How Many People Are Left From the Year You Were Born

Thanks for posting. I see this now for the 1st time.

The dip in life expectancy across the globe in WWI is sobering. But I did not know that China and India suffered that badly compared to other nations. In WWII, it's Poland and Russia.

It's genocide! Such sad madness.


You're welcome. It's a cool database. If you are interested there are a few TED talks about it.

The Flu Epidemic of 1918-1919 killed far more than WWI. The return of personnel after the war helped spread the virus which was exceptionally lethal and, unlike most flu viruses, was especially deadly in younger healthy individuals.
 
Last edited:
Can't wait to show this to my dad, born in 1933, the year they started with. I think he'll be shocked that 38.9% of his cohort are still alive at 86.
 
94.2%. That feels low actually! More than 1 in 20 individuals born in 1982 is dead already?!
 
For some reason - ?statistical noise? - the cohort from 1997 seems to enjoy amongst the greatest surviving percentage.
 
Welcome to Generation Jones.

We watched the early boomers suck up all the resources, bad. But we didn't die in Vietnam, good.

Besides no dying in 'Nam, I think the point above about improved health care has a lot to do with our bubble in the boom.


I've never heard that term before. Thanks for linking.

Born in '58, but with older sisters, I grew up with the Beatles but transitioned to the hippies and the anti-war movement. Drugs of choice were weed and psychedelics as I started learning about such things in junior high school. By the time I was Senior in high school, the move (at least at my high school) was to the "preppie" look, long hair for men was on it's way out, greed and consumerism were dating and on their way to marriage and the drug of choice was quickly transitioning to cocaine.

I felt huge waves of relief and maybe a few tiny pangs of guilt about the draft situation.
 
Millions in Russia and Ukraine were mass-murdered by Stalin in the 1930s BEFORE WW2... but that is another topic.

.

I looked for that, and it's there. Thanks.

You're welcome. It's a cool database. If you are interested there are a few TED talks about it.

The Flu Epidemic of 1918-1919 killed far more than WWI. The return of personnel after the war helped spread the virus which was exceptionally lethal and, unlike most flu viruses, was especially deadly in younger healthy individuals.

Thanks. I will watch the TED talks. The deaths in China and India must be by the flu rather than WWI, although these countries did get involved to some extent.
 
Interesting and thanks for the link.
 
Dad turns 80 later this summer, nearly 60% of those born the same year are still alive.

Wouldn't have thought it would be so high.
 
Dad turns 80 later this summer, nearly 60% of those born the same year are still alive.

Wouldn't have thought it would be so high.

Many people underestimate longevity issues. That leads many to take social security early.
 
Two World Wars, the spanish flu, and the Great Depression. After that the coming of vaccines (polio, flu and Measles, etc), and antibiotics. I am not surprised there is a curve of life expectancy
 
Millions in Russia and Ukraine were mass-murdered by Stalin in the 1930s BEFORE WW2... but that is another topic.



.


Some even suggest the Russians nearly lost to Germany because Stalin had purged (i.e. killed/imprisoned) so many officers.

Of course, Hitler’s stupidity and the Russian winter might have been factors as well...
 
I've never heard that term before. Thanks for linking.
About "Generation Jones"... like most things, I learned about that here.


It resonates with me because both DW and I have a few siblings 10 years older than us ('63 babies). We are lumped together all as boomers, but have completely different experiences for so many things.
 
Some even suggest the Russians nearly lost to Germany because Stalin had purged (i.e. killed/imprisoned) so many officers.

Of course, Hitler’s stupidity and the Russian winter might have been factors as well...

In late 1920s/early 1930s... Stalin stole much of the harvests in Russia then destroyed Russian family farms via forced conversion of family farms into communist collectives. Farmers who protested were executed. Stalin also moved massive amounts of rural people into the cities. Tens of millions of Russians starved. While millions of Russians were starving... Stalin stole Ukraine's harvests while also destroying Ukraine's family farms to create communist farm collectives in Ukraine causing millions of Ukrainians to also starve [see key word, Holodomor.]

Ironically, in contrast, Hitler enacted laws which protected German family farmers. Farmers and rural family life were idealized and revered as the mainspring of the Third Reich's "blood and soil" philosophy.

Here's more irony... the battle that turned the war in Russia's favor was near Stalingrad. That area of Russia was settled by German farmers when Russia's Empress Catherine the Great [who was originally a German princess] encouraged them to move to that part of Russia. At the beginning of WW2, Stalin moved those Germans [called the Volga Germans] east to Siberia and many [only God knows how many] died in the process.

.
 
Last edited:
1960 was when the birth control pill was introduced, hence one big, popular reason for the decline. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birth_control_in_the_United_States


I recall reading that it wasn't really available until 1964 (due to state laws).


Also -- I long ago read that in order to get it legalized, the govt wanted buy-in from the Catholic Church. They required that a woman still menstruate. So that is why the monthly package contains sugar pills. But female doctors routinely went right to another package, thus ridding themselves of the nuisance.


if true, this is major malpractice -- for all the women who had lifetimes of painful periods.
 
I recall reading that it wasn't really available until 1964 (due to state laws).


Also -- I long ago read that in order to get it legalized, the govt wanted buy-in from the Catholic Church. They required that a woman still menstruate. So that is why the monthly package contains sugar pills. But female doctors routinely went right to another package, thus ridding themselves of the nuisance.


if true, this is major malpractice -- for all the women who had lifetimes of painful periods.



As a male, I don’t want to comment further on women’s reproductive choices but I mentioned the factor because I was born in the mid-60s and our particularly small class sizes in school were sometimes commented on. Whatever the reason/s, competition for college admissions and jobs has since worked to my advantage and still does, and I need and appreciate any bit of help I can get!
 
I recall reading that it wasn't really available until 1964 (due to state laws).


Also -- I long ago read that in order to get it legalized, the govt wanted buy-in from the Catholic Church. They required that a woman still menstruate. So that is why the monthly package contains sugar pills. But female doctors routinely went right to another package, thus ridding themselves of the nuisance.


if true, this is major malpractice -- for all the women who had lifetimes of painful periods.


Griswold v Connecticut
 
In 1965, so 93.3 % of us still kicking. I do know/knew of some friends that are in the other part of this equation.
 
Interesting. DW and I recently attended our 40 year college class reunion. I calculated about 6% of our entering class has died. Since almost everyone was born from 1956 through 1959, our class is ahead of the listed percentages for those years. This is probably use to the demographics of who our college chose to admit, and the career/lifestyle opportunities available to its graduates.
 
Interesting. DW and I recently attended our 40 year college class reunion. I calculated about 6% of our entering class has died. Since almost everyone was born from 1956 through 1959, our class is ahead of the listed percentages for those years. This is probably use to the demographics of who our college chose to admit, and the career/lifestyle opportunities available to its graduates.
Yes but also because the numbers start at birth. Childhood diseases and accidents took out a certain number before they even reached college age.
 
Yes but also because the numbers start at birth. Childhood diseases and accidents took out a certain number before they even reached college age.

yep - it may help to look at a life table

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_table

so at age 55, you have 91.181% of the 100,000 life cohort alive

from age 18 to age 55 you have 91181/98851=92% conditionally alive at age 55 from age 18
 
Last edited:
Yes but also because the numbers start at birth. Childhood diseases and accidents took out a certain number before they even reached college age.


True, I had not thought of that. I guess multiplying the mortality factor of birth thru age 16-19 for those years by the data in that table would yield a more accurate result. Also, since the class is a biased selected group (as Ivy League schools tend to be) that is also an influence.
 
Also, since the class is a biased selected group (as Ivy League schools tend to be) that is also an influence.
Absolutely a factor too. There's a whole other set of people in jail, on drugs, working in the coal mine, too sick to go to college, etc. They may be still alive at age 18, but might expire earlier than the college kids.
 
Back
Top Bottom