While this is true for medium life expectancy … Maximum life expectancy does not increase to much.

And the maximum life is pretty much stuck at 116 years for females, there is no great improvement of the maximum life we can hope to be onthis earth, no matter what antiaging scientist are telling you, the progress is slow to nonexistent.

Some great exaggeration but still proving a point:

Same reason the average age in ancient times was 30. Every one who died, died at 80, or at childbirth. Lol. 1% makes it look nice but

https://www.ssa.gov/oact/NOTES/as120/LifeTables_Body.html

LifeTables_Body-5

The problem with this graph and the rectangularization of the survival curve is that this is presented as an effect of the antiaging progress. It is presented as this: People are living more time a  healthy life, and then the get old and just drop dead one day … or at least the morbidity period is being compressed.

Total nonsense. How could some scientists got from that graph of survival / mortality to the wrong conclusion that now we live more time in a healthy state?

What did we do to rectangularize that curve? We decreased infant mortality and used antibiotics. We also improve the medical system to have and widespread use of antibiotics and maybe save some people from accidents( car crashes etc). We even got better at keeping sick people alive, people who had a heart infarct, a stroke, diabetes, and COPD. We even got better of keeping sick people alive … people with cancer, virus infections, cardiac insufficiency and this for sure does not increase the healthy period.

How did we get from this increase in medium life expectancy which is done by preventing young people mortality and increasing the period when we live with chronic diseases  to the concept that we increased the period we stay healthy ? there is absolutely no connection.

And even more. That graphs show that more people are living closer to the limit of lifespan, and this is because more people are not dying young, it does not say anything about the health of the old population.

It does not say anything about the health of and individual. The fact that more people are living (by not dying at birth and in childhood, by the fact that we no longer die in our 30-40 because antibiotics) it does NOT means you as an individual have a bigger healthy life expectancy.

The normal consequence of living healthy more is an increase of maximum life expectancy. Just dropping dead healthy (rectangularization of the survival curve) is a myth … if you are healthy you will live a long time …

The sad truth is that we don’t have any good powerful antiaging treatments …

 

U.S. life expectancy declines for the first time since 1993 [L]

You can not artificially increase the lifespan without actually doing scientific progress. The fact that the medium lifespan is artificially increased by removing child death and treating some infections more efficiently, even increasing work safety does not improve the Maximum Life Span which is 110 for man and 115 for women.

We show that improvements in survival with age tend to decline after age 100, and that the age at death of the world’s oldest person has not increased since the 1990s. Our results strongly suggest that the maximum lifespan of humans is fixed and subject to natural constraints. [L][L][L] How he Freak can they can try to contradict the statistic … this people don’t understand the difference between maximum lifespan and life expectancy … so sad [L]

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/318175.php

THIS is really not god, and the title … wtf … come fast get your first one …

Average age of first stroke in England falls, figures show: http://www.bbc.com/news/health-42871861

 

 

 

 

 

Donate for Health Research