Most active commenters

    ←back to thread

    Life expectancy rise in rich countries slows down: took 30 years to prove

    (www.nature.com)
    135 points andsoitis | 11 comments | 15 Oct 24 13:39 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source | bottom
    Show context
    lovethevoid ◴[15 Oct 24 14:36 UTC] No.41849070[source]▶
    > The decline in the United States is driven by increasing numbers of deaths because of conditions such as diabetes and heart disease in people aged roughly 40 to 60.

    People are asking if we should be surprised by the headline but are missing this. As suggested in the article by the researchers, there is something dragging down the average since the 2010s. Not even hitting the general expectation of ~75 years. We don’t have solid answers yet, only theories.

    So yes, generally while going up against the process of aging is going to create barriers (eg can we get to 130 years old), we are also failing to raise the baseline which is the bigger issue that people might not grasp when it comes to “life expectancy rates”.

    replies(4): >>41849103 #>>41849266 #>>41849314 #>>41855788 #
    hn_throwaway_99 ◴[15 Oct 24 14:40 UTC] No.41849103[source]▶
    > We don’t have solid answers yet, only theories.

    The exact quote you gave had a pretty solid answer, certainly not just "theories".

    replies(2): >>41849449 #>>41849483 #
    lovethevoid ◴[15 Oct 24 15:14 UTC] No.41849483[source]▶
    That's not what I meant. A solid answer as to why those conditions are happening, not the fact that they are happening at all.

    We have research on what can affect heart health, like what things might be linked to it, such as smoking and alcohol. We also know genetics plays a huge role.

    So we don't actually have solid answers, actionable answers as to the rise of heart health issues. Look at this analysis[1] regarding how dietary guidelines specifically for fats (saturated, trans) have very little substantial evidence supporting it. Yet this gets repeated by the average person, that fats are the ultimate evil you must avoid. In another study[2] we find that reducing your fat intake still resulted in the same rates of mortality as those who ate more. This is also why more in the space are shifting away from these sort of claims ("only eat x amount of saturated fat per day") and more to general food composition (eg who cares if a fish has saturated fats, eat the fish with vegetables).

    It's quite challenging to figure out, everyone has their theories. All I'm saying is we don't actually have the answers yet.

    [1]: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9794145/ [2]: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8092457/

    replies(4): >>41849792 #>>41851220 #>>41853625 #>>41854190 #
    1. hulitu ◴[15 Oct 24 18:00 UTC] No.41851220[source]▶
    > That's not what I meant. A solid answer as to why those conditions are happening, not the fact that they are happening at all.

    Nestle ? McDonalds ? Burger King ?

    replies(2): >>41853515 #>>41853639 #
    2. pessimizer ◴[15 Oct 24 21:54 UTC] No.41853515[source]▶
    Insane prices for insulin?

    edit: you really think insulin prices don't have an effect on the lifespans of diabetics?

    replies(2): >>41853632 #>>41853683 #
    3. doubled112 ◴[15 Oct 24 22:11 UTC] No.41853632[source]▶
    People putting off healthcare because it costs money?
    4. BeetleB ◴[15 Oct 24 22:11 UTC] No.41853639[source]▶
    Portion sizes. The average plate is larger than it was, say, in the 60's.
    replies(1): >>41853889 #
    5. ponector ◴[15 Oct 24 22:17 UTC] No.41853683[source]▶
    Are they insane, though? How many hours average man should work to pay for average monthly dose of the average quality insulin? May be even more affordable than in other countries.
    replies(2): >>41854148 #>>41856219 #
    6. mjevans ◴[15 Oct 24 22:43 UTC] No.41853889[source]▶
    Portion Sizes and the No/Low Fat craze from the 90s mentioned in another post are related.

    This is all my THEORY, a speculation that I would like someone to study or to find a study about.

    Theory / speculation:

    Humans evolved with natural sugars, fats, proteins/meats; primitive cooking, probably some grains (more recently). That's what our bodies know how to process, to react to.

    All the fake sugars, modified foods that lack the components our bodies use to regulate internal processes; highly processed foods which also lack those components we need to feel satiated and to produce the messengers to digest correctly: those are likely the causes of obesity (not feeling full, so more eating) and bodies behaving poorly.

    'Food Deserts' and corporations that are geared around selling large portions of tasty but unsatisfying food, or only offering huge sizes rather than also offering adults a tasty portion that's not intended for take home leftovers also contribute.

    Also: my main vice for this topic. Can I _please_ have lightly caffeinated + carbonated water that isn't outrageously expensive?

    replies(1): >>41853939 #
    7. asdff ◴[15 Oct 24 22:53 UTC] No.41853939{3}[source]▶
    Caffeine addiction gets cheap when you stop beating around the bush and start just buying the caffeine pills that are like a cent a pop.
    8. Riseed ◴[15 Oct 24 23:26 UTC] No.41854148{3}[source]▶
    I don’t think the average man should have to work any hours to pay for an average monthly dose of average quality anything that they require to stay alive. Perhaps I’m insane.
    replies(1): >>41854412 #
    9. sokoloff ◴[16 Oct 24 00:16 UTC] No.41854412{4}[source]▶
    Who then will work to provide these average monthly doses of things they require to stay alive?
    replies(1): >>41855105 #
    10. Riseed ◴[16 Oct 24 02:44 UTC] No.41855105{5}[source]▶
    I don't believe being able to work is an ethical prerequisite to survival. I don't believe being willing to work is an ethical prerequisite to survival.

    The government can work to provide the medication that its citizens require to stay alive. Under such a system, those who are able and willing to work can, via taxes or other contributions, provide medications that some citizens require to stay alive. Many such systems seem to cost less overall than the system currently existing in the United States, so the average man who will work will have to work fewer hours to pay for an average dose of average quality anything required to stay alive.

    Alternatively or in tandem, the pharmaceutical companies can sell such medications at cost, with rebates and coupons for no/low-income patients, while still making plenty of profit on reasonably priced pharmaceuticals that patients do not technically require to survive.

    https://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/article/S0025-6196(19)...

    https://www.house.mn.gov/Caucus/View/DFL/31433

    11. watwut ◴[16 Oct 24 06:40 UTC] No.41856219{3}[source]▶
    Insulin is cheap elsewhere.

    > U.S. manufacturer gross prices per 100 international units of insulin were on average 9.71 times those in OECD comparison countries combined.

    It is 10 times more expensive in USA.