A demographic disaster?

With the recently released birth statistics in Poland we might easily admit the problem with ageing and declining population in my homeland is getting horrific.

As the graph with preliminary figures for 2023 shows, albeit the number of deaths is not rising (COVID-19 accelerated many deceases), the number of births is plummeting. Had it not been for migrants (predominantly Ukrainians), merely 252,000 infants would have been born last year. Actually the 252,000 thousand is the rough number of children born with the Polish citizenship.

The major reason for the number of births getting lower is the echo of the previous demographic wave, with a high of new births of 724,000 in 1983, but then decreasing gradually to around 350,000 in 2003. Since then for over a decade the number of births was getting higher, with some boost in 2017 put down to 500+ child allowance in place.

Within 6 years the number of birth, upon
adjustment for inflow of Ukrainians has gone down by more than 35%. Over that time fertility rate of women fell from nearly 1.5 to around 1.3, compared to 2.0 around 1990. Needless to say, if a country’s population is not about to dwindle, the rate should be slightly above 2.0 in mid-term.

Most (but not all) European countries are facing the same problem, yet in the Western Europe fertile migrants tend to make up for the shortfall of domestic births. The key reasons cited for the trend by both experts and home-grown specialists are:
1) a cultural and lifestyle shift in which raising a family is not the only option, but one of many, with decreasing social pressure for having children,
2) priority of career pursuit / convenience for many people (not only women),
3) shortage of mature male partners to women who would become responsible fathers participants in upbringing and household works,
4) housing problems, especially high property purchase and rental prices, compounded by lack of non-commercial accommodation alternatives,
5) financial insecurity,
6) lack of systemic support for parents wishing to combine professional duties with taking care of children.

Another problem, less often mentioned is that many couple confine themselves to one child only. Back at school, I was one of very, very few only children, with everyone around having siblings. With hindsight I see having a sister or a brother teaches empathy, sharing and social skills. A child which is not an only child quickly realises they are not a hub of the universe, but sadly, several “only childs” these days are brought up in such way. I am holding back from assessing parents choosing a 2+1 model (the motivations are the same as for declining overall fertility), but I see several drawbacks of such option.

To show the declining number of children per woman is not necessarily an option, let’s look at the example of Czech Republic, not a catholic nation, with wide access to abortion in early pregnancy. Surprising to the pro-life wackos, they do not have such problem as Poland. Reasons why our southern neighbours have done so well have been listed by Łukasz Pietrzak on his X profile:
1) the highest number of in-vitro inseminations per citizen in the EU,
2) low unemployment and higher job security,
3) a well-developed network of public nursery schools (low-cost daily care for children aged 3 – 6),
4) a young-parent allowance is paid to each parent until a child turns 4 (helps combine professional duties and parenthood),
5) 100% salary equivalent is paid during a maternity leave,
6) generous tax allowance for parents,
7) flexible labour market schemes for young parents, including part-time jobs and home office.
Some of the above are already in place in Poland, on others the Polish new government needs to work on. Given the overall cultural context of many youngsters ruling out parenthood altogether, it will partly go in vain, but if we look at the upsides, it will benefit the planet.

Longevity – a reason to be cheerful?

Musings written with considerable delay – should have been posted here a few weeks ago, as on 24 October 2013 my paternal grandparents had their 65th wedding anniversary and my paternal grandmother turned 88 on 3 November 2013.

My maternal grandmother died from cancer aged 73, when I was only four, so I barely remember her, but until the last weeks of her life, when the disease began to advance rapidly, she stayed mentally and physically fit. My maternal grandfather died aged 87 five years ago. Until the age of 86 he was mentally and physically very fit, but fortunately the senility overwhelming him in the last months of his life did not progress so quickly to prevent him from moving around and doing basic things on his own and by the end of his days he understood what was going on around and even sensed the oncoming departure.

My paternal grandparents still live on their own and somehow manage on their own. Their self-sufficiency can be attributed only to the fact they are together (also financially, as their pension benefits are demure).

Grandma is mentally still exceptionally fit. She displays no signs of dementia, is interested, sometimes overly, in what is going around, experiences no problems with memory and despite advanced age, her brain seems unaffected by aging. On the other hand, on account of her problems with spine, several bones and joints, she moves around with aid of walking stick. If she goes out of her flat, she only ambles outside her block of flats; any further journeys require somebody giving her a lift by car.

Grandpa, aged 87, on the other hand is moderately mentally and physically fit. When he feels well, he does the shopping, strolls around the neighbourhood and cleans the house. In terms of general comprehension of surrounding world, his mental fitness is much better than many of his peers, but nowhere as good as of his wife’s. Once in a few months he loses conscience and is taken to a hospital, where he recuperates, but then return home so weak that he stays in bed most of time, recovers for some next month and does well until next such incident strikes him. In 2012 he had 2 such stays in the hospital, in 2013 he landed in the hospital three times, last time in November. Doctors openly say odds of sustainable improvement in his health, owing to his age, are very low.

Polish language lacks the equivalent of ‘grand old age’, the term intuitively referring to a person who lived very long, but in good health. When you speak of far-reaching senility when an elderly person requires as much attention and aid as an infant, it is just an ‘old age'

I am lucky to assert none of my departed and living grandparents has reached that point when the old age is no longer grand. It is that sad moment when an old person no longer recognises their relatives, does not remember their own name, cannot be left at home alone, is bed-ridden, or unable to do the most mundane things on their own.

Aging of societies begins to pose a challenge for humanity, in economic and social terms. Higher percentage population in pension age elicit a need to reshape pension systems. Higher number of senile people and other social changes raise a question how to properly take care of elderly people and give rise to businesses focusing on such services.

For the last decades it has become a paradigm that each next generation will outlive the previous one. A recent study by WHO call this assertion into question and gives evidence current children are less fit than their parents and this will translate into lower life expectancy. No wonder, youngsters fall victim of their lifestyle –  being driven in cars by parents, avoiding sport lessons at school and doing sport in general, spending time in front of computer, rather than on football pitch. Even during breaks between classes at school they stare at their smartphones instead of running around. In Poland I observe things drifting in the wrong direction, in comparison to times when I was in primary school. With some dread my parents recently noticed their parents were much more fit (meaning healthy and active) when they had been in their early sixties then they are…

What to do to grow old and live until ripe old age in good health?

Have a lot of friends and foster friendships?

Be sociable?

Be open-minded and keep track of new developments in the world?

Have hobbies and passions?

Get enough physical exercise?

Do sports regularly?

Avoid using cars when unjustified?

Having medical examinations done regularly?

Refrain smoking and drinking alcohol in small amounts?

Follow a healthy diet?

Keeping work-life balance?

Avoiding stress?

Drawing pleasure from your work?

Extend the list above?

Or do the factors above it really matter? Is it all written in the stars? Or does it run in the genes?

Longevity

My paternal grandfather turns 85 this Tuesday. Maybe it's not yet a grand old age (although far longer than average lifespan), but there's a chance that he makes it to the next round, 90th, anniversary. He'd been in a very good health until the age of 80, then he had several attacks of epilepsy and some other problems with general health. This year, after passing out unexpectedly he spent a few days in a hospital. He still cleans up the house and does the shopping, mentally he's fit enough to do the household chores unaided.

His birthday made me think a bit of the determinants of length of a human life. I've even drawn up a short list of factors.

1. Genes - probably the most meaningful factor. Length of our life, no accidents permitting is written in the genes at the moment of birth. Some are predestined to live 90 years, some have to die 25 years earlier. Genes of longevity may be passed on to next generations. In my family the fateful age was 87. Three out of seven of my great-grandparents, whose dates of deaths are known, died aged 87, my maternal grandfather also passed away aged 87 (he had predicted it seven years earlier...).

2. Resilience - stronger people, who don't give up, bear up what fate brings should live longer.

3. Temper - patient, kind-hearted, joyful people are more likely to live longer than aggressive and hot-tempered ones.

4. Social activities - the more friends you have, the better your relationships with your family are, the more time you spend with other people (nad enjoy it), the longer you should stay on this earth.

5. Sport - people who do some sports and have a daily, or at least weekly dose of physical exercise, should stay fit longer and hence the probability that they die from heart attack should decrease...

6. Train your brain - I'm not sure if it can extend life, but for sure if brainteasers, crosswords and books keep you company, risk of senility in the old age should go down.

7. Stress - here the correlation is negative. The more stressful life you lead, the shorter might it be...

8. Happiness - works just as in the case of social activities.

9. Place of residence - generally refers to factors other than listed above. On where you live depends how well-equipped hospitals are, how well-trained doctors are and how easy access to medicines is.

10. Wealth - sadly. Well-off people can afford to undergo costly therapies that can save their or their relatives' lives. Not everyone can.

11. Awareness of health - look at the example of breast cancer prevention. Those women who suffer from it usually were oblivious of the possibility to have their breast examined each three years or were afraid of the very examination. Results are dire.

12. Smoking, drinking, other addictions - it is said that each smoked cigarette shortens your life by 18 minutes. I've never had a cigarette in my mouth in my life but I still wonder how long would live those people who died aged over 100 and smoked several cigarettes a day over decades. In small doses alcohol also should not hamper one's health.

Anything to add to that list?

Actually if the factors above were that very crucial, my paternal grandparents, both aged 85, married to each other for over 62 years, would not be predestined to live that long. So is everything written in the genes? Or somewhere else?

At the very end of this short (again, but easier to digest) post a small reflection. It is said, in the context of imminent collapse of pension systems, that people will live longer and longer. Is it so certain. "Live fast, die young" - look at young yuppies who break their backs to make roaring careers and make lots money and ask yourself, if they'll be able to carry on like this for 40 years. Imagine a man working 60 hours a week for four decades when he retires in his sixties. What will be left? Who will be left?

Provocative paragraph, but if it's a bit controversial, it suits the blog very well :)