4 ms·

> do full-body work-outs a lot, eat a really clean diet, avoid drugs Could it be that older people were less likely to be able to avoid physical work (even the

> do full-body work-outs a lot, eat a really clean diet, avoid drugs Could it be that older people were less likely to be able to avoid physical work (even their chores were far more of a workout), were relatively more religious and conservative than current generations, and grew up with fewer processed foods and more home cooking by stay-at-home moms? What I mean by this is are you just describing people who were born in the 1930s? The fact that the ones that are left are mostly typical would be expected. > keep using your brain actively into your 80's and 90's. This could be seen as a symptom of aging well, rather than a cause. People whose brains don't work well aren't studied as examples of aging well. The person I know who most fits this description is my dad, he had a swimmer's body in his 60s, worked out every morning since high school, has kept a dead center BMI his entire life, has never done a drug and probably only had a sip or two of beer, always had a gym guy diet that has gradually become more vegan, and was a math major and computer programmer, plays chess etc.. He's totally falling apart in his late 70s and becoming very frail. Seems like he's having nerve and neurological issues, and having problems with his connective tissue and with arthritis in his hands and knees. I don't know how you eat, work out, and think yourself into avoiding that. Half of his joint problems are caused from having been athletic, just like my super-athletic Army grandpa, whose knees would bend backwards for the last years of his life from football when he was young. Protestantism isn't a law of nature. You aren't automatically rewarded for sacrifice and suffering, at least while you're alive.

brnt 2y ago
It's always funny how people are eager to cite the good examples in their life, but totally forget the family that died early. Just walk into any sort of care facility for the elderly to understand that bias.
- stonethrowaway 2y ago
  If more people did this maybe everyone could tone it down a bit and go back to, “we don’t quite yet know” rather than having every one of these threads filled with “survivorship bias!!” nonsense.
  - pclmulqdq 2y ago
    People mistake probability for certainty too readily. If you show me someone who is 400 lbs at 29 and someone who is 150 lbs at the same age, I would take an even-odds bet on the 150 lb person dying later. I think you would, too. I could be wrong, and there's a lot of uncertainty there, but that doesn't mean that there's absolutely no link between health and lifespan.
    - brnt 2y ago
      Of course there is, but there's a huge amount of noise too. Signal below the noise floor can't be eyeballed.
- Tade0 2y ago
  Now that I have the opportunity, note how I omitted my paternal grandfather. He was a surgeon and died aged 59. Kidney failure was the direct cause IIRC, but in reality a career of stressful overwork. They named one particularly short street in one small city after him in honour of his achievements in setting up healthcare infrastructure directly after WW2.
pclmulqdq 2y ago
> What I mean by this is are you just describing people who were born in the 1930s? The fact that the ones that are left are mostly typical would be expected. People born in the 1930's were 30 in the 1960's, and if you think that means a lot of religious/social conservatism, you probably don't know much about American history. Most of these people adopted more conservative ideals later in life, which happens to literally every generation. By the way, it sounds like the people who you are talking about have a history of very much overworking their bodies to the point of injury, and that is also pretty clearly bad for you. I don't think you are guaranteed to live a long time if you take care of yourself, but I think it's pretty clearly true that you will maximize your chances if you do. > Protestantism isn't a law of nature. You aren't automatically rewarded for sacrifice and suffering, at least while you're alive. The happiest and healthiest 90-year-old I know does 2 hours a day of work meticulously maintaining his trees and eats whatever he wants. He happens to want healthy things, though, and enjoys the trees. You don't have to suffer to be healthy.

brnt 2y ago

It's always funny how people are eager to cite the good examples in their life, but totally forget the family that died early. Just walk into any sort of care facility for the elderly to understand that bias.

stonethrowaway 2y ago
If more people did this maybe everyone could tone it down a bit and go back to, “we don’t quite yet know” rather than having every one of these threads filled with “survivorship bias!!” nonsense.
- pclmulqdq 2y ago
  People mistake probability for certainty too readily. If you show me someone who is 400 lbs at 29 and someone who is 150 lbs at the same age, I would take an even-odds bet on the 150 lb person dying later. I think you would, too. I could be wrong, and there's a lot of uncertainty there, but that doesn't mean that there's absolutely no link between health and lifespan.
  - brnt 2y ago
    Of course there is, but there's a huge amount of noise too. Signal below the noise floor can't be eyeballed.
Tade0 2y ago
Now that I have the opportunity, note how I omitted my paternal grandfather. He was a surgeon and died aged 59. Kidney failure was the direct cause IIRC, but in reality a career of stressful overwork. They named one particularly short street in one small city after him in honour of his achievements in setting up healthcare infrastructure directly after WW2.

pclmulqdq 2y ago

> What I mean by this is are you just describing people who were born in the 1930s? The fact that the ones that are left are mostly typical would be expected. People born in the 1930's were 30 in the 1960's, and if you think that means a lot of religious/social conservatism, you probably don't know much about American history. Most of these people adopted more conservative ideals later in life, which happens to literally every generation. By the way, it sounds like the people who you are talking about have a history of very much overworking their bodies to the point of injury, and that is also pretty clearly bad for you. I don't think you are guaranteed to live a long time if you take care of yourself, but I think it's pretty clearly true that you will maximize your chances if you do. > Protestantism isn't a law of nature. You aren't automatically rewarded for sacrifice and suffering, at least while you're alive. The happiest and healthiest 90-year-old I know does 2 hours a day of work meticulously maintaining his trees and eats whatever he wants. He happens to want healthy things, though, and enjoys the trees. You don't have to suffer to be healthy.