Say It Ain’t Old! Should ‘Old Age’ be redefined? Researchers Now Say 65 isn’t OLD anymore!

Over twenty years ago, I decided to remove the words “old,” and “aging” from my vocabulary I chose to no longer use them.  Honestly, even though it is a popular term, I have a problem with “anti-aging,” I prefer longevity.  After hearing Deepak Chopra, MD speak about the remarkable research on reversing aging conducted by Ellen Langer, Ph.D., a Harvard professor.

We are as old as we think, and even more importantly, we are as old as we are stressed. Stress contributes to the deterioration process known as aging.

The cost of senior medical treatment in industrialized nations may need to be re-examined, U.S. researchers say.

Stony Brook University researchers and collaborators from Austria say increased longevity and improved health means populations are “aging” at a slower rate and the burden may not be as significant as anticipated.

Science magazine published this study.  The scientists assert that chronological aging can be misleading and should not  be the fixed standard for measuring and.

“Most of our information about aging comes from indicators published by the United Nations and statistical agencies,” said Professor Warren Sanderson from Stony Brook.

“These indicators, which are used worldwide to determine healthcare and retirement costs, are based on chronological age and in many instances consider people as being old when they reach age 65 or even earlier,” he said.

This is an antiquated approach, according to the researchers is out of date, due to the fact that people live longer and a 65 year old person isn’t “old”  anymore.

Research shows the attitude, social engagement, exercise have a profound impact on our health and “aging” or more appropriately stated, longevity.

The vast majority of healthcare costs occur in the last few years of a person’s life and these years happen at ever-later ages as life expectancies increase.

Population aging will be the source of many challenges in the future, the study says, “but there is no reason to exaggerate those challenges through mismeasurement,” it concludes.

Source:

Science Magazine