Longevity in women

I was reading an article on longevity in women. In addition to questions about menopause, age at first pregnancy etc., the questionnaire included questions on smoking and drinking. The alcohol question completely baffled me. It made no sense,

“Alcohol use was assessed using a health-seeking behavior questionnaire during the physical assessment. The question was “Do you try to avoid the use of alcohol?” The answers were “don’t try at all,” “try a little,” or “try a lot.” “

I was thinking how I would answer. I had a 6 oz. glass of red wine on November 4 and November 18 with dinner in a restaurant. That’s it. So am I “trying to avoid it” or am I “trying a lot to avoid it?” I didn’t order a 12 oz. or a second or third glass. There was no trying going on at all—I just know if I want to walk out of the restaurant rather than be carried out, I’ll just have one small glass. 

 The people being asked were centenarians born between 1881-1895 (study began in 1988). Those ladies were probably too polite to tell the researchers that they made no sense. And really, if a 105 year old woman wants a little libation, who is going to say, “It’s not good for your health, Grammy?”

When I looked through the “Discussion” section of the paper (2017) it used the weasel words meaning they didn’t find anything so therefore it needed more study. I did see one sentence that jumped out at me which they didn’t pursue at all: “ The introduction of “the Pill” [artificial hormones] in 1960 caused the fertility of women to change forever.” I wonder what else it has changed, don’t you? Maybe 3 generations of women on the pill produce a 4th who is a 10 year old who is confused about whether she’s a boy or girl?

Relationship of Fertility, Lifestyle, and Longevity Among Women | The Journals of Gerontology: Series A | Oxford Academic (oup.com)

More babies, longer life span?

https://academic.oup.com/biomedgerontology/article/61/2/190/542517/Does-Having-Children-Extend-Life-Span-A  The Journals of Gerontology: Series A, Volume 61, Issue 2, 1 February 2006, Pages 190–195

I came across an interesting article on using the genealogies of Old Order Amish to see how parity affected life span. Having a lot of children seems to affect both the life span of the father and the mother. Only after 14 (!) children do the pregnancies have an adverse affect on the Amish mother.  You’d have to read it and look up a few words (like parity—means number of deliveries) The advantage that I see in using genealogical records instead of medical records is it ended in 1912, before our current era of modern medicine.

So is it good genes, later menopause therefore affecting life span, or maybe having enough children around to work on the farm and take care of you in your old age? Since the majority of Americans lived on farms before the 20th c. I doubt it is any of today's concerns about diet, GMO, gluten and pesticides.

My genealogy has many Mennonites, some Old Order and some Old Order Brethren, some River Brethren but not sure about Old Order Amish. So far I haven't found another article on health among Old Order sects in American culture, but they are probably out there. You only have to look at a 18th-20th c. genealogies to see the longevity.

If you are related to me on my mother's side, her grandparents were Wengers. There is a database of of Hans and Hannah Wenger, 474,000 - 496,000 names (depending on update) of individuals, mostly descended from 18th century Mennonites, River Brethren (Brethren in Christ) and German Baptist Brethren who settled in Lancaster, Lebanon and Franklin Counties, Pennsylvania, in Ontario, Canada and in Washington Co. Maryland and Botetourt Co. Virginia. In the 1800s a number of the families moved to Darke Co. and Montgomery Co. Ohio and to Iowa, Indiana and Kansas. In the early 1900s there was continued migration to Upland, Calif. and Modesto, Calif.

Not sure a subjective view cuts it

. . . the researchers looked at 65 different mortality risk factors as they tracked participants through the later years of their lives. Once the number crunching was finished, the factor that rose to the top was surprisingly simple and straightforward.

The most sensitive measure of longevity was the individual’s own subjective evaluation of how healthy he or she felt. In other words, a person reporting that he or she feels healthy outweighed any other single predictor of a long life, including any medical measures such as cholesterol levels and blood pressure.'

It's hard for someone with diabetic neuropathy or COPD to report "I feel healthy." Unless they lie.  Unless they just haven't been to the doctor in years and don't know better.  Having a positive attitude and a fulfilling life is different.  I have a friend about 80 with a wonderful sense of humor, bright fulfilling volunteer life, and so many ailments she should be in a text book.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/out-the-ooze/201605/the-surprising-factor-can-predict-long-life