60minutes : Living to 90 and beyond

[walkinwood]

An interesting study based on people who once lived in a retirement community south of LA. Informative and enjoyable.

Living to 90 and beyond - CBS News

Some counter-intuitive findings:
- putting on weight in your later years is good
- they suspect that higher blood pressure in your later years may protect from dementia.
- a lot of people suspected of having alzheimers did not have it (post mortem), but had suffered from micro-stokes. And a number of people who were just fine mentally had plaques in their brains.

And confirmation of things that are already well known.
- social life and exercise is important
- smoking is bad
- alcohol in moderation is good.

Enjoy.

 

[JDARNELL]

The putting on weight might make some sense in that as people get older they tend to get smaller and lose weight. Maybe they just have more weight to lose and it extends their time and allows medical care to continue. I am thinking about veins getting to small etc.

I watched the program also. I thought it was interesting. And even in their 90s, love is still in the air.

JDARNELL

 

[Live Free]

. And even in their 90s, love is still in the air.

Yes. Perhaps that is why when I clicked the link to view the episode, the first advertisement before the program was for Viagra.

 

[Which Roger]

The putting on weight might make some sense in that as people get older they tend to get smaller and lose weight. Maybe they just have more weight to lose and it extends their time and allows medical care to continue. I am thinking about veins getting to small etc.

I watched the program also. I thought it was interesting. And even in their 90s, love is still in the air.

JDARNELL

Weight includes muscle mass as well as fat, and we tend to lose a lot of muscle mass as we age. I think weight workouts to retain that muscle mass later in life are one of the best things a person can do. And this would tend to make a person "overweight" relative to others of the same age, which could be part of the reason this conclusion was drawn.

 

[pb4uski]

I saw it too. Very good piece and interesting study. I thought the interviews with the study participants was very interesting. I hope we are that vibrant in our 90s.

 

[imoldernu]

The study was made on those who were in their 90's.

Hmmm... no mention of anyone younger than that, or anything that I could see that made any connection to those under age 90. That may sound like a picky comment, but... what about weight at age 60 or 65 or 70, or 80? Is it only okay to have a drink or two after you've reached age 90?
The discussion of vitamins:

So which vitamins helped? Antioxidants?

Lesley Stahl: OK, Vitamin E. We're sitting at the edge of our chairs. Does it-- did it make a difference? Vitamin--

Claudia Kawas: It was--

Lesley Stahl: --E?

Claudia Kawas: --my favorite, but uh-uh.

Lesley Stahl: No?

Claudia Kawas: People who took Vitamin E didn't live any longer than people who didn't take Vitamin E.

They also looked at Vitamin A, C, and calcium...

Claudia Kawas: The short answer is none of 'em made a difference.

Lesley Stahl: None of them made a difference to living--

Claudia Kawas: In terms of--

Lesley Stahl: --a long life?

Claudia Kawas: --how long you live.

Lesley Stahl: What about alcohol?

Claudia Kawas: Oh. Alcohol made a difference.

But it may not be what you think...

Claudia Kawas: Moderate alcohol was associated with living longer than individuals who did not consume alcohol.

Lesley Stahl: Wait a minute. Ha-- moderate-- alcohol you live longer?

Claudia Kawas: Yes.

You might have noted that during the entire interview and story, that Stahl steered very clear of making any statements about the veracity of the results.
Personally, I'm inclined to agree, but I feel that the tenor of the story will give many people younger than age 90, carte blanche to ingnore or lower concerns about blood pressure, weight, alcohol, and the importance of vitamins in staying healthy.
The broadness of the statements, in many ways, runs counter to many accepted medical expert organizations, including the National Institute for Health.

An interesting and encouraging story, but as with many of the "new" discoveries about health... trust, but verify.

my opinion only

 

[walkinwood]

Personally, I'm inclined to agree, but I feel that the tenor of the story will give many people younger than age 90, carte blanche to ingnore or lower concerns about blood pressure, weight, alcohol, and the importance of vitamins in staying healthy.

You don't have much confidence in people younger than 90!

The people who ignore commonly agreed upon aspects of a healthy life don't need to read this to continue their unhealthy ways.

 

[scrabbler1]

The one thing I was looking for in the program but did not find was how well these 90+ people drive, if they still do drive. Driving skills begin to decline as people get into their 70s and 80s. Sixty Minutes did a piece on this back around 1988.

 

[heeyy_joe]

At one point the researcher asked the subject; "What is today's date?" and he didn't know it. Well hell, I've been looking forward to not knowing (or caring) the current date for years!

 

[Eagle43]

I also saw the program and liked it. I am already drinking the red wine. I exercise every day. I like sex. Desserts, especially chocolate, are a favorite of mine. And I can remember today's date. I guess I better be careful. I might outlive my investments.

 

[Walt34]

At one point the researcher asked the subject; "What is today's date?" and he didn't know it. Well hell, I've been looking forward to not knowing (or caring) the current date for years!

Exactly. If you're retired who cares or pays much attention to the date anyway. Most days I don't know or care either.

 

[Chuckanut]

Dates? Yes, I enjoy the ones with the almonds in them and the coconut on the outside.

 

[Rosie]

Dates? Yes, I enjoy the ones with the almonds in them and the coconut on the outside.

I prefer walnut inside, with a bit of cream cheese on top, and a light drizzle of balsamic vinegar reduction. With a glass of red wine. Cheers!

 

[MooreBonds]

Some counter-intuitive findings:
- putting on weight in your later years is good
- they suspect that higher blood pressure in your later years may protect from dementia.
- a lot of people suspected of having alzheimers did not have it (post mortem), but had suffered from micro-stokes. And a number of people who were just fine mentally had plaques in their brains.

And confirmation of things that are already well known.
- social life and exercise is important
- smoking is bad
- alcohol in moderation is good.

Enjoy.

While I realize there can be good info from this study, the biggest problem is that it appears to take a very small subset and analyzes them.

It would be akin to looking at olympic track and field athletes and saying "well, out of all of the track and field athletes that competed in the olympics, those who ate a certain protein supplement or certain foods high in protein or something else didn't get any more medals than those athletes who didn't eat the various foods. Therefore, eating those foods poses no clear benefit to track and field athletes"

The problem is that there is quite a bit of success bias, as it ignores the 99% of the other track and field athletes in high school/college/professional who aren't in the olympics, and assumes that the findings would apply to them, even though the subset they're looking at is a somewhat unique dataset (olympic athletes or a group of nonagenarians in relatively good health). If these people lived to be this good in their 90s, it's quite probable that they would have done this well (more or less) regardless of what they did or didn't do to their bodies in the prior 90 years.

It would be no different than looking at early retirees who retired in the 1980s, withdrew 5% from their portfolios, and still sit around at the coffee shop today with a few fellow early retirees who have far more money in in their portfolios than when they retired (because those who blew their early retirement ran out of money and are back at work), and then proclaiming that everyone can spend 5%.

You obviously would be foolish to automatically extrapolate one person's success to everyone else in the world (including those who clearly failed, be it early death or portfolio exhaustion)....so just remember to take news broadcasts about scientific studies like that with a grain of salt, and that the old adage of "everything in moderation" is just about the only thing you can accurately count on.

 

[clifp]

While I realize there can be good info from this study, the biggest problem is that it appears to take a very small subset and analyzes them.

It would be akin to looking at olympic track and field athletes and saying "well, out of all of the track and field athletes that competed in the olympics, those who ate a certain protein supplement or certain foods high in protein or something else didn't get any more medals than those athletes who didn't eat the various foods. Therefore, eating those foods poses no clear benefit to track and field athletes"

T.

Now I haven't read any of the published studies medical journal, but I'm not sure how you reached that conclusion.

IIRC, the study was based on ~30,000 older (52 and above) Americans who filled out an extensive medical survey and and 30 years later than found ~1,700 who were still alive and most were in there 90s.

Intuitively those seem like sufficient sample size, even if they have to look at much small subsets. (e.g. those who took vitamin E.

 

[kcowan]

I thought that the apparent success of the LeisureWorld model was interesting. All the other stuff made sense. I can vouch for lack of exercise causing the sudden demise of 3 relatives. Each lasted just 5 years after being unable to exercise daily.

 

[Walt34]

I can vouch for lack of exercise causing the sudden demise of 3 relatives. Each lasted just 5 years after being unable to exercise daily.

Same here. My sisters and I noticed that when our mother couldn't drive to the Y anymore for swimming her health went downhill rapidly. She passed six months later.

 

[razztazz]

Just to stir things up and tell the whole story....

The exercise myth | ENCOGNITIVE.COM

Q: Isn't the health of the coronary arteries the basis for claims that vigorous exercise is necessary to maintain them?
A: Most of the improvement in functional capacity because of exercise is not even directly related to the heart. It comes from an effect on the peripheral muscle cells whereby they extract more efficiently and use oxygen from the blood. Dr. George Sheehan, the "guru" of running, has said, "You might suspect from the emphasis on cardiopulmonary fitness that the major effect of training is on the heart and lungs. Guess again. Exercise does nothing for the lungs; that has been amply proved... Nor does it especially benefit your heart. Running, no matter what you have been told, primarily trains and conditions the muscles."

George A. Sheehan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Crapped-out at a whopping 75. BFD