medciare stats centenrrians

[Guest guest]

FYI:http://paa2005.princeton.edu/download.aspx?submissionId=50718

Table 3 says the U.S. (36 centis/10000) is second only to France, 41, amongst 14 other highly developed nations. 50% more than Japan.

Point out their number of 32,920, does not agree with the 2000 census, 69000. BUT, census data is not necessarily documented.

Regards.

[Guest guest]

Hi All,

No, it does not seem to. It says that, for Americans, there are 36 100 and

older

persons per 10,000 who are 80 and older in years. The US health care system

being

better than that of some of the other countries may be involve.

--- jwwright <jwwright@...> wrote:

> FYI:

> http://paa2005.princeton.edu/download.aspx?submissionId=50718

>

> Table 3 says the U.S. (36 centis/10000) is second only to France, 41, amongst

14

> other highly developed nations. 50% more than Japan.

> Point out their number of 32,920, does not agree with the 2000 census, 69000.

BUT,

> census data is not necessarily documented.

>

> Regards.

>

Al Pater, PhD; email: old542000@...

__________________________________

Start your day with - Make it your home page!

http://www./r/hs

[Guest guest]

Hi All,

No, it does not seem to. It says that, for Americans, there are 36 100 and

older

persons per 10,000 who are 80 and older in years. The US health care system

being

better than that of some of the other countries may be involve.

--- jwwright <jwwright@...> wrote:

> FYI:

> http://paa2005.princeton.edu/download.aspx?submissionId=50718

>

> Table 3 says the U.S. (36 centis/10000) is second only to France, 41, amongst

14

> other highly developed nations. 50% more than Japan.

> Point out their number of 32,920, does not agree with the 2000 census, 69000.

BUT,

> census data is not necessarily documented.

>

> Regards.

>

Al Pater, PhD; email: old542000@...

__________________________________

Start your day with - Make it your home page!

http://www./r/hs

[Guest guest]

http://paa2005.princeton.edu/download.aspx?submissionId=50718

third line above table 3: (page 5)

" - 36 per 10,000 - is substantially higher in the United States than the pooled estimate for the countries.......second only to France."

Am I interpreting that wrong?

below Table 3:

"The lofty position of the United States with respect to this statistic is certainly related to the lower extreme-age mortality in the United States, relative to other highly developed countries."

The 32,920 total centenarians is on page 6, Table 4.

Do you have some way to copy the text?

Regards.

Re: [ ] medciare stats centenrrians

Hi All,No, it does not seem to. It says that, for Americans, there are 36 100 and olderpersons per 10,000 who are 80 and older in years. The US health care system beingbetter than that of some of the other countries may be involve.--- jwwright <jwwright@...> wrote:> FYI:> http://paa2005.princeton.edu/download.aspx?submissionId=50718> > Table 3 says the U.S. (36 centis/10000) is second only to France, 41, amongst 14> other highly developed nations. 50% more than Japan.> Point out their number of 32,920, does not agree with the 2000 census, 69000. BUT,> census data is not necessarily documented.> > Regards. > Al Pater, PhD; email: old542000@...

[Guest guest]

Hi JW:

I think Al's point is that it says that the number of U.S.

centenarians ****per 10,000 people alive at age 80**** is second only

to France. That is not the same as saying that the U.S. is also

second to France in the percentage centenarians represent as compared

with the TOTAL U.S. population.

The point may be that high quality medicare in the U.S. after age 65

may permit more of those over 80 to survive to being over 100, while

poor diet, perhaps inadequate medical services prior to age 65, and

other factors MAY result in more deaths earlier.

We just do not know from that article how the number of centenarians

as a percentage of the total population in the U.S. compares with the

same number in France. (And just to be clear I do not have an

opinion on this latter point, because I do not have the data.)

If you get my drift.

Rodney.

>

> > FYI:

> > http://paa2005.princeton.edu/download.aspx?submissionId=50718

> >

> > Table 3 says the U.S. (36 centis/10000) is second only to

France, 41, amongst 14

> > other highly developed nations. 50% more than Japan.

> > Point out their number of 32,920, does not agree with the 2000

census, 69000. BUT,

> > census data is not necessarily documented.

> >

> > Regards.

> >

>

>

> Al Pater, PhD; email: old542000@y...

>

[Guest guest]

Hi JW:

I think Al's point is that it says that the number of U.S.

centenarians ****per 10,000 people alive at age 80**** is second only

to France. That is not the same as saying that the U.S. is also

second to France in the percentage centenarians represent as compared

with the TOTAL U.S. population.

The point may be that high quality medicare in the U.S. after age 65

may permit more of those over 80 to survive to being over 100, while

poor diet, perhaps inadequate medical services prior to age 65, and

other factors MAY result in more deaths earlier.

We just do not know from that article how the number of centenarians

as a percentage of the total population in the U.S. compares with the

same number in France. (And just to be clear I do not have an

opinion on this latter point, because I do not have the data.)

If you get my drift.

Rodney.

>

> > FYI:

> > http://paa2005.princeton.edu/download.aspx?submissionId=50718

> >

> > Table 3 says the U.S. (36 centis/10000) is second only to

France, 41, amongst 14

> > other highly developed nations. 50% more than Japan.

> > Point out their number of 32,920, does not agree with the 2000

census, 69000. BUT,

> > census data is not necessarily documented.

> >

> > Regards.

> >

>

>

> Al Pater, PhD; email: old542000@y...

>

[Guest guest]

Hi All,

Below are the pdf excerpts from your article and the original article.

http://paa2005.princeton.edu/download.aspx?submissionId=50718

NUMBER OF CENTENARIANS IN THE UNITED STATES

01/01/1990, 01/01/2000, AND 01/01/2010

BASED ON IMPROVED MEDACARE DATA

Bert Kestenbaum, B.Reneé Ferguson

Social Security Administration

.... Table 3. Number of Aged Persons, circ 2000, Selected Countries

=============================

Country =/>80 =/>100 =/>100/10,000 persons =/>80

=============================

Austria 280,554 453 16

Belgium 356,498 893 25

Denmark 208,879 483 23

England & Wales 2,099,739 6,320 30

Finland 171,111 246 14

France 2,131,882 8,752 41

Germany, West 2,428,787 4,925 20

Iceland 7,465 25 33

Italy 2,263,467 5,438 24

Japan 4,755,732 11,546 24

Netherlands 505,315 1,323 26

Norway 190,012 423 22

Sweden 436,373 907 21

Switzerland 282,535 678 24

Total 16,118,349 42,412 25

The lofty position of the United States with respect to this statistic is

certeinly

related to the lower extreme-age mortolity in the United States, relative to

other

highly-developed

countries. In an importont paper published in the New England Journal of

Medicine

in 1995, Manton and Vaupel speculated on possible explanations for

the

singulurity of the United States and hypothesized that the availability and

quality

of health care under the Medicare program is the primary factor.

Manton KG, Vaupel JW.

Survival after the age of 80 in the United States, Sweden, France, England, and

Japan.

N Engl J Med. 1995 Nov 2;333(18):1232-5.

PMID: 7565998

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve & db=pubmed & dopt=Abstra\

ct & list_uids=7565998 & query_hl=28

.... VARIABLE †--YEAR------U.S.JAPAN SWEDEN FRANCE ENGLAND--U.S.JAPAN SWEDEN

FRANCE

ENGLAND

-----WOMEN--MEN

=======================================

Five-year survival probability (%)

At 80

..... 1987 71.9 70.6 69.0 70.9 67.1--58.4 58.6 55.7 57.4 52.4

At 85

.... 1987 57.8 52.3 50.4 52.8 50.7--44.8 41.8 38.9 41.0 37.8

At 90

.... 1987 39.8 33.0 31.3 33.6 33.5--30.0 26.4 23.2 23.5 25.0

At 95 1987 23.2 17.7 16.0 18.1 19.5--16.5 15.4 11.5 13.1 13.8

Life expectancy (years)

.... 1987 9.1 8.5 8.3 8.6 8.1--7.0 6.9 6.5 6.7 6.2

--- jwwright <jwwright@...> wrote:

> http://paa2005.princeton.edu/download.aspx?submissionId=50718

> third line above table 3: (page 5)

> " - 36 per 10,000 - is substantially higher in the United States than the

pooled

> estimate for the countries.......second only to France. "

>

> Am I interpreting that wrong?

Al Pater, PhD; email: old542000@...

__________________________________

- PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005

http://mail.

[Guest guest]

I see your point. Interesting how "facts" can be written down. S/B 32950 for about 289,000,000 people. 2.3 per 10,000.

How about table 4. Is that not 32950 people over 100?

It was interesting to me, because the numbers don't agree with the US census of 2000 which gave 69000. I can't imagine another 36,000 centenarians not in Medicare. I guess it's possible a large number of immigrants 100+yo in 2000, not eligible for SS? Not likely. And if they started lying as they got old, it would show up in older census.

So with birth records fairly accurate after 1900, drivers licenses requiring birth certificates, and census data back to 1880 quite accurate, I find it hard to think the census 2000, would overestimate the centenarians 100%.

Even my 102yo neighbor had a drivers license, expired, but she could use it for ID.

Regards.

Re: [ ] medciare stats centenrrians

Hi All,No, it does not seem to. It says that, for Americans, there are 36 100 and olderpersons per 10,000 who are 80 and older in years. The US health care system beingbetter than that of some of the other countries may be involve.--- jwwright <jwwright@...> wrote:> FYI:> http://paa2005.princeton.edu/download.aspx?submissionId=50718> > Table 3 says the U.S. (36 centis/10000) is second only to France, 41, amongst 14> other highly developed nations. 50% more than Japan.> Point out their number of 32,920, does not agree with the 2000 census, 69000. BUT,> census data is not necessarily documented.> > Regards. > Al Pater, PhD; email: old542000@...

[Guest guest]

I see your point. Interesting how "facts" can be written down. S/B 32950 for about 289,000,000 people. 2.3 per 10,000.

How about table 4. Is that not 32950 people over 100?

It was interesting to me, because the numbers don't agree with the US census of 2000 which gave 69000. I can't imagine another 36,000 centenarians not in Medicare. I guess it's possible a large number of immigrants 100+yo in 2000, not eligible for SS? Not likely. And if they started lying as they got old, it would show up in older census.

So with birth records fairly accurate after 1900, drivers licenses requiring birth certificates, and census data back to 1880 quite accurate, I find it hard to think the census 2000, would overestimate the centenarians 100%.

Even my 102yo neighbor had a drivers license, expired, but she could use it for ID.

Regards.

Re: [ ] medciare stats centenrrians

Hi All,No, it does not seem to. It says that, for Americans, there are 36 100 and olderpersons per 10,000 who are 80 and older in years. The US health care system beingbetter than that of some of the other countries may be involve.--- jwwright <jwwright@...> wrote:> FYI:> http://paa2005.princeton.edu/download.aspx?submissionId=50718> > Table 3 says the U.S. (36 centis/10000) is second only to France, 41, amongst 14> other highly developed nations. 50% more than Japan.> Point out their number of 32,920, does not agree with the 2000 census, 69000. BUT,> census data is not necessarily documented.> > Regards. > Al Pater, PhD; email: old542000@...