This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Topic Collections  • Humanities  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

JAMA. 2009;302(16):1817.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

It is often asked if men do not live longer now than formerly—if the length of human life is not actually increased? It is evident that two distinct problems may be hidden in this question as it is ordinarily put. The first relates to what may be called the natural term of existence. The duration of a normal life not cut off by accident or infectious disease was placed by the Psalmist at about threescore years and ten; seventy or eighty years is, indeed, to-day commonly reckoned as the normal life.

There seems to be no reason for supposing that within historical times man's natural term of life has materially varied. Like that of the dog or the horse, it is determined by unknown biologic causes. While some statements in old documents might be taken to indicate that in antiquity men lived hundreds and even thousands of years, such assertions . . . [Full Text of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?