2. Every stochastic mortality forecast model extrapolates the observed evolution of falling mortality rates.
3. What does it take to continue this trend?
THE PROBLEM
1. The younger age or age group would be the best target to increase life expectancy further.
2. The problem is the potential to reduce mortality at younger ages has been almost exhausted.
3. In 1843, life expectancy at birth was merely 40.8 years, while by 2013 it had increased to 79.2 years. In the past 40 years, life expectancy has risen linearly by about three months per calendar year. Over this period, mortality rates were markedly reduced at all ages, mainly owing to medical advances, in particular:
(i) Reduced infant mortality, initially achieved through simple things like improved hygiene
(ii) Invention of antibiotics, especially penicillin
(iii) Measures taken to reduce the number of deaths by accident, such as the introduction of safety belts.
(iv) Reduction in mortality owing to cardiovascular disease by means of bypass operations, angioplasties and blockbuster medication.
4. Consequently, 99.6% of all newborn babies now survive the first year of life, 99.8% continue to live for the next 14 years and 98.4% survive between ages 15-40. The survival probability between ages 40-65 is 89.0%. The graph illustrates conditional survival probabilities for males in England and Wales, according to the Official National Statistics ONS period life tables of 1843 and 2013.
THE PLAN
1. It is assumed that those people who die would, if saved, enjoy the same life expectancy as the rest of their birth cohort.
2. Newborns should be prioritized otherwise they would lose many years of life. It would take saving many 80-year-olds to achieve the same effect on life expectancy at birth and the effort increases exponentially with age.
3. The graph below calculates using data in the UK the effort needed in terms of the number of deaths at any given age that are to be averted – in order to increase life expectancy for newborn males by one week.
LIFE EXPECTANCY RISE FOR AFFLUENT MEN
1. Affluent men in the UK saw their average life expectancy increase by 17 weeks between 2011 and 2015 – more than any other group.
2. those in the ‘comfortable’ group as having retirement income of over £7,500 per year, or £5,000 if they live in the least deprived parts of the UK. It also identifies a ‘making-do’ group of people with modest retirement income, living in areas of average to low levels of deprivation, and a ‘hard-pressed’ group of people living in deprived areas on low income.
3. “It could be due to one off events such an especially harsh winter. It could also be the impact of austerity measures making life a bit harder for those who don’t have as easy access to support networks, or alternative resources to buffer them from changes in the social care system.
4. however, males from outside this group saw their life expectancy stagnate between 2011 and 2015.
HIGH EXPECTANCY FOR PENSIONERS AT A COSTS
1. A report, based on data from 2014, found that within England as a whole, life span for both men and women at ages 65, 75, 85 and 95 increased between 2013 and 2014. Between 2013 and 2014, male longevity increased by 0.3 years at age 65 and 0.2 years at ages 75, 85 and 95.
2. For those who were living longer, many were doing so in poor health.
3. Pension schemes were already allowing changes in their budget for the improvement in longevity. However, as life span was not growing as fast as expected, state pension age might not have to rise as quickly as previously thought.
4. While a 65-year-old man in England could expect to live for 18.6 years in 2014, the 2012-based expectation for life expectancy at 65 in 2014 was actually 18.9 years.
5. unless the government changes the formula used to increase the state pension age above 67, it is now expected to rise slower than previously thought.
THE EFFORT
1. Life expectancy at birth has increased by about three months each calendar year for the past 40 years.
2. Mortality projection models in the life and pensions industries are often based on mortality improvement factors. It should be borne in mind that any relative change in mortality for younger ages is rather ineffective, since they are at a very low point anyway.
3. With respect to older ages, any assumed mortality improvements require averting a large number of deaths. It is therefore questionable if even small relative changes in mortality rates for the elderly are an effective target.
4. Not forgetting the gain in terms of additional years of life at older ages is low. It is also expensive owing to the large number of deaths at old age. It therefore becomes inefficient to keep prolonging life expectancy for the population as a whole.
5. Therefore it is interesting it say that to keep life expectancy increasing at the same pace, it would be necessary to allocate more economic resources of our society to lifesaving of the elderly instead of wellbeing for the younger.
(Source: theactuary, M. Ortmann from Beuth University of Applied Sciences Berlin)
