?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Key to long life may be mom's age at birth - Open Knowledge — LiveJournal

Jun. 25th, 2006

12:38 pm - Key to long life may be mom's age at birth

Previous Entry Share Next Entry

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=healthNews&storyID=2006-06-23T213904Z_01_SPI377899_RTRUKOC_0_US-SCIENCE-BIRTH-AGE.xml&archived=False

Key to long life may be mom's age at birth
"People are more likely to see their 100th birthday, research hints, if they were born to young mothers.

The age at which a mother gives birth has a major impact on how long her child will live, two researchers from the University of Chicago's Center on Aging told the Chicago Actuarial Association meeting this spring.

The chances of living to the ripe old age of 100 -- and beyond -- nearly double for a child born to a woman before her 25th birthday, Drs. Leonid Gavrilov and Natalia Gavrilova reported. The father's age is less important to longevity, according to their research.


In a previous study, the husband and wife research team of Gavrilov and Gavrilova identified birth order as a possible predictor of an exceptionally long life. They observed that first-born children, especially daughters, are much more likely to live to age 100.

But their latest research suggests that it is the young age of the mother, rather than birth order, which is significant to longevity.

Using U.S. Census data, the Social Security Administration database, and genealogical records, Gavrilov and Gavrilova identified 198 centenarians born in the U.S. from 1890 to 1893. They reconstructed the family histories of these individuals to try to identify possible predictors of longevity.

They found that while being born to a young mother was an important predictor of reaching 100, other factors seem to help someone live an exceptionally long life. These include growing up in the Western part of the U.S., spending part of one's childhood on a farm, and being born first.

"Centenarians represent the fastest growing age group in industrialized countries, yet factors predicting exceptional longevity and its time trends remain to be fully understood," Gavrilov and Gavrilova note.

The finding that children born to young women are more likely to live to 100 "may have important social implications," Gavrilov added in a statement, "because many women postpone their childbearing to later ages because of career demands."

"This research helps us better understand the predictors of longevity and quantify the implications on society and business," said Thomas Edwalds, a fellow of the Society of Actuaries, which co-sponsored the study.

The researchers emphasize that why children born to younger mothers have an advantage when it comes to longevity requires further study.




© Reuters 2006. All Rights Reserved. http://today.reuters.com/

Tags:

Comments:

[User Picture]
From:elsewhereangel
Date:June 25th, 2006 05:04 pm (UTC)
(Link)
The study is especially interesting given the factors it does not discuss. To wit: in previous generations people gave birth much younger and also died much younger. With longer lifespans women have put off childbirth significantly. Its an interesting paradox, longer lives lead to later childbirth which makes for shorter lives.
(Reply) (Thread)
From:smandal
Date:June 25th, 2006 06:40 pm (UTC)
(Link)
The researchers emphasize that why children born to younger mothers have an advantage when it comes to longevity requires further study.

Yep.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:semiotic_pirate
Date:June 25th, 2006 06:53 pm (UTC)
(Link)
even if this were true - society is set up for it to be (usually) financially unfeasible to most women/couples to contemplate having children at a young age. another example of needing to change societal constraints - if longevity was to be a goal.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:pasquin
Date:June 25th, 2006 07:14 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Another reason to only fuck young girls.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:quodlibetic
Date:June 25th, 2006 11:02 pm (UTC)
(Link)
This data is about 198 centenarians - a very, very small group of anyone to use for a statistically valid predictor. Also, the predictors of longevity for those born 100 years ago has to be different than those born today. I mean, really - what percentage of the populace is born to farming families today as opposed to 100 years ago?
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:starling321
Date:June 27th, 2006 02:58 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Agreed. There are serious problems comparing the data of people born a 100 years ago, to children born now. Almost completely different worlds. The only data that bears interest is the age of the mother. However, my guess is at the time, a mother over age 25 was significantly less healthy than a woman over age 15 today.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:aldoushuxley
Date:June 26th, 2006 02:10 am (UTC)
(Link)
I suppose it's possible that the age of the eggs makes a difference.
(Reply) (Thread)
From:(Anonymous)
Date:April 18th, 2007 11:44 pm (UTC)

Reference to published study

(Link)
Thank you for your interesting post!
I thought perhaps you may find it interesting to take a look at the original published peer-reviewed study:
Longevity Science: NAAJ Paper (http://longevity-science.blogspot.com/2007/02/naaj-paper.html)
http://longevity-science.blogspot.com/2007/02/naaj-paper.html (http://longevity-science.blogspot.com/2007/02/naaj-paper.html)

(Reply) (Thread)