Showing posts with label Health. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Health. Show all posts

2025/06/24

Make Weight Training a Habit: 4 Science-Backed Strategies

 Make Weight Training a Habit: 4 Science-Backed Strategies 

Motivation isn’t enough. Identity, planning, and behavior design create consistency.

Key points

  • Motivation fluctuates. Consistency depends on systems, not willpower.
  • Shrinking the workout to fit motivation increases follow-through.
  • Focus on identity goals: “I’m someone who lifts,” not just “I want to get fit.”

In the last few years, working with hundreds of different people, I’ve been pleasantly surprised by how many already know they should be strength training. Aerobic exercise has always garnered attention (for good reason—it’s good for you), but the health benefits of resistance training are becoming harder to ignore.

Lifting weights improves strength, preserves muscle as we age, supports metabolic health, and even contributes to psychological well-being. And yet, many people still struggle to stick with it.

You get inspired, maybe train for a few days, but then life throws you off course. Travel, work, stress. Before long, the habit collapses. That’s the real issue.

The question isn’t why lift weights. It’s “How do I make lifting a habit I actually stick with?”

As someone who researches behavior change and coaches people through it, I want to offer a few science-backed strategies. Not motivational fluff—just practical ideas that work in the real world.

1. Plan It Like an Appointment

Planning is one of the most effective ways to bridge the gap between good intentions and real behavior. Once you’ve decided to strength train, your next move should be to schedule it. Not “I’ll try to go after work.” Put it on your calendar.

When a prompt arrives—like a phone notification or calendar reminder—it creates a simple yes/no decision moment. That removes ambiguity and helps you avoid missing the opportune window.

Some apps allow you to schedule your workouts (sometimes only with a coach working with you). Others allow you to do it on your own.

2. Start Small, Then Scale Up

Motivation is tricky. You might feel ready to train in the morning—but after a long day, the couch suddenly becomes more persuasive than the gym.

Behavior happens when motivation, ability, and a prompt converge. If your motivation is low, the task has to be easy—or it won’t happen.

Let’s say lifting for 30 minutes feels like a 7/10 in difficulty. But at 6:00 p.m., your motivation is a 4/10. That prompt will fail unless you reduce the demand of the task.

So instead of fighting your motivation, shrink the behavior. Ten minutes with a pair of dumbbells is still a win. These smaller actions make it far more likely you’ll act again, which brings us to point 3.

3. Past Behavior Predicts Future Behavior

In behavioral research, we often build models to predict future actions—using motivation, self-efficacy, and social support among predictors. These variables work—until we add past behavior. Once that’s in the model, it often becomes the strongest predictor.

Why? Because behavior builds momentum.

So even if your workout is short or imperfect, it still contributes to a pattern. That pattern matters. People often skip a workout because they “don’t have enough time to do it right.” But doing something is what increases the likelihood you’ll keep doing anything.

4. Build Identity, Not Just Habits

Motivation ebbs and flows. But identity is more stable.

In psychology, identity refers to your self-concept—the internalized beliefs about who you are. Identity helps provide meaning and direction. It’s what makes someone say “I’m a lifter,” not just “I go to the gym.”

James Clear, author of Atomic Habits, frames it like this:

“Every action you take is a vote for the type of person you want to become.”

Most people set outcome-based goals like “I want to lose 10 pounds” or “I want to lift more.” But once that goal is met, the behavior often ends. Identity-based goals are more durable. If you want to become “someone who trains consistently,” you simply ask: What would that kind of person do today?

That question gets you to the gym—even on the off days.

You Don’t Need to Be Perfect. You Just Need a System.

Consistency isn’t about high motivation. It’s about designing a life where working out is visible, accessible, and rewarding. Focus on identity-based goals and adjust the difficulty of the task to match your current motivation—not the other way around.

If you can stay consistent long enough, the benefits will start to reinforce the behavior. Over time, it becomes easier—not just because your body is stronger, but because your actions and identity are finally aligned. That’s how you create a virtuous cycle—and a lasting habit.

FAQ: How to Stay Consistent With Workouts

Q: How do I stay consistent with my workouts?

A: Start small, schedule workouts, and focus on building identity-based habits.

Q: Why do I keep losing motivation to work out?

A: Because motivation fluctuates. You need systems that support action even when motivation is low.

Q: What’s the best way to build a workout habit? 

2025/04/23

Why Walking After Eating Is So Good for You

 Why Walking After Eating Is So Good for You

Let’s face it: Grocery shopping, meal prepping, cooking, and cleaning up afterwards takes a lot of energy. Once you’ve actually eaten and washed the dishes, getting up and moving may be the last thing you want to do.

But taking a walk after eating comes with a host of health benefits — and you don’t have to go too fast or far to reap the rewards.

Here are all the reasons it’s so good to go for a power walk or even just a stroll after a meal.

When Should You Walk After a Meal?

While experts have mixed opinions on exactly how soon to walk after meals, they generally agree that it’s good to get moving as soon as you can — ideally within a half an hour of eating.

“As long as you feel comfortable walking right after you finish eating, that is a good time,” says Sheri Colberg, PhD, professor emerita of exercise science at Old Dominion University in Norfolk, Virginia.

Research has found significant improvements in blood sugar and other so-called cardiometabolic risk factors when people took a walk instead of standing still or sitting after meals.

How Long Should You Walk After Meals?

There are no hard and fast rules on how long you should walk for. It’s possible to benefit even from a brief, leisurely stroll. Health improvements have been seen even with walking at a slow pace for as little as two to five minutes. Want to kick it up a notch? Taking a 15-minute walk after each meal may further improve your cardiometabolic health.

“There's no step distance or number of steps you need to reach to feel the benefits of walking after eating,” says Heather Viola, DO, an assistant professor of internal medicine at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York City. “One person’s ideal walk length may be different from another’s.”

If you’re just starting out with a new walking routine, aim for 10 minutes, Viola advises. As that starts to feel comfortable, gradually increase the duration of your walks.

What’s more important is picking an amount of time you can stick to and make a daily habit, says Loretta DiPietro, PhD, MPH, a professor of exercise and nutrition sciences at the Milken Institute School of Public Health at George Washington University in Washington, DC. “This must be repeated regularly for the benefits to continue.”

Walking After Eating Is Good For Blood Sugar

Studies have long shown that walking after meals is good for managing blood sugar levels. A small experiment done more than a decade ago compared how walking before versus after meals impacted blood sugar in people with type 2 diabetes — and found that it was clearly better to walk after eating.

More recently, a meta-analysis of eight studies examining the benefits of walking before versus after meals also found a clear advantage for waiting. Both healthy participants and individuals with symptoms of type 2 diabetes had better blood sugar control when they walked after meals, and saw little if any impact on blood sugar from walking before meals.

Why? Walking requires your muscles to work harder than they do at rest, and muscles burn glucose, or sugars, as fuel to do this work, says Dan Seung Kim, MD, PhD, an exercise and physical activity researcher at Stanford University in California. “As a result, walking after eating has been shown in numerous small trials and larger meta-analyses to decrease blood glucose in both patients with diabetes and those without.” 

Get walking — but make sure you do it in the right shoes. Here's our list of the best walking shoes for women, according to podiatrists.

Walking After Eating May Support Heart Health

Much of the research on walking and heart health doesn’t focus specifically on whether it’s more important to get your steps in before or after meals. But the large body of evidence does point to clear heart health benefits from taking a walk — no matter when it fits into your schedule.

In fact, walking as little as three times a week for 20 minutes at a time has been found to significantly lower blood pressure.

Walking can have a positive impact on cholesterol levels, as well — particularly in individuals with overweight or obesity. Research also shows that walking may help significantly improve total cholesterol and the “bad” low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol that clogs arteries, regardless of how much people weigh. People with obesity may experience these benefits, too, as well as reductions in triglycerides, or fats that can clog arteries.

“These beneficial effects, if kept up over a longer period of time, help keep the arteries of the heart clear of plaque buildup that causes heart attacks,” emphasizes Dr. Kim.

Walking After Eating May Aid Weight Loss

Walking may not be the first workout that comes to mind when your goal is weight loss. And it’s true that spending time performing more intense aerobic activities can burn more calories than taking leisurely stroll around the neighborhood. But weight-loss benefits from walking still exist — even if you break it down into shorter, more frequent walks.

In fact, research comparing the benefits of a single 50-minute daily walk to two 25-minute walks each day found that people shed more inches from their midsection and lost more weight with the two short walks then they did with the single long one.

Part of the benefit of multiple daily walks is that this approach often replaces the time people otherwise spend sitting after eating (or indulging in extra calories with dessert) with post-meal stroll, instead, says Dr. DiPietro.

“Walking after meals consistently can bring you closer to reaching a calorie deficit and — if consistently maintained — can aid in weight loss,” Viola says. “When you walk after eating, your body expends more energy to support the exercise, resulting in more caloric expenditure than sitting or resting.”

And even if weight loss isn’t a goal, taking a walk after eating can still help with weight management, says DiPietro.

“Walking after eating can aid in appetite regulation and reduced snacking between meals, which can help with weight management,” adds Viola.

Walking After Eating May Improve Sleep

Many people who don’t sleep well struggle with exercise because they simply feel too tired to push through a workout. But the truth is that incorporating low-impact activities like walking into your day can actually help you sleep at night.

Research shows that people who averaged more steps a day reported better quality sleep with fewer nighttime awakenings than people who walked less. And walking before bed may also help improve sleep efficiency, or the amount of time spent in bed actually sleeping.

Another study found that walking more can help you fall asleep faster, another key to waking up feeling more rested and able to face your day.

“Walking after a meal can improve sleep quality by helping regulate circadian rhythms and promoting better digestion,” Viola says. “Low-to-moderate physical activities like walking can enhance the body's natural sleep-wake cycle, making it easier to fall asleep and enjoy deeper, more restorative sleep.”

Walking After Eating May Boost Mood and Mental Health

“Walking can help with the release of hormones in the brain that help decrease depression and improve mood,” says Jill Kanaley, PhD, a professor of nutrition and exercise sciences at the University of Missouri in Columbia.

As with so many other potential benefits of walking after a meal, most of the evidence that shows sleep can boost mental health has to do with the exercise itself rather than the timing of it. That said, it’s clear that you don’t have to walk for long or push yourself too hard to reap the benefits.

Research shows that taking a 20-minute walk five days a week can significantly reduce the risk of depression. While harder, longer workouts showed even more mental health benefits, this amount of walking alone was associated with a 16 percent lower risk of depression compared with those getting no physical activity at all.

Another study found taking a brief walk just three days a week was enough to reduce symptoms of anxiety, depression, and stress. Here, too, the magnitude of these benefits was higher when people walked longer and more often — but the gains of a leisurely stroll like many people might take after a meal were still clear.

Walking can improve mental health because it lowers the amount of stress hormones such as adrenaline and cortisol and releases endorphins that can help boost mood and reduce stress, Viola says. While walking after meals is one way to achieve these benefits, it’s not the only time that works, Viola adds. “If this is the primary benefit you’re looking for, aim to fit a walk in whenever suits you best.”

The Takeaway

While taking a walk any time of the day is good for your health, squeezing some steps in after you eat can provide even more benefits to both your mind and your body. Whether you’re looking to stabilize blood sugar, improve heart health, support weight-loss efforts, promote sleep, or boost mood, taking a stroll after you eat can help you achieve your health goals. And if you’re short on time, don’t stress: Even walking for a few minutes after a meal can help you reap these health benefits.

EDITORIAL SOURCES

Everyday Health follows strict sourcing guidelines to ensure the accuracy of its content, outlined in our editorial policy. We use only trustworthy sources, including peer-reviewed studies, board-certified medical experts, patients with lived experience, and information from top institutions.

Sources

Resources

  1. Buffey A et al. The Acute Effects of Interrupting Prolonged Sitting Time in Adults With Standing and Light-Intensity Walking on Biomarkers of Cardiometabolic Health in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Sports Medicine. February 11, 2022.
  2. DiPietro L et al. Three 15-Min Bouts of Moderate Postmeal Walking Significantly Improves 24-h Glycemic Control in Older People at Risk for Impaired Glucose Tolerance. Diabetes Care. September 14, 2013.
  3. Colberg S et al. Postprandial Walking Is Better for Lowering the Glycemic Effect of Dinner Than Pre-Dinner Exercise in Type 2 Diabetic Individuals. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association. May 22, 2009.
  4. Engeroff T et al. After Dinner Rest a While, After Supper Walk a Mile? A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis on the Acute Postprandial Glycemic Response to Exercise Before and After Meal Ingestion in Healthy Subjects and Patients With Impaired Glucose Tolerance. Sports Medicine. January 30, 2023.
  5. Lee L et al. The Effect of Walking on Blood Pressure Control. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. February 24, 2021.
  6. Ballard A et al. The Effects of Exclusive Walking on Lipids and Lipoproteins in Women with Overweight and Obesity: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. American Journal of Health Promotion. November 22, 2021.
  7. Madjd A et al. Effect of a Long Bout Versus Short Bouts of Walking on Weight Loss During a Weight-Loss Diet: A Randomized Trial. Obesity. February 9, 2019.
  8. Bisson A et al. Walk to a Better Night of Sleep: Testing the Relationship Between Physical Activity and Sleep. Sleep Health. October 5, 2019.
  9. Hori H. Does Subjective Sleep Quality Improve by a Walking Intervention? A Real-World Study in a Japanese Workplace. BMJ Open. October 24, 2016.
  10. Llaird E et al. Physical Activity Dose and Depression in a Cohort of Older Adults in The Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing. JAMA Network Open. July 10, 2023.
  11. Bahri A et al. The Relationship Between Walking and Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Among a Sample From Jazan, Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Investigation. Medicine. September 23, 2022.

2024/12/20

Seven reasons why Americans pay more for health care than any other nation

 Seven reasons why Americans pay more for health care than any other nation


Americans spend far more on health care than anywhere else in the world but we have the lowest life expectancy among large, wealthy countries.

A lot of that can be explained by the unique aspects of our health care system. Among other things, we reward doctors more for medical procedures than for keeping people healthy, keep costs hidden from customers and spend money on tasks that have nothing to do making patients feel better.

"We spend more on administrative costs than we do on caring for heart disease and caring for cancer," said Harvard University economist David Cutler. "It's just an absurd amount."

The nation's rising health bill affects just about everyone.

The amount working-age Americans spent on health insurance through the payroll deductions has jumped nearly three times faster than wages over the past two dozen years. Health bills are the leading cause of personal bankruptcy. And medical bills accounted for more than half of all debt on consumers credit records in 2022, according to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Public anger over high costs and poor results has been squarely focused on health insurance industry in the wake of the assassination earlier this month of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson.

Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren said that while violence is never the answer, the public's frustration should serve as a warning for the health care industry, and in a Huffington Post interview last week cited the "visceral response" from people who feel "cheated, ripped off and threatened by the vile practices of their insurance companies."

But health economists say the entire health care systemnot just insurers, deserves scrutiny for runaway medical bills.

Health insurance companies took in $25 billion in profit last yearwhile hospitals collected an eye-popping $90 billion, Rice University economist Vivian Ho said.

"It's become quite clear how angry the public is with health care costs," said Ho. "I'm glad people are voicing their anger against insurers, but they should be directing equal anger against hospitals, particularly since so many are nonprofit."

Reason 1: Lack of price limits

U.S. hospitals have more specialists than do medical facilities in other nations. Having access to 24/7 specialty care, particularly for hospitals in major metro areas, drives up costs, said Michael Chernew, a health care policy professor at Harvard Medical School.

Patients have more elbow room and privacy here. U.S. hospitals typically have either one or two patients per room, unlike facilities abroad that tend to have open wards with rows of beds, Chernew said. He said differences in labor markets and regulatory requirements also can pack on costs.

Of the $4.5 trillion spent on U.S. health care in 2022, hospitals collected 30% of that total health spending, according to data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Doctors rank second at 20%. Prescription drugs accounted for 9% and health insurance − both private health insurance and government programs such as Medicare and Medicaid − collect 7% in administrative costs.

Most U.S. hospitals are nonprofit and get federal, state and local tax breaks. These nonprofits are expected to provide free or reduced-cost care to low-income patients as well as other community benefits. Federal law requires hospital to assess and stabilize every patient who seeks care in an emergency room, even if they can't pay their bills.

But research suggests many hospitals don't live up to their charity care and other community benefit obligations.

Johns Hopkins University and Texas Christian University researchers estimated the nation's nearly 3,000 nonprofit hospitals were spared $37.4 billion in federal, state and local taxes in 2021. That same year, Medicare filings show hospitals paid out $15.2 billion in charity care.

Chernew has proposed health care price caps to curb runaway health costs. Such caps might be used in markets where large hospitals control a significant share of a local health market, which allows them to demand higher prices from insurance companies who might not have other options.

Reason 2: Hospitals and doctors get paid for services, not outcomes

Doctors, hospitals and other providers are paid based on the number of tests and procedures they order, not necessarily whether patients get better.

The insurer pays the doctor, hospital or lab based on negotiated, in-network rates between the two parties.

Critics of this fee-for-service payment method says it rewards quantity over quality. Health providers who order more tests or procedures get more lucrative payments whether the patients improve or not.

"This is not the way health care should be delivered in our country," U.S. Rep. Vern Buchanan, R-Fla., said during a hearing in June exploring an alternative health payment called value-based care.

After the Affordable Care Act passed in 2010, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services funded small programs that encouraged hospitals and other health providers to emphasize value over volume.

But the U.S. health system has been slow to adopt value-based care programs. Of 50 such models launched by CMS over the past decade, only six delivered health savings and two demonstrated improvements in quality, according to June testimony from U.S. Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Texas.

Reason 3: Specialists get paid much more ‒ and want to keep it that way

Doctors who provide specialty care such as cardiologists or cancer doctors get much higher payments from Medicare and private insurers than primary care doctors.

Some see that as a system that rewards doctors who specialize in caring for patients with complex medical conditions while skimping on pay for primary care doctors who try to prevent or limit disease.

Under the current system, doctors are chosen or approved by the American Medical Association to a 32-member committee which recommends values for medical services that Medicare then considers when deciding how much to pay doctors. Some have compared the idea of doctors setting their own payscale to the proverbial fox guarding the henhouse.

The health news publication STAT first reported that Robert F. Kennedy Jr., President-elect Donald Trump's nominee to become Secretary of Health and Human Services, is seeking to limit the AMA's influence over these medical billing codes.

Medicare payment rates not only determine how much taxpayers shell out for older Americans' health care, they set the base for health care prices. Private insurers typically use Medicare rates to decide how much they pay doctors and hospitals.

If such an overhaul resulted in more lucrative payment for primary care doctors who emphasize preventive care, it could help make people healthier and reduce costly spending on specialists, Ho said.

Reason 4: Administrative costs inflate health spending

One of the biggest sources of wasted medical spending is on administrative costsseveral experts told USA TODAY.

Although Medicare's official health care spending report doesn't calculate how much the nation spends on administrative tasks, Harvard's Cutler estimates that up to 25% of medical spending is due to administrative costs.

Health insurers often require doctors and hospitals to get authorization before performing procedures or operations. Or they mandate "step therapy," which makes patients try comparable lower-cost prescription drugs before coverage for a doctor-recommended drug kicks in.

These mandates trigger a flurry of communication and tasks for both health insurers and doctors, Cutler said.

Although medical records are computerized, too often medical computer systems don't communicate with outside organizations such as health insurers, Cutler said. That results in extra administrative tasks, when doctors attempt to get authorization from an insurer on behalf of a patient.

Such communication could be more seamless − and result in less busywork − if insurers could track patients records electronically, Cutler said

Instead, they often turn to calls and throwback technology such as fax machines.

"The only use of fax machines now are in medical care," Cutler said.

Cutler said government-run Medicare is a much more efficient operation. Doctors who provide care for Medicare patients are allowed to bill and collect payment in relatively seamless transactions without the same level of oversight that private insurance companies apply.

One drawback: Unscrupulous providers can more easily fraudulently bill the federal health program, Cutler said.

Reason 5: Health care pricing is a mystery

Patients often have no idea how much a test or a procedure will cost before they go to a clinic or a hospital. Health care prices are hidden from the public. And because consumers with health insurance often must pick up a portion of their bill, health care prices matter.

An MRI can cost $300 or $3,000, depending on where you get it. A colonoscopy can run you $1,000 to $10,000.

Economists cited these examples of wide-ranging health care prices in a request that Congress pass the Health Care Price Transparency Act 2.0, which would require hospitals and health providers to disclose their prices.

Under a law that passed Congress during Trump's first term and was enacted under the Biden administration, hospitals must disclose cash prices and rates negotiated with health insurers for a broad list of procedures in a computer-readable format so the information can be analyzed. The rule also mandated hospitals post estimates for at least 300 services so consumers can compare prices.

However, the consumer nonprofit Patient Rights Advocate said in a November report that just 21% of hospitals fully comply with the existing federal price transparency rule, down from 35% as of February.

Reason 6: Americans pay far more for prescription drugs than people in other wealthy nations

There are no price limits on prescription drugs, and Americans pay more for these life-saving medications than residents of other wealthy nations.

U.S prescription drug prices run more than 2.5 times those in 32 comparable countries, according to a 2023 HHS report.

 In one study of 224 cancer drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration from 2015 through 2020, the median price for a patient was $196,000 per year.

Lawmakers have scrutinized prices of weight-loss drugs such as Ozempic and Wegovy. During a September hearing, Sen. Bernie Sanders grilled Novo Nordisk's top executive over why U.S. residents pay so much more for these medications than people in other countries. Although the amount consumers pay at the pharmacy is often discounted, Novo Nordisk charged $969 a month for Ozempic in the U.S. ‒ while the same drug costs $155 in Canada, $122 in Denmark, and $59 in Germany, according to a document submitted by Sanders.

Reason 7: Private Equity

Wall Street investors who control private equity firms have taken over hospitals and large doctors practices, with the primary goal of making a profit. The role of these private equity investors has drawn increased scrutiny from government regulators and elected officials.

One example is the high-profile bankruptcy of Steward Health Care, which formed in 2010 when a private equity firm, acquired a financially struggling nonprofit hospital chain from the Archdiocese of Boston. The chain is led by a former heart surgeon who collected more than $100 million in compensation and bought a $40 million yacht while employees at Steward hospitals complained about a lack of basic supplies, according to a Senate committee. Layoffs and hospital closings followed.

Private equity investors also have targeted specialty practices in certain states and metro regions.

Last year, the Federal Trade Commission sued U.S. Anesthesia Partners over its serial acquisition of practices in Texas, alleging these deals violated antitrust laws and inflated prices for patients. The federal agency also sued private equity investor Welsh Carson that funded these deals, known as "rollups," but a federal judge in Texas dismissed Welsh Carson from the case.

FTC Chair Lina Khan has argued such rapid acquisitions allowed the doctors and private equity investors to raise prices for anesthesia services and collect "tens of millions of extra dollars for these executives at the expense of Texas patients and businesses."

A National Bureau of Economic Research paper by researchers from Yale, Northwestern and the University of Chicago shows 18 metro regions where such serial anesthesiology acquisitions, known as "rollups," resulted in fewer provider choices and higher bills for consumers.

The tragic shooting of an insurance executive has highlighted the distinctive aspects of the nation's health care system.

Andrew Witty, the CEO of UnitedHealth Group, parent company of UnitedHealthcare, said in an op-ed Friday that the slaying of Thompson was "unconscionable." But he also acknowledged the flaws that so many Americans see in their medical care.

"We know the health system does not work as well as it should, and we understand people’s frustrations with it," he wrote.

Ken Alltucker is on X at @kalltucker, contact him by email at alltuck@usatoday.com.

(This story has been updated to add new information.)

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Seven reasons why Americans pay more for health care than any other nation

2024/09/30

What’s the secret of the supercentenarians? They don’t really exist

 What’s the secret of the supercentenarians? They don’t really exist

Earlier this month, an unusual prize ceremony got under way. Five Nobel laureates gathered at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, not to receive further accolades themselves, but to present the Ig Nobel prizes. Now in their 34th year, these are awarded to researchers whose discoveries “make people laugh, then think”.

One winner was Saul Justin Newman, whose research probing the quality of demographic data certainly made me laugh and think. Places with surprising clusters of individuals reaching remarkable ages, with centenarians or even supercentenarians (aged 110+) galore, attract lots of attention. Debates focus on their secrets – from Mediterranean diets to superior genetics.

But Newman argues that the real secret is that many of these super-senior citizens exist only on paper. He shows that in the US, when a state introduced birth certificates, often towards the end of 19th century, there was a 69-82% fall in supercentenarians recorded. Maybe birth certificates harm our health… or, more plausibly, they cleanse dodgy data.

Even better is his work on Europe. It shows super-oldies are correlated with how rich a region is. But not in the way you’d expect: poorer and deprived places record most people living to the oldest ages – odd, when those regions have terrible health outcomes on every other metric.

Despite having high poverty and the lowest proportion of people aged 90+, Tower Hamlets somehow records more people aged 105+ per capita than anywhere else in England. Corsica is apparently stuffed full of the super-old, yet is very poor (and has France’s highest murder rate).

What’s going on? Pension fraud, because deprived areas create financial pressures, not greater longevity. Something to think, but not laugh, about.

 Torsten Bell is Labour MP for Swansea West and author of Great Britain? How We Get Our Future Back