There's a sort of creepy old name for pneumonia; "The old man's friend". It's a pretty quick and painless way to die, most of the time. Jack did great and his life is a tremendous example for us all. Immortalists have a name for the idea that you'd live a long time but have terrible health: It's called "The Tithonus Error", after the mythological character Tithonus. The "error" part is because that's not what life extension is actually about. The real idea behind life extension is healthspan extension.This is an intelligent discussion of pneumonia, but I think Jack LaLanne did achieve longevity. He was fit and strong well into his old age and died at 96. It's a shame he died, but he out-did most people in strength and longevity. Not to offend any immortalists, but if you are going to die, you want to go out before your life turns to shit.
How can we avoid pneumonia?
#31
Posted 02 December 2011 - 02:04 PM
#32
Posted 02 December 2011 - 04:14 PM
Promoting life course vaccination. Pierre Olivier Lang and Jean-Pierre Michel. Rejuvenation Research. 14.1 (Feb. 2011) p75.
Invasive pneumococcal disease (IVP)
Streptococcus pneumoniae vaccine recommendations vary from one European country to another. In most countries, vaccination is recommended in adults over the age of 65 and in populations at risk. However, in Poland for example, the recommendations are not age related, but rather disease related. Moreover, recommendations regarding boosters are not always consensual: for the over 65s, booster shots are recommended every 5 years in Finland and France, but every 6 years in certain counties of Sweden. They are only recommended every 5 years in Ireland, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom for at-risk populations (e.g., cigarette smokers; patients with chronic cardiovascular, pulmonary, liver, or renal diseases; patients suffering from diabetes, alcoholism, functional or asplenia, or from any immunocompromising conditions).
A recent appraisal study performed in three different European countries showed that even these inhomogeneous recommendations are not respected. (40) Pneumococcal vaccine coverage in the community is highest in the United Kingdom (21%) and lowest in Switzerland (9%). As recently demonstrated by a metaanalysis of 22 trials involving 101,507 participants, the currently available anti-pneumococcal vaccine does not appear to be effective in preventing presumptive pneumococcal pneumonia. (41) The pneumococcal vaccine is less effective in the oldest old as well as in the immunecompromised older adults. (42-44) Moreover the duration of the protection decreases with the progression of the immunesenescence process. For these reasons pneumococcal vaccine has to be administrated in the early 60s.
Nonetheless, the nonrespect of pneumococcal vaccine recommendations explains the tremendous burden of invasive pneumococcal diseases in the Europe. Partial data collected in a few European countries mentioned the existence of 77,778 cases of IVP over the last 8 years. For example, 18,204 cases were notified in the United Kingdom over a period of only 3 years (2004, 2005, and 2006), 9,305 cases in Belgium between 1999 and 2005, 7,618 cases in Norway for the period 1999-2006, but no cases were notified in Italy, for reasons that remain unclear. (12) Thus, it can be seen that the burden of preventable infectious diseases remains very high at the beginning of this new century, despite the fact that vaccines exist to fight this disease, which concerns principally children and adults over the age of 65. (45,46) The importance of herd immunity is again evident in this situation. A recent large study from the United States showed that over the period 1998-2003, the introduction of a new 7-valentconjugate pneumococcal vaccine for children not only significantly decreased the incidence of invasive pneumococcal disease in the young vaccinated population, but also in the old population, without any intervention. (47)
Edited by trance, 02 December 2011 - 10:15 PM.
#33
Posted 02 December 2011 - 08:46 PM
So the question we should be asking is, what did Jack Lalanne do that allowed him to live virtually disease free till 96 years of age? Not why did he only live to 96. 96 is still a pretty big number!Scott,
This is an intelligent discussion of pneumonia, but I think Jack LaLanne did achieve longevity. He was fit and strong well into his old age and died at 96. It's a shame he died, but he out-did most people in strength and longevity. Not to offend any immortalists, but if you are going to die, you want to go out before your life turns to shit.
sponsored ad
#34
Posted 03 December 2011 - 05:57 AM
96 is not a very big number guys. This is an immortality forum. Lets think in 3 digits at least, OK?
If I have to go, I want to have all my stem cells used up and my telomeres as mere shadows of their former selves.
Edited by scottknl, 03 December 2011 - 06:10 AM.
#35
Posted 04 December 2011 - 04:53 AM
But if you are trying to do something in real life, you have to look at real life examples. Life isn't a computer game. Yes, you should take care of your lungs, but do you think Jack LaLanne didn't do that? What percentage of the population lives to three digits healthy and happy? Do they have something you can imitate or is it something unique that you can't replicate? What kind of life will a person that old have in America when they have taken down the social welfare network?
Your understanding of what causes people to die is just wrong. Furthermore, there are multiple type and severities of pneumonia, which merely means an inflammation of the lungs.
Most centenarians have unique qualities that probably are hard to replicate. Jack LaLanne took actions that prolonged his life so his example has more to teach us about life, and death.
Edited by Luminosity, 04 December 2011 - 05:01 AM.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users