Old Hammer Boy

I ran across this site the other day as I was doing some retirement planning. You may have seen it. If you're interested, it projects your life expectancy. It's no internet joke kinda thing, but uses family history, medical information, etc. to project how long you may live. It doesn't ask about vehicular/bicycle collisions!! Go here to find out>>> https://moneycentral.msn.com/investor...xpect/main.asp

jimshapiro

I sure hope their predictions are accurate -- they predict I'll be a nonagenarian! I'd drink to that (except I told them I don't drink.)

Jim

HiYoSilver

I died yesterday and someone forgot to notify me.

papedaler

It told me I would live to be 94, which is nice since I'm shooting for 100, but it said the biggest thing going against me is my gender. (A lot of women tell me the same thing.)

oldcrank

85 for me (at age 50 now).

Then I went in and picked all the worst-case scenarios -- smoke 3 packs a day, high-blood pressure, cholesterol, high-fat foods, no exercise, drink until intoxicated, along with no seat-belts and 2 DUI's within the last 5 years.

Hey . . . they're out there.

Came up with 53.

I think I'll skip that pizza tonight.

jppe

Interesting!! Now I have even more incentive to keep weight, cholestrol, excercise in-line.

Probably like most folks, it indicated that the best thing I had going for me was the age ofn my parents....

Old Hammer Boy

Yep, it's important to choose good parents...

Digital Gee

I have twenty five more years. That should be a lot of miles on the bike!

Trsnrtr

It says I'll live to be 85. I had my wife witness it and have had it notorized. I gave my attorney a copy and filed another away in a safe deposit box. If I die before 6-2-2036, those suckers are going to pay!!!

pastorbobnlnh 

WHAT! ME WORRY?!?

oldcrank

Spoke to my wife about this tonight. She had a few good points after I told her the choices that the questionairre asked. She mentioned sleep -- quality and quantity -- and also relationships -- do you or do you not have another person very close to you, etc. stuff like that. I guess they couldn't get EVERYthing into the questionnaire -- but there are certainly elements in life that, in and of themselves, can add to or take from longevity besides the "usual" smoking, drinking, fat level, etc.

Time to go make gingerbread houses with the Mrs. tonight -- we sure do have a wild time around here!

luv2cruz

Says I need to plan for 93 years. Guess I better start beefing up that retirement fund a little!

I'm 20 pounds over my "ideal" weight, too. Doesn't seem to matter much.

John E

The calculator returns 96 for me, which is consistent with my own guestimate, based on ancestry and lifestyle, assuming of course that I don't meet Sydney's fate. (Sorry, I am still royally bummed out about that.) Even at age 55, I still figure I am far more likely to be killed in a traffic accident (as a motorist, bicyclist, or pedestrian) than by heart disease.

DnvrFox

I am headed for 97!


I am headed for Trinidad (CO - sex change capital of the country) for a sex-change operation ASAP.

I plan to ride my age when I am 96.

Litespeed

I'm expected to live to 102, but it says my ideal weight is 123. If I weighed 123 I would look like a blimp. The heaviest I have ever weighted is 115 and that's before I started exercising and had BIG thighs. I only want to live that long if I can take care of myself and continue to bicycle and hike and generally be in good health.

cyclintom

There is a large difference in the "ideal" weight it returns and the body build you selected. For me at 6'4" tall the difference in weight it returned was 11 lbs. between small and medium.

First shot it claimed my "ideal" weight was 173 which would make me look like a skeleton. Second was 182 which I achieved about 8 years ago for a short while and MAN could I climb then. Oh well, I need to lose 12 lbs.

oldcrank

Our family doctor has always told me that there's no difference between muscle and fat when it comes to weight . . . if your body mass index is high, then either is just as bad for the body.

To me, that's BS.

They should add "waist mesurement" to the complete picture. If you're 6-foot and 210 pounds with a 42-inch waist, that's one thing. If you're 6-foot and 210 pounds with a 33-inch waist, that's totally another thing altogether.

On another note, my wife and I were talking about this again today. She's an RN and has been working in the field of Geriatrics for close to 30 years now. She said, that in all her years of experience, that she could not put her finger on what lifestyle habits make people live the longest. She's had people 100+ that have smoked, and those that haven't. Some were still obese well into their 80's and beyond, others were not. Some had good lifestyle habits in their history, others were terrible. Some wanted to still live, others would talk about wanting to die. Some had labor jobs that were physical, others had sedentary jobs.

There's really such a mix in the geriatric homes, that you'd be hard pressed to really put your finger on what the answer is.

DnvrFox

Yes, weight lifters hate the BMI.

Your doc is way out of line, and the muscle component of the BMI is becoming increasingly recognized in the literature.

We should just use bodyfat% - much more meaningful.

Thrifty1

85 for me! I, also, disagree with the weight recommendation of 164 for 6' 1". My doctor is satisfied with my 196 lbs. I lowered my cholesterol from 410 to 105 in 2 years....doctors attribute success to cycling and diet "improvements".
I wonder if my current bicycle will last another 25 years.......should start saving for a new go-fast in few years :>)

Trsnrtr

Though I don't agree with it, some doctors have pointed out that a muscular body requires the heart to work hard to feed the muscle and also that the body still has to do extra work for the extra weight whether it's muscle or fat.

Like I said, I'm not sure I would agree with that but if it's true, then an average lean body of normal muscle mass would be ideal, hence the BMI.

Regardless, my BMI of 32 is excessive and I know it. No amount of rationalizing it by saying I'm heavily muscled (which I am) changes the fact that I need to lose weight.

geraldatwork

Mine said I would live to 93 I'm 57. Just by coincidence I took a few of these tests about a week ago. Do a Google search "life expediency" and quite a few come up. There are a lot of similar questions but you can see different ones use different considerations. Of the 3 or 4 I did (Including the one here) my range was from 83 to 93 so there is some consistency.

roccobike

It told me I can expect to make it to 93. Then it said the biggest factor against me is my personality type. I can't understand why that stupid piece of crap survey said that. I think I'll call the SOB that wrote it and tell him what I REALLY think of that survey. Then I'll go outside and kick the neigbor's cat. Then go cuss at the village idiot, oh I forgot, that's me.
Enjoyed the survey, hope I make it to 93 and still cycling.

cyclintom

Hey Fox, you believe that the heart doesn't have to support muscle even more than fat? Remember that muscle weighs twice as much as fat per volume and has a lot more extensive capillary systems.

We won't use body fat percentage because it is very difficult to get an accurate reading and it changes very rapidly. During a couple of weeks off the bike your body fat percentage can change several percentage points. Over a winter 20%.

I've know people who were frighteningly fat that were VERY healthy. One guy was the chief adjuster for one of the world's largest insurance companies and he weighed over 300 lbs and he would race sailboats with me at almost 70 years old. He moved a little slower than me but he was just as sure.

He moved out of the area some 10 years ago but my bet is that he's still alive and doing well in the wine country.

berts

Barring unforseen circumstances I should live to 83, problem is that 90% of circumstances are unforseen -that kind of shoots a hole in their calculations.