Conference quark::human_relations-v1

    To seed the discussion a little, one of the respondents in this
    conference (can't remember where) said it's the QUALITY not the
    QUANTITY that counts.  Two possible applications:
    
    (1)	Single life is of superior QUALITY and additional QUANTITY of
    life is not needed for fulfillment.
    
    (2)	Single life is of inferior QUALITY and additional QUANTITY of
    life is not tolerable.
    
    I smell smoke.  Think the flames should start any time ...
    
    Steve
    

	What statistics are you using to draw the conclusion that married
    people outlive single people?  I think it's too easy to draw this sort
    of conclusion without some very detailed analyses.

							-davo

    It's the swinging single life, the wild partying, and the lewd and
    lascivious sex that kills us off sooner... 
    
    	(^;	(^;	(^;	(^;	(^;	(^;	(^;	(^;	(^;

        Well, I heard a couple of stories on NPR which could help to
        explain why married folk live longer. According to the reports I
        heard, they were doing research on human pheromones. They did
        two types of experiments, both on women. Both involved spreading
        human "essences" (under-arm sweat I believe, but I wasn't able
        to attend closely to either story) on the upper lip of the
        subject. 
        
        Male essence caused the woman's periods to normalize. Female
        essence caused the recipient's cycle to synchronize with the
        donor's. There was also some mention which I didn't get all of
        the details of about the male essence not only regularizing the
        woman's cycle but improving or protecting her health as well.
        
        I just tried to find the same story in the VTX AP news. The
        basic story about male essence regularizing, and the female
        essence synchronizing a woman's cycles were there, but nothing
        about any specific improvements to health. However, I did find
        an article which indicated that estrogen seems to help protect
        women from heart attacks, but to raise a man's risk. This would
        indicate that there might be links between hormonal activity and
        life expectancy.
        
        I also found an article which indicated that fatal heart attacks
        are more common among childless women. A possible explanation
        for this is again a link between hormones and the heart. In any
        event, there is a correlation between having children and
        marriage and now one between having children and a lowered rate
        of heart attacks. 
        
        In any event, it is still somewhat speculative but there may be
        a mechanism involving pheromones, hormones, and improved health.
        
        JimB. 

    It is true that people who marry, eat breakfast, sleep eight hours
    a night and are happy live longer that those who do not.
    
    It is not necessarily true that those differences are the ones which
    cause the difference in lifespan.
    
    Remember that "A and B are correlated" can mean "A causes B",
    "B causes A", "C causes A and B" or "Error in data collection and
    processing".
    
    If married men live longer that single men, it may be because women
    are more likely to marry healthy men that sick ones, more likely
    to marry whole men than damaged ones, more likely to marry happy
    men than sad ones.

    In any case, your experience is not statistical: when you die is
    determined by many other things than your marital state, most of
    which have greater influence than it does.
    
    				-John Bishop

    re:  .3
    
    Well, now we know YOUR lifestyle.  And if you go early, we know
    why!   ;'}                 
    
    Must be some truth to the adage "he who longs the most lives the
    longest"!  I guess those who don't long so much go sooner ...
    
    re:  .2
    
    As for source of statistics, I initiated this topic by referring
    to a source in MENNOTES where they are discussing the same thing.
    
    HOWEVER, you've sent me to the library and I have SOME stats, albeit
    not ones specific to the single/non-single question, but pertaining
    to the male/female question.
    
    Source:  Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1985 edition,
    US Dept of Commerce, Bureau of the Census (that should be official
    enough for most of us ... don't ask me why I have this book, I'm
    just a collector of strange facts I guess)
    
    Expectation of Life at Birth (in years):
    Year	W Male	W Female	B Male	B Female
    1983 est	71.6	78.8		67.1	75.3
    1980	70.7	78.1		65.3	73.6
    1970	68.0	75.6		61.3	69.4
    1950	66.5	72.2		59.1	62.9
    
    I've also checked out the 1986 World Almanac and it provides similar
    info.
    
    What I haven't located is a specific reference and hard numbers
    on the marital status impact on life span.  Perhaps someone else
    can help provide it.
    
    However, as soft evidence, what about the ad campaign that singles
    should adopt pets because it makes them happier and better adjusted
    and healthier?  Seems to me there's a prevalent perception that
    marriage extends life (or does it just seem longer).  In any case,
    it's a topic for discussion - perhaps others can provide additional
    insight.
    
    Steve
    
    

    
    I wouldnt be suprised if its because married people tend to eat
    healthier than singles and probably drink less.  
    I really have no evidence for the above statement other than my
    own personal observances, however Im sure someone would agree with
    me on this one.
    
    I can see reasons why married people would eat healthier, they 
    have someone to share the meal preperation so they probably eat
    out less, and when eating out, probably eat more complete meals
    as apposed to junk food dinners.  They probably eat a more regular
    times than singles.
    
    Its probably true that singles party more than couples, most likely
    because they are interested in meating someone, and what better
    place to meat someone than at a party or bar or club. ...
    
    I also wouldnt be surprised if singles worked longer hours than
    couples, especially if couples have a meal waiting at home for them
    at the same time every day.  
    
    Paul

    any decent insurance actuary can provide the missing info here
    
    married people are more stable in all walks of life 
    
    stability = complacency = peace of mind = good cardiovascular
    

    I don't think these statistics have too much to do with how you eat
    or sleep.  I think it comes down to loving and being loved.  Having someone
    to care for and depend on MUST reduce the stress generated by 
    modern life.  It sure makes life easier and more fulfilling anyway.
    

    
    Re .3, is that what it's really like to be single.  Oh, please say
    it's true!
    
    Re .4, I don't think I understood the stuff about the sweat. 
    
    Re .7, .10, I think it's a combination of getting love and affection,
    and living a calmer, more regular, lifestyle - more good food, more
    sleep, less running around - but if it sinks into boredom, what
    good is eternity.
    
    Lorna
    

	Just as I suspected; broad-ranging conclusions from incomplete
    or misleading statistics.  Not that I have anything to disprove what
    is claimed in .0 either, but just that I think that there are altogether
    too many factors which have not been examined here to justify making such
    a broad (seemingly moralistic) statement.

	I tend to think that John Bishop's analysis comes the closest to being
    accurate here (given the statistics we have to go on)...

re: .5,
    
>    If married men live longer that single men, it may be because women
>    are more likely to marry healthy men that sick ones, more likely
>    to marry whole men than damaged ones, more likely to marry happy
>    men than sad ones.

	...sort of a "survival of the fittest" analogy of the mating process.
    The fact is that both males and females tend (by nature) to seek out the
    healthiest of the species as their chosen mates (healthy here is defined
    as both mental and physical well-being) would tend to group the healthier
    humans into the married category by default.  These healthier people would
    undoubtedly live longer, but they would have lived longer regardless of
    whether they got married or not.

	As to drinking and longevity, an artilcle compiled recently in
    American Health magazine indicates that people who partake in light to
    moderate consumption of alchohol live longer on average than people who
    either don't drink at all, or than those who drink heavily.  Again, there
    are other factors to consider here (perhaps those who drink in moderation
    also tend to have a more balanced diet as well, who knows?), but don't so
    quick to assume that the key to a long life is as easy as some simplistic
    assumptions might lead you to believe.

							-davo

There is another explanation to the "longevity of the married"
phenomenon. This man was celebrating his 75th birthday. He was asked
how had he managed to reach that age and still retain his youthful
health and looks, to which he replied: 

	"At my wedding night, my wife and I made a pact. If we ever 
	were to have a fight, we agreed, I would immediately leave the
	house and take a long, long walk around the block."

	"Well, gentlemen, no wonder I am in such good health, after
	55 solid years of long nightly walks in the fresh air..."

-- Ron