shouldn’t we have extended the life expectancy to at least 90-100 years with all the advancements we have in medicine now?
In: Biology
This is a very big question and encompasses a LOT of different variables. For all of our advancements, we still don’t have a cure for cancer. Each year, over 600,000 people die from cancer. You’d be hard pressed to find someone who hasn’t had a friend or loved one affected by this awful disease. My wife died of cancer two years ago, and my father died of cancer 8 years ago–those are the two who are closest to me, but certainly not the only ones. Cancer is currently the second highest cause of death in the United States.
Obesity has increased in this country to epidemic levels. Heart disease often results from obesity and is the number one cause of death in the United States at almost 700,000 people per year.
Another factor is immigration. The United States has lower lifespans than some other countries, and we also have a surprisingly high infant mortality rate for such as advanced western nation. Well, a big part of the reason for that is immigration. Most immigrants come from very poor, third-world countries, and assimilating them into our society means that we have to accept the hit to our health statistics. The other countries that we often get compared to don’t have anywhere near our levels of immigration.
These are just three factors which significantly impact our lifespan, but they are not the only factors–there are many, many more. But I think it gives a hint as to why our lifespan seems to be frozen at around 70%.
Latest Answers