Healthy for Life

Centenarians, born in 1907, alive in 2007

The fastest growing demographic group in America today is centenarians. 

Now, as you struggle with whether you should drink 8 glasses of water or take xyz supplement or whether caffeine or alcohol is good or bad for your health, think about this:

A centenarian today was born in 2007.  They survived

• An era of diphtheria, childhood diarrhea, typhoid, tuberculosis, all common diseases in the early part of the century. 
• No vaccines against childhood diseases, ever.
• The smoke from open fires and industrial smokestacks from 1900 until 1950 at which time cars became the leading cause of smog.
• Breakfast of eggs and bacon, lunch of tuna fish sandwiches made at home, and dinners of pot roast, gravy, mashed potatoes, carrots, and apple pie for dessert (but no trans fats or high fructose corn syrup).  More on this later in the month. 
• WW I, the great depression, and WW II
• More than a few of them smoked at some time in their life.
• And perhaps even high blood pressure and cholesterol that went untreated for years (because we did not know any better).
• Social security, retirement, and pensions were not even in the vocabulary.  Let alone, cars or planes, or phones, or computers, or the Internet.  And certainly not U-Tube. 

And still, they lived to 100.  Maybe we need to rethink some of our rigidity about what it takes to be healthy.

These people who became centenarians ate natural food grown in their garden (a big, big hint); they did weekend work outdoors even if they had an office job; they spent the weekend gardening outdoors; they walked to the store, every store, all the time.  And they did not watch television; they did not drive to and from the mall; they did not worry about supplements because they got all of their complete nutrition in everything natural that they ate.   

So tonight, take a long walk, then have a glass of wine with dinner, enjoy your apple (fruit) pie dessert, and laugh.  Life is good, life is long, life is good health.   

Stay well.  Dr. Bob   

The National Center for Health Statistics has just announces that continuing declines in the death rates of the major diseases has increased life expectancy to new record highs: women 80.1; men 74.8; combined average  77.6.  All of this is 2003 data. 

AM New York carried the story Sunday night .  The made the following observations from the study:

• The death rate from heart disease measured in X deaths per 100,000 population fell from 241 in 2002 to 232 in 2003.  The death rate from cancer fell from 194 to 189. 
• Death rates for Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, and hypertension were all up.
• Research also indicates an increase in the active life expectancy--yes, we are living longer, but fewer people are disabled or limited.   
• Despite the increases, the US life expectancy still lags most other developed countries.   

The 559 page 2006 report (released January 11, 2007) from the National Center for Health Statistics can be found here.  I will summarize parts of this report in blogs later this week--at least the parts that interest me. 

Until then, eat more vegetables and take a brisk walk--if you are going to live that long, you need to be in good health. 

Stay well   Dr. Bob

A satisfying retirement requires planning

The impact of retirement on boomers is as important as the impact of boomers on retirement.

Most Americans spend more time planning a ten-day vacation than they do planning a 30-year retirement.  Ken Dychtwald, (one of my idols) CEO of Age Wave and one of the first real explorers to shed light on the impact of boomers on retirement, has explored this issue for one of my competitors. 

Dr. Dychtwald has researched and identified four groups of retirees based on their success as retirees.

Before we look at my quick summary of his four groups, what kind of retirement do you want and have you planned to make retirement satisfying?   

Dr. Dychtwald's lesson is that a satisfying retirement takes planning.  His first group (19%) has reinvented themselves to new adventures and challenges that are meaningful and satisfying.   His second group (19%) is content with a retirement that is "less frantic" and less structured than work was.  The third group (22%) has trouble figuring out who they are and what retirement means to them.  The fourth group (40%) really struggles with retirement because they did not plan and do not aspire to find meaning in retirement. 

If you planned a new career or a real commitment to volunteer and can make it work, you are in the first group and should enjoy retirement.  If you planned on enjoying a less frantic life, are you certain that you will enjoy ten years of uninterrupted golf or afternoon reading?  If so, and for some the answer is that this is all they want, then they will be happy.  But many people start out thinking this is all they want only to be dissatisfied later. 

Also, note that 40% of retirees are a whole lot happier and more satisfied than the other 60%.  What group are you headed for?    

Just as you need to plan you financial retirement, you need to plan a retirement that is satisfying and meaningful.

Stay well, and live well as long as you are alive. 

Dr. Bob 

Saving for retirement--or not spending?

More in my "Health and Wealth--Why Don't People Care?" series

The New York Times has another in the series of articles on saving for retirement.  Damon Darlin, the author, asks the contrarian question of whether some people are saving too much for their retirement.  Of course, the prevailing view is that most Americans are almost certainly saving too little at a time when corporate pensions are dwindling.

Is the problem saving or spending?  Saving for retirement correlates poorly with income as some people with modest incomes spend even less--thus saving enough for retirement--while others who earn large incomes spend even larger amounts and never save enough for income.   

The spenders will never accumulate enough to retire comfortably and when they do retire, they will continue to spend too much too fast. 

A person who does not save for retirement because they consistently spend too much while they are working--a bigger boat, a too-large second home, a horse--will likely spend too much when they are retired.   

The problem is not saving too little, the problem is spending too much.  The habit of earning an after-tax dollar, and spending eighty-five cents should be taught to all school children and then they can teach their parents to do the same.

Besides, the children then get the benefit of the magic of compounding. 

Stay well.  Spend a little less today.  Dr. Bob

 

 

 

health, wealth, and life expectancy

Prof. Gorvett writes an outstanding blog on actuarial science, which will put most non-actuaries to sleep, but does contain this absolutely beautiful time-sequenced motion chart.  Look at the chart if nothing else.  I am certain that I will check his blog often--his insights are wonderful.

The message that wealth and health are positively correlated with longevity between countries also applies to individuals within a country.   

Why are we living longer?

Are we living longer A) because modern medicine really can work miracles or B) because preventive medicine and classic public health measures work? 

Deaths from coronary disease in adults under age 85 have plummeted more than 50% since 1970. Why? 

Dr. Belgin Unal and associates has studied this question.  His important work, published in the scientific journal Circulation, found that 42% of the decline in the numbers of deaths was due to individual treatment and 58% was due to population control of risk factors and preventive medicine: fewer smokers, better primary recognition and treatment  of hypertension and hypercholesterolemia.   

He also found worrisome future trends for the growing epidemics of obesity, diabetes, and physical inactivity. 

One of my themes for this blog is that we are largely responsible for our own future health--for better or worse. 

Stay well, life is long and you want to be healthy as long as you are alive. 

Dr. G. 

Age 65, a line in the sand

Age 65, the age of retirement and Social Security, is an artificial line-in-the-sand that Bismark of Germany drew in 1885 and we have not had the courage to change. 

But our lives will be drastically different and longer than any prior generation of 65-year olds in the history of the world.  When Bismark drew the line in the sand, 2% of the population lived to age 65 and then they lived an average of only 2 years.  Today, a 65-year old can expect to live nearly ten years longer than his own parents could have expected when they were 65. 

The average 65-year old can expect to live to age 84.  If you are in the top (best) 20% of health, and many of my readers are, half of you will live to at least age 92--and half longer than that.  Who are these people?  Those who do not smoke, who treat their high blood pressure or high cholesterol, who exercise at least a couple of days a week or walk regularly, and those who eat healthful foods. 

By contrast, the unhealthiest 20% of the 65-year olds will live to an average of age 76.  Who are these people?  They are those with real disease like past heart attacks, those who have not taken care of themselves like smokers, and those who are severely obese (BMI > 35) and now have type-2 diabetes.   

The difference between the top and bottom quintile is huge.  In the coming weeks, I will give you the statistical data supporting these statements.  I will also write about how to best use that time, what provides meaning, how to stay healthy. 

For now, let us remember our shared goal: "to die young as late as possible." 

Stay well.  Have a glass of wine with dinner and dark chocolates for dessert.  Life has never been so promising. 

Dr. Bob