Stay childless to stay healthy, says study

IF YOU hope to live a long and healthy life, then abandon all plans of marriage, forget about the trauma of childbirth and dedicate yourself to climbing the career ladder to achieve a disease-free old age.

A massive study of 15,000 middle-aged men and women, carried out in Paisley 30 years ago, has given researchers a unique opportunity to determine the factors which contribute to a productive dotage.

And the startling results reveal that women who have never married and never given birth have the best chance of good health in their later years.

For men, career success seems to be the elusive elixir necessary for sustained quality of life long after-retirement age.

The ground-breaking study, carried out by the University of Paisley, revisited some of the surviving 7,500 men and women who took part in the original research.

Professor Mary Gilhooly, director of the Centre of Gerontology and Health at the university, told The Scotsman that the two and a half year PREVAIL project was unique in the world, because most other studies of its kind did not have access to a pool of women subjects.

It was thanks only to the stubbornness of a female factory worker who demanded that women be included in the original survey that scientists today had ready access to such valuable data.

Today’s research found evidence to suggest that eliminating stress was a precursor for a healthy old age.

Professor Gilhooly said: "It seems that having and caring for children is stressful for women and lack of career progression is stressful for men.

"So low levels of chronic stress from giving birth or a poor career are damaging over a lifetime."

The study determined the factors which allowed the 100 healthiest men and women, now in their seventies or older, to live productive lives. "What is surprising is that of the 52 women we looked at 20 of them are childless, which is quite astonishing," added Prof Gilhooly.

"It appears that being unmarried and childless is the better option for women who want to stay healthy in their old age," she said.

"It’s not a happy state to have lived to 95, but to have spent 30 years in poor health.

"Giving birth is physiologically demanding, but it is also time-consuming and stressful bringing up a child, and for some of them it is very boring.

"We’ve got to remember that we’re talking about a generation who had children and then were expected to give up work."

Throughout the past 30 years, studies conducted into the Paisley Buddies, initially undertaken by researchers at Glasgow University, have given valuable insights into the prevention and treatment of heart disease and cancer.

The MIDSPAN study also examined the effects of smoking, drinking and obesity on lifespan. Describing the 52 women looked at in the new study as the "healthy elite", the professor said those who were unmarried were a far cry from the stereotype of the hard-nosed spinster.

She added: "They were not crabby old witches. If anything, they were dynamic and leading interesting lives with very strong social circles."

Asked whether the prognosis for a generation of women who juggle career and family commitments was poor, Prof Gilhooly said: "Well, it could be worse. If the common under-lying factor in our findings is stress, then it’s possible that poor health may increase for those women when they reach old age."

The professor explained that modern women could benefit from increased salaries, better homes and better diets, which could, in turn, balance out any negative impacts on health associated with child-birth and marriage.

Professor Gilhooly added that her study had thrown open some interesting results for her own future.

She admitted: "I’ve been married for 30 years and I have a son.

"I’m not childless and not unmarried, but I have had career progression, so if I was a man, my prognosis would be wonderful."

The research project concludes in March 2002.

"Parents, on the whole, based on my exposure, are intellectually weak. I.E. stupid, more to the point, dense and unobservant. Even more to the point, fricken rude. "

Very sad for you. My parents were fairly sharp, decent and considerate people. They had seven of us and took us everywhere they went. Screaming and misbehaving at a restaurant, even as toddlers, would have been no more tolerated than it would have been at home. And as babies, we either slept or ate... very little fussing, and quickly removed if we did. We're the same with our son. Some people really do have good babies. It has to do with bonding with them early and often, and not "sticking" them in daycare so they don't even know where they are or who they're with half the time.

As for the dog, I completely understand - but you, unfortunately, haven't the compassion or experience to say the same re kids. We have two furry babies who are actually more work than the boy what with grooming and exercise etc. The baby learned how to say "sit" and "stay" before he learned to say "Mommy."

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.