March 22, 2011 - More on population aging 1. What is the...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–4. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: More on population aging 1. What is the current health status of the 'younger' elderly (60-70)? How and why is it changing? A. 'Old Age' is usually defined as 65 and older- Problem if they could work or not if pensions received @ later age This age should be tied to ability to work Most data based on questionnaire Ability to work (self-reported) at 65 decreased in 1970s, increased in 80s and 90s; has decreased this century but may be reversed again People working after 65 increased up to 58% From 97-07, % 60+ working up by 1/5 to 58%; % unable to work in 60s stable at 11-14% However, all developed nations have recently raised or considered raising the age at which government pensions can be received (CPP, Social Security) - If you are deciding whether to retire at 55, 60, or 70 B. Government reducing on government-pension; therefore, you need to start pension-planning early Consider health status report (old age status not changing much) You should not ignore this until you are 40 (will have to have own pension, so need to contribute earlier) - Mobility impairment for ages 60 - 69 is 30% in US Means that, for a couple, chance of neither having a mobility impairment may well be 49% You may want to know what you will be able to do at each age - What are realistic futures for aging? C. Life span has increased (life expectancy @ birth) --> 2 years/ decade Unlikely; there are # bodily systems that breakdown due to various interdependent causes In 2100, life expectancy @ birth would be around 100 years (if now considered 80 yrs. Old) Wolfgang Lutz and IIASA group seem to think that life expectancy at birth of >100 by the year 2100 is realistic (yet their write-up disguises this assumption) - If you have 13 yr. mortality rate without senescence Death only by accident Jonathan Wiener book based largely on beliefs of Aubrey de Grey (claims personal life expectancy of 500yr.) This is contradicted by evolutionary understanding of senescence; millions of years of evolution where traits affecting repair in one system have been shaped by evolution with senescence (which is why all physiological measures decline with age) Vocal minority of scientists believe much greater increases likely to occur soon -- What does increasing life expectancy mean for the extent of senescent mortality? D. Human values and lifestyles and their effects on actual and potential population size April-03-11 2:28 AM March 22, 2011 Page 1 Any mortality that is above minimum mortality rate around 12~13yr can be considered as senescence Senescent vs. Non-senescence mortality Baseline death rate @ age 20~25 Mortality factors same rate as age 20, then considered non-senescent; any factors rising after 20~25 is senescent Changes in senescent death is the cause of increase in life-expectancy John Bargaarts estimates death rate March 22, 2011 Page 2 17 different countries plotted There has been small changes in death rate but little significant...
View Full Document

Page1 / 11

March 22, 2011 - More on population aging 1. What is the...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 4. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online