close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

I have an odd question about life expectancy.

Discussion in 'The Okie Corral' started by jame, Apr 17, 2012.

  1. jame

    jame I don't even know....what I'm doing here....

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2002
    Messages:
    6,267
    Likes Received:
    2,370
    Location:
    Central Iowa
    The way I understand it, the average life expectancy today is around 75 or so. But as I've read a variety of history books and articles, many of the older authors, founding fathers, et al have passed on when they were well into their 70's, 80's, or older.

    If we were able to kick out of the statistic all those that died under the age of say, 10 years old, between the years of 1700 to present, we the average life expectancy be any different than it is today?

    We have made great strides in infant death and mortality, as it wasn't at all unusual for kids under the age of 5 to die from a wide range of maladies way back in the day. But do we really live that much longer today than we did way back when?
     
  2. Rabbi

    Rabbi The Bombdiggity Lifetime Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2004
    Messages:
    27,620
    Likes Received:
    10,196
    Location:
    San AntonioTexas
    If you start to set various level to a statistical sample that leaves out a number below a certain point, the overall average does goes up.

    For example, you will find that people who make it to a certain fairly low age, such as 30, have a life expectancy of over 80. (I dont remember the exact numbers and I am not going on a google mission) one quick googling show the life expectancy in the 1700's was under 40. I dont know how they arrive at that number.

    For an opinion, that has a lot of statistical validity, people with a purpose live longer. So the Founding Fathers may have had an anomalous life span. However, I bet you will find that their life expectancy was, as a whole, shorter than you think. There is also another problem with your statement....the biggest problem, you picked a group of grown men. That skews the math in a major way. I understand that you are using that exact thing to make a point but the math of that cuts both ways.

    As for your question...no matter what age you set the bar at, life expectancy has risen...a fair amount.
     

  3. Big Bird

    Big Bird NRA Life Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2003
    Messages:
    10,549
    Likes Received:
    2,219
    Location:
    Louisville KY
    The average age of mortality in this nation was shockingly ~38 when the country was founded. Certainly SOME people lived much longer back then but lot never made it. By the turn of the 19th Century our life expectancy still was not above 50.

    When I was a kid in the 1960's and 1970's and a man died in his 60's the most common refrain was "he lived a good life." Today, when someone dies in their 60's you'll hear: "He died young!"

    I was looking at a 1980 Commissioner's Standard Ordinary Mortality Table for work the other day and there were 11.6 deaths per thousand for Males, Age 55, Non-smokers. The same table updated in 2000 showed 6 deaths per thousand for that same class of risk--almost half what it was just 20 years before!

    The best proof? Go to your daily newspaper obit page and count the number of dead folks in their 80's and 90's...on any given day half the croaked people will be REALLY old...
     
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2012
  4. cgwahl

    cgwahl Sheriffs a near

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2002
    Messages:
    6,670
    Likes Received:
    966
    Location:
    CA
    It probably didn't hurt that they were able to live more opulent than the regular folk.

    Rabbi's thought that them living with a purpose probably played a part as well.
     
  5. Rabbi

    Rabbi The Bombdiggity Lifetime Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2004
    Messages:
    27,620
    Likes Received:
    10,196
    Location:
    San AntonioTexas
    That as well. It is a statistical fact that the wealthy, as a whole, live longer.

    Besides the obvious "access to better healthcare...." I am convinced that it has more to do with purpose, mission and activity. Again, as a whole, the wealthy have things to do.

    The best thing money ever bought anyone was purpose and mission.
     
  6. samurairabbi

    samurairabbi Dungeon Schmuck

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 1998
    Messages:
    5,894
    Likes Received:
    41
    Location:
    Indianapolis, IN
    As touched on earlier, most of the statistical INCREASE in life expectancy is due to getting YOUNG people past EARLY death. This includes two areas: 1) getting young children past childhood diseases by vaccination, and 2) getting women in their 20's past death in childbirth. Adding a few years of life to someone who was already at, say, 70 may seem dramatic, but statistically it has little effect on AVERAGE life expectancy.

    A possibly imprecise historical observation: There have always been MANY oldsters in American society. Civil War veterans organization events and battle reunions were heavily attended in 1920; this would mean veterans in their early 70's were common. Somewhere around 1925, their numbers faded abruptly.
     
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2012
  7. treeline

    treeline

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2006
    Messages:
    1,659
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    ex-CA, now UK
    Even if you exclude child mortality, the average length of life would be much shorter largely because of poor hygiene, seasonal malnutrition and simple infections. Things that are now easily treated would often cause further complications and eventually death. For example, a cold would become a serious chest infection or pneumonia, or someone with a chest infection would catch dysentry and be overwhelmed by a combination of illnesses.

    Deaths weren't spread across all ages because some of the common killers became more likely with age. Dental problems like absesses often led to blood poisoning and late childbirth was a common cause of death.

    I like social history, the stuff about day-today liiving conditions, and I'm always amazed how dangerous life was. Don't even get me started on how smelly the world must have been. Gaaak!
     
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2012
  8. Emoore

    Emoore

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2006
    Messages:
    213
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    DFW Texas
    A large percentage of the population at the time were slaves and poor farmers. I'm sure they didn't live very long. These days even the poor live as well as the wealthy did in ages past.
     
  9. BFN

    BFN

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2010
    Messages:
    321
    Likes Received:
    18
    The child mortality rate was extremely high 200 years ago. Most families had some children that did not make it to adulthood. Yes, take out the deaths under 10 and the average goes way up. But it is still lower than today, as they had yellow fever, smallpox, and many drank themselves to death. However, 200 years ago there were still people who had good genes and seemingly immune to cancer, heart disease, and other ailments, and they would live to 90+ years. Just not as many.
     
  10. ron59

    ron59 Bustin Caps

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Messages:
    6,927
    Likes Received:
    22
    Location:
    Smyrna, GA
    Emoore hit on it.

    You're looking at how long the Founding Fathers lived. They were aristocracy to an extent. They were the average everyday working man. THOSE were the ones who died early, that you don't read about.
     
  11. ChuteTheMall

    ChuteTheMall Witless Protection Program

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2000
    Messages:
    65,601
    Likes Received:
    84,536
    Location:
    Trump Tower, overlooking the wall Mexico bought.
  12. eyesnorth

    eyesnorth

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2004
    Messages:
    837
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    CT
    Just to clarify, please define "people with a purpose."
     
  13. Glock20 10mm

    Glock20 10mm Use Linux!

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2005
    Messages:
    14,873
    Likes Received:
    105
    Location:
    Land of Idiots and Libtards
    We live longer due to several factors:

    - Clean water
    - Advanced medical care
    - Better health awareness
    - Less dangerous living environment / conditions
    - More abundant and wider variety of foods
    - Better genetic diversity

    All these are factors into longer life spans. Watch what happens when you interrupt any of these.
     
  14. sputnik767

    sputnik767

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,536
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Chicago
    I guess to answer your question, you would have to look at the percentage of people who lived to let's say 70 or more at a given point in history. I can tell you that right now, the fastest growing group are people either in their 70s or 80s (I don't remember the exact statistic and don't want to look it up right now, but I think it's actually the 80s). I would bet that 100 years ago, this was not the case. So I guess the point is that average is not so important to your question, compared to the actual age range population statistic that you are interested in.

    But in reality, most people actually die from some specific, identifiable cause, rather than simply "old age." The older you get the higher your chances are of cancer, hypertension and associated morbidity, etc. Needless to say, cancer advancements didn't really come around until very recently, and until beta-blockers, diuretics, ACE-inhibitors, ARBs, etc came around, there was no real effective treatment for hypertension. This helps explain the current growth of the older population.
     
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2012
  15. samurairabbi

    samurairabbi Dungeon Schmuck

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 1998
    Messages:
    5,894
    Likes Received:
    41
    Location:
    Indianapolis, IN
    Permit me to supplement your comments. Any old person who dies from a condition heavily attibutable to "old age" has, of course, already ACHIEVED old age. Saving that person is a worthy cause, but statistically it adds only a few years to that person's lifespan. A shop-worn public health worker who hustles to prevents case of measles from killing a 4-year old will contibute as much to statistical life expectancy than 25 Medicare-financed heart transplants; getting that 4-year-old past a childhood death and onto the track to a full-term lifespan doesn't get the glamour of a transplant, but it is massive in its statistical effect.
     
  16. Rabbi

    Rabbi The Bombdiggity Lifetime Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2004
    Messages:
    27,620
    Likes Received:
    10,196
    Location:
    San AntonioTexas
    Something to do on a continuing basis and the drive to keep doing it.