If this is your first time here you're probabily wondering WTF! and I wouldn't blame you, I know I would. But before you press your back button I'd suggest, if you have an adventurers spirit,  click on the page 'Our Adventure' on the left as this will enlighten you. Course, if you dont have any adventurer in you, by all means, have a quick look, sqint a bit at the screen, look at the picture, let your mind go blank and click the back button. Bye.  

 

 

 

 

Thursday 22nd Sept 2016

    Living 125 years could soon be the norm!

 

    This was posited in an influential speech made by the expert Otto Thoresen, yeah, I've never heard of him either but apparently he's a big cheese in the 'How long are we all going to live' world.  I read his speech. In it he cited other experts -and you know what I think of them- who are predicting men will soon live to 90 and women 93. Whether this means we'll all be dribbling and mumbling incoherently just that bit longer or healthy and old, he doesn't say. What he also doesn't say is that this increase only applies if you're born now, this year, which begs the question, why was he addressing a hall of middle aged people and not a room full of babies? In his defence I should say one year old's make for a pretty unresponsive audience.

    He then turned from the optimistic start he'd made to being the harbinger of bad tidings. I quote:

    “This does not take into account further medical advances made, which may prolong longevity even further. This makes ageing the greatest threat to the UK's economic future”.

    Now I don't know about you, but to categorise 'age' as being a threat is just a tad worrisome and should set alarm bells ringing for all of us.

    Typically, as with all these doom and gloom experts, they load their argument in an attempt to try and prove a flawed theory. For example, they never factor in, because they can't, unforeseen economic changes, of which I'm sure there will be plenty. Nor can they factor in social changes such as the birth rate, infant mortality, nor the effect new diseases might have on humanity. Thirty years ago Aids was unheard of and only birds caught Avian flu. Also, and perhaps our greatest threat, is that bugs, germs and viruses are becoming antibiotic resistant and that could spell big trouble for us in the not to distant furture.

    The thing is, that's not the part of his argument that gets me reaching for my soap box, what does is the wholesale negativity of it all. The implication that the old are becoming a threat to economical stability. I have to ask, is that how we should see old age in our society? Can't he, and people of his ilk, rejoice in the fact that perhaps future generations will enjoy fuller, longer lives? To people like him and this government age has become an economic issue and rather than manage old age some are looking for ways to navigate around it.

    This government has cleverly managed to demonise those on welfare and now what? Is it the turn of the elderly?

    Shame on them.