live a full and active life until well into your 90s.

The flip side is obesity and other lifestyle diseases have the potential to shorten or at least reduce the quality of our life - but again great healthcare will increasingly mitigate the worst of these.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was recently explored, in a round about way, here:

http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/index.php?showtopic=193565&st=0

:)

Thanks for the link to that. And thanks to other replies it's always interesting to read other peoples thoughts on things. Perhaps I should have done a search first before posting to see if there was a topic already?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the link to that. And thanks to other replies it's always interesting to read other peoples thoughts on things. Perhaps I should have done a search first before posting to see if there was a topic already?

Its ok, its not that sort of forum, "how do I rewire my unobtanium discombobulator?".

Just wanted to throw something in and southpaws are still ******ed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think life expectancy has recently decreased - the first blip since records began.

Heard a debate on it on R4 last week. Seems the fact was admitted by both sides, and the debate was whether it had been caused by government austerity policies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Confirming some of my fears and suspicions, it is said recently that women in the US had their average life expectancy decrease by about FIVE years (a few more women dying quite young in their 40s to 60s shifting it down I suppose, dying two to four decades younger than their mothers).

It could be a combination of American style poverty (high incidents of morbid obesity, cigarettes, booze, and meth) and the better off, brighter women being more subjected to the pressures of a high flying career (hotshot first female astronaut Sally Ride dropped dead from pancreatic cancer at the comparatively premature age of 61).

You've got to die from something and nobody's getting out of here alive, but I get the distinct impression that although cancer and aging could feasibly be conquered before this century is out, life expectancy could get worse or remain stagnant before it rises again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you rather live till 80 and retire at 70 or live till 70 and retire at 60?

I believe we will have so many people retiring due to ill health in the near future.

Can you imagine being a nurse at 68? or a teacher?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the poor, yes, for the rich, life expectancy is going to skyrocket.

.........also I think the poor will also have less access to certain expensive medical drugs and procedures......will we see something like productivity testing? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.........also I think the poor will also have less access to certain expensive medical drugs and procedures......will we see something like productivity testing? ;)

Stem cell therapy is already starting.

Let's imagine a rich man in future, his food all organically raised in his large garden by his domestic robots, access to stem cell therapy and by then the beginnings of gene therapy plus he will know exactly all the things that are best for his particular genome, how long do you think such a person will live?

The poor will mostly have gone by then but those left will live short and brutal lives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stem cell therapy is already starting.

Let's imagine a rich man in future, his food all organically raised in his large garden by his domestic robots, access to stem cell therapy and by then the beginnings of gene therapy plus he will know exactly all the things that are best for his particular genome, how long do you think such a person will live?

The poor will mostly have gone by then but those left will live short and brutal lives.

.....the rich will still have their weaknesses/addictions and will still be in competition for health, resources, knowledge and power.....the lucky poor will be those that work for the rich households/circles until they are no longer fit enough to work they become worn out... machines/robots can only ever do so much they also break down and or need to be fixed or replaced. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you imagine being a nurse at 68? or a teacher?

I don`t like the idea of being treated by a 65 year old surgeon, or scallywags being chased by a 65 year old copper. If they are not up to the job who now decides? Already coppers cannot be forcibly retired.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only reason someone is telling your that '60 is the new 70' or something is so that you will be a mindless pleb for longer and accept your ever decreasing 'lot' in life.

The only thing that has changed that could extend life is medicine and surgery, both of which have side effects and usually reduce quality of life.

However, we're fatter, and more stressed than ever. Crap food, crap job prospects for a lot of people, I also think a higher percentage of society are isolated and lonely.

No one really knows how your health will be one year from now, never mind 30 years away. So as cliched as it sounds, you really have to make the most of every day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don`t like the idea of being treated by a 65 year old surgeon, or scallywags being chased by a 65 year old copper. If they are not up to the job who now decides? Already coppers cannot be forcibly retired.

So in reality it is not how long life will be, more how good the quality of the life you do still have left will be....so why would someone of that age in well paying professions still be working full time, even if they loved their jobs they may not still have the energy to carry on in a highly effective way, change and rapid technology and practice changes also deter many older workers.....staying on as a part time mentor possibly, a sudden stopping of work is not the ideal way of doing things, a gradual flexible slowdown is far preferable........how many times have you heard they gave up work to then give up on life.....sudden changes again. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.....the rich will still have their weaknesses/addictions and will still be in competition for health, resources, knowledge and power.....the lucky poor will be those that work for the rich households/circles until they are no longer fit enough to work they become worn out... machines/robots can only ever do so much they also break down and or need to be fixed or replaced. ;)

The machines will fix themselves or take themselves to somewhere to be fixed.

The only reason to have domestic servants in about 50 years time will be if they are sh*ggable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The machines will fix themselves or take themselves to somewhere to be fixed.

The only reason to have domestic servants in about 50 years time will be if they are sh*ggable.

Surely there'll be sex robots within 50 years?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question of our times is which of the sexes will render the other obsolete. Men or women?

.....both men and women have their purposes.....anything only becomes obsolete when they are no longer required. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The machines will fix themselves or take themselves to somewhere to be fixed.

The only reason to have domestic servants in about 50 years time will be if they are sh*ggable.

I can't help thinking of some of the predictions of the future back in the 60s. We would all have so much leisure time; we would hardly need to eat - we'd just take pills with all the nutrients we needed.

They seem positively quaint now. As for the then fashion for stark, no-frills modernity in architecture and housing - who would ever have foreseen that 'period' would be so sought after and people would be busily putting back all the cornices and fireplaces they were equally busy ripping out back then?

And still nobody has invented a self-cleaning kitchen floor...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My wife comes from a rural village of about 5000 where everyone sort of knows each other; what people have observed is while those born approximately before WW2 are living longer than their parents and on the whole were quite active and healthy past their 60’s; their children, those born after WW2 are not faring so well and a higher proportion have not reached their parents age or have health problems, the pre WW2 generation had a more ‘primitive’ existence: more walking, physical work, very plain/bland local food and little excess drinking while their children had a lifestyle that we’d recognize today.

*edited for spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't help thinking of some of the predictions of the future back in the 60s. We would all have so much leisure time; we would hardly need to eat - we'd just take pills with all the nutrients we needed.

They seem positively quaint now. As for the then fashion for stark, no-frills modernity in architecture and housing - who would ever have foreseen that 'period' would be so sought after and people would be busily putting back all the cornices and fireplaces they were equally busy ripping out back then?

And still nobody has invented a self-cleaning kitchen floor...

You think my prediction was quaint?

I'm only predicting this extended easy life for a tiny minority, the poor will go to the wall.

Things are moving very much faster now than a few years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't help thinking of some of the predictions of the future back in the 60s. We would all have so much leisure time; we would hardly need to eat - we'd just take pills with all the nutrients we needed.

They seem positively quaint now. As for the then fashion for stark, no-frills modernity in architecture and housing - who would ever have foreseen that 'period' would be so sought after and people would be busily putting back all the cornices and fireplaces they were equally busy ripping out back then?

And still nobody has invented a self-cleaning kitchen floor...

....how about the dogsbody. :P

I don't necessarily agree that for the elderly 'period' is sort after...homes that are easy and economical to keep, are comfortable with no draughty windows...fireplaces are far too much work, cornices gather dust....more important is where the home is and the support services that surround that home...thinking of say, walking clubs, gardening clubs, lunch clubs, flower clubs, skittles or bowls, local surgery, shops, bus services, community groups etc etc....sheds/workshops and allotments. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My wife comes from a rural village of about 5000 where everyone sort of knows each other; what people have observed is while those born approximately before WW2 are living longer than their parents and on the whole were quite active and healthy past their 60’s; their children, those born after WW2 are not faring so well and a higher proportion have not reached their parents age or have health problems, the pre WW2 generation had a more ‘primitive’ existence: more walking, physical work, very plain/bland local food and little excess drinking while their children had a lifestyle that we’d recognize today.

*edited for spelling

This observation seems to mirror what many seem to be saying, that life expectancy has peaked for the majority of the population in the UK. We have a growth in poverty, something the UK is becoming really good at developing. I, like many here, feel increasingly despondent about the future for younger generations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My wife comes from a rural village of about 5000 where everyone sort of knows each other; what people have observed is while those born approximately before WW2 are living longer than their parents and on the whole were quite active and healthy past their 60’s; their children, those born after WW2 are not faring so well and a higher proportion have not reached their parents age or have health problems, the pre WW2 generation had a more ‘primitive’ existence: more walking, physical work, very plain/bland local food and little excess drinking while their children had a lifestyle that we’d recognize today.

*edited for spelling

Well enough people in the pre-Babyboomer generations died fairly young - my father's mother died tragically young in the 1960s and my mother's parents were both already dead when the Soviet Union fell, however my granddad and a fair few other older relatives and contemporary neighbours died between the ages of 80 to 100 in more recent times.

While people here are being a bit tinfoil hatted about most processed food eaten in moderation, I agree that UK Babyboomers hitting the booze, fags, and drugs must've taken a toll on them, degrading their health needlessly or shortening their lives by many years. The late Scottish author Iain Banks admitted to taking class-A drugs for a long time (presumably on top of the alcohol and cigarettes); his first wife died of cancer and he succumbed to cancer at just 59.

At the same time some actors/celebrities who are relatively rich and physically looked after themselves (organic diet, personal trainer, cosmetic surgery, etc) seem a lot younger in their 40s and 50s than equivalent celebrities three or so decades ago. Hard living Peter O'Tool was a survivor out of contemporary hellraising character actors who died prematurely in their droves through the 1970s and 1990s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   215 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.