This is all subjective, of course, but interesting nonetheless. Here’s a survey of Best and Worst States for Senior based on various criteria: health care availability, health of neighbors, blah blah blah.
Top 10 best:
Vermont
Hawaii
Colorado
Connecticut
New Jersey
District of Colombia
New Hampshire
Minnesota
Utah
Massachusetts
Bottom Ten (worst first)
West Virginia
Alabama
Louisiana
Mississippi
Indiana
Tennessee
Arkansas
Georgia
Oklahoma
Virginia
Here is a taste of what they find important:
Our new study explores the reality of aging across the country and how it differs depending on where you live. We analyzed national and state-level data on people aged 65 and over, including:
● National trends in chronic conditions such as heart disease, diabetes, obesity, and high cholesterol
● Changes since 2015, showing which conditions are rising and which are falling
● State-by-state comparisons of chronic illness, life expectancy, physical inactivity, disability, and mental distress
So, where are people living the healthiest lives into their later years?
What is the ‘Expansion of Morbidity’ theory?
The Expansion of Morbidity theory states that while modern medicine helps people live longer, it doesn’t always mean those extra years are spent in good health. Instead of adding healthy decades, advances in treatment may be extending the period in which people live with chronic conditions.
This is crux for my family: NOT giving in to either disease or war wounds, but also not automatically accepting medical proceduralism, with solid stories going back 160 years. Think HARD (but not too long) about the choices you make, the life you live, and how you leave.
Allowing medical procedures and medications to dominate living is obscene.
Note this about health and life expectancy. It ignores financial issues like inheritance taxes and property tax discounts for seniors. I’d think financial issues like cost of living etc might be much more important especially when health improvements are marginal.
I’m surprised Florida and Texas are not mentioned.
I’m gonna have my consciousness imprinted onto a robot “brain”. Probably one of those Chinese a** kicking Kung Foo (really?) robots.
Seriously though, it will be interesting to see what kind of technological advances await us in the short (5 years), medium (10 years), and long-term (20 years) future.
Agreed. But it is nice to have the option to avail yourself of them if they can restore/extend quality of life. A fuzzy line, I know. But there are a lot of places where you wouldn’t have that option at all. I would be concerned about Mexico because I suspect that good doctors and hospitals are only available in the big cities. And at least one I saw in a big city (Mazatlan) isn’t one I would have wanted to go into if I had a choice.
I think I mentioned that my priorities have changed from being in a cabin by a lake with no nearby neighbors to having plentiful access to whatever medical care we may need without having to drive 4 hours to get it.
Mom was a marathon running, good eating, mountain climbing, nannyGOAT who was “done” as she put it, when she was 96. She held on until “that SOB” is out of the White House, celebrated that day intensely with her few surviving staffers and her already retired children when she was 97. The next day she announced she was “always just too damn tired,” and so stopped eating the day after “the next guy” took over. Savoring one big glass of her favorite wines a day, she lived ten more days preaching joy in living AND dying.
I watch so many people suffer physically and emotionally for years, living in an artifically created “long life” often with no respites of happiness. Insanity.
I am genuinely curious how much medical science might extend the possibility of my life being worth it past what she pushed herself to.
I have reduced saturated fat for whole foods with fiber, am losing weight, and going to bed early. I want clean arteries. I have them now. I want them in the future. Most of it might just be that simple.
My grandma did the same. Turned 94, announced she was done, and quit eating. Died within two weeks. Although she was partial to Harvey’s Bristol Cream [shudder].
Agreed, while Im OK at 84, there are things to keep an eye on, cataracts for sure, just back from my Opthamagist/surgeon, one eye is getting borderline, so maybe this year is it’s time to fix…
That said, BIL hit 100, but he’d lost his sight, hearing, kinda rough to see a WWII Vet slowly fade, and other friends, classmate, strokes, all manner of ails, no so fun, and generally healthcare was minimal. family scattered, no fun… Nope, not going for the 100+…
@Goofyhoofy…..interesting that the article mentions expanded morbidity. My focus is on the opposite. Compressed Morbidity. Occasionally misinterpreted as “fear of dying”, it seems.
My mum died just a few weeks before her 79th birthday. A bit close for comfort for me to think about but, regardless, not tremendously prematurely. However, well over 15 years of worsening health before that as a result of ASCVD. Signs and symptoms began in her early 60s and her lifespan (if not her healthspan) was extended by virtue of medical intervention available in the 1980s and 90s.
Although I’ve seemingly inherited her genetic predisposition, slightly different lifestyle choices (I’m a non smoker/never smoker) and more targeted and aggressive interventions appear to be compressing that morbidity. Even if it turns out that I croak at the same age witha bit of morbidity as a run up, I’ve whittled poor quality of life down mightily.
Mind you, I don’t know whether living in Colorado can be held accountable. Only lived here for just over 9 years. Something to take on board when looking at statistics like this. FWIW, most everyone I know here is also a “transplant”…..I think it’s that sort of place.
AND, whatever you do with lenses, everyone should get the insides of their eyes looked at, especially as you age. I thought I had minor normal senior hyperopia that could be corrected with coronal implants….NOPE. Instead I have macular wrinkling, a more complex problem.
I am waiting for my cataracts to become ripe. At age 65 for the right eye, and maybe 67 for the left eye. The techs have told me I am lucky. I will heal faster as I am younger, and I will have great vision for the rest of my life.
We see an ophthalmologist once every two (or so) years. He says I’m about 5-6 years away from cataract surgery. I’ll be on Medicare by that time.
I’ll investigate further as the time draws near, but at the present I am planning to have myopic lenses installed. It is my understanding you have to choose your focal length (which makes sense…it’s a single lens that isn’t adjustable, unlike my natural lens). So I will be able to read without glasses (as I have always been able to), but need progressives for mid and far (which has been necessary for 20+ years). So, no difference for me except no more cataracts.
If you can better to do cataract surgery before Medicare. Company insurance has better coverage. Medicare has more out of pocket expense.
Years ago people got far range in one eye and short in the other. I think that is out of date. Full range implants are now common. Mine are and that was in 2007.