More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Bhagwan Chowdhry

GET UPDATES FROM Bhagwan Chowdhry
 

Death Makes Us Weak, Impatient and Risk-Averse

Posted: 05/15/10 08:00 AM ET

Ask most people why we die as we grow old, the answer you most likely will get is that our body slowly wears out, getting weaker and weaker with increasingly delicate immune system that is no longer able to fight disease or physical injury. But that really begs the question: why is it that we get weak as we get older? The mechanistic answer that body parts wear out is not satisfactory because the body parts don't have to wear out. After all, we do in fact get stronger between infancy and early adulthood.

The body is not like a machine with inert parts. We consume food and water and our cells grow and repair themselves. In other words, evolution could have easily decided that such repair and resuscitation is necessary and kept our bodies with equal strength and vigor all our lives. We would still die because our resources to fight disease, predation and other physical strengths are not infinite and every now and then we would succumb to an external threat of predation, disease or accident. But we would stay young, beautiful and strong all our lives and a multi-billion dollar industry hopelessly attempting to help people fight aging and senescence would disappear.

But evolution chose not to arrange our lives that way. Why not? The answer, it turns out, is that because resources necessary to fight external threats are limited, it is more important to allocate more resources to the body when it is young than when it is old. This is because death is irreversible. If you die while young, you wouldn't be around to become old. On the contrary, if you die when you are old, that is not as bad because you still enjoyed being alive (which means procreate passing your genes to the next generation) while young. Thus genetic mutations that allocated resources equally, keeping us equally strong all our lives, will lose the evolutionary race to genes that front-load the resources early on. This argument was articulated nearly 50 years ago by biologist George Williams in a paper he published in 1957. He wrote:

...natural selection will frequently maximize vigor in youth at the expense of vigor later on and thereby produce a declining vigor (senescence) during adult life.

I developed a mathematical model to capture this insight and to explore what else would such evolutionary optimization imply. In a paper that is forthcoming in the journal Economic Inquiry, I show that not only does the possibility of death imply that organisms value the future less, compared to the present (called discounting in Finance and Economics), it also makes sense to avoid risk in the sense organisms would tend to avoid gambles that have equal probabilities of increasing resources and decreasing resources by an equal amount (called fair lotteries). The intuition is that a decrease in resources has a disproportionately larger negative impact compared to an equal amount of increase in resources because the decrease is more likely to cause the organism to die and thereby permanently forgo the possibility of producing offspring in the future that will contribute to its genetic fitness. So, possibility of death causes us to value the future less, makes us weaker as we grow old, and predisposes us to avoid risk, following a simple evolutionary argument. You can read the paper with the mathematical model here.

 

Follow Bhagwan Chowdhry on Twitter: www.twitter.com/bhagwanUCLA

Ask most people why we die as we grow old, the answer you most likely will get is that our body slowly wears out, getting weaker and weaker with increasingly delicate immune system that is no longer a...
Ask most people why we die as we grow old, the answer you most likely will get is that our body slowly wears out, getting weaker and weaker with increasingly delicate immune system that is no longer a...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 47
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
05:16 PM on 05/17/2010
I must admit, you had me, right up until "We would still die because our resources to fight disease, predation and other physical strengths are not infinite and every now and then we would succumb to an external threat of predation, disease or accident."

Doc, you need to get out of your ivory tower, away from mathematical models and get out amongst the living. You still have time.

People die because they are ready to leave this particular reality, not because of any disease or predator or accident. The events leading to death provides the means of the desire to leave, not the other way around. When you get to know people, you will understand the actual sequence and see death as a natural and fulfilling act of living.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Bhagwan Chowdhry
07:42 PM on 05/17/2010
OK. Mathematical or spiritual models, ivory tower or not, you can rewrite my statement you quoted as "the desire to leave this reality materializes more often when we are sick, weak or when ton of bricks fall on our head."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LastAngryWoman
waiting for godot
11:03 AM on 05/17/2010
This title is weird.

I thought Death just made you dead. Didn't know you could be dead AND impatient at the same time!
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Bhagwan Chowdhry
02:05 AM on 05/16/2010
A more appropriate - though longer - title would be:
(Possibility of) Death Makes Us Weak, Impatient and Risk-Averse (While We Are Alive)
07:52 AM on 05/16/2010
Indeed. Just to refine it further:

Foreknowledge of death?
Awareness of death?
Fear of death?
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Bhagwan Chowdhry
12:07 PM on 05/16/2010
Foreknowledge is not required for this evolutionary arguments. Indeed, most species do not have foreknowledge of death. Genetic mutations that front-load resources become more prevalent with time - this happens automatically.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:24 PM on 05/17/2010
Instead of death you mean old age. just think a little. the last angry woman is also the last correct woman
11:47 PM on 05/15/2010
What a title. I guess you could also say death makes us motionless, apathetic and unlikely to finish that novel.
07:52 AM on 05/16/2010
... and smelly.
11:06 AM on 05/16/2010
and smelly. I forgot that. Stiff as a board as well, but not like a certain Tokyo Hotel guitarist. har
sonoffestus
Got smart & got out!
10:43 PM on 05/15/2010
I'm living until I die.
10:25 PM on 05/15/2010
I've been like this all of my life. There is no way to predict the moment of my death. I plan to keep having fun till I die.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Diogenis
10:02 PM on 05/15/2010
We live in anticipation of life and seldom live it.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Diogenis
09:59 PM on 05/15/2010
Interesting headliner. I say "death makes us dead"!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
robotfog
Victim of Technology
07:54 PM on 05/15/2010
I always thought dying would be having to sit through a KISS concert. As long as I avoid that, I'll be here alive and well.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Diogenis
10:03 PM on 05/15/2010
.......the last kiss!
photo
laaambchop
Cheerfulness is a sign of wisdom
07:27 AM on 05/16/2010
Discrete Math did it for me.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DMSmith
06:48 PM on 05/15/2010
I take exception to the headline.
Death makes you DEAD!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Diogenis
09:59 PM on 05/15/2010
imagine that!
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
KIVPossum
Moldova Marsupial
04:34 PM on 05/15/2010
Death usually makes us very still and cold.
03:41 PM on 05/15/2010
My guess is that Deepak Chopra would enjoy this article (the man who claims we don't need to age, yet colors his hair, but that's another topic). However, I really don't get the point of your article. It is a nice thought that our parts don't have to wear out, but the reality is that they do. We have lots of protections while Mother Nature is using us to procreate, when that's over, the decay begins - joints, eyes, hearing, arteries, the list goes on. Just deciding we're not going to think about aging, so we won't, just won't work. Consider the whole "Mind-Body" science stuff that was so popular a few years ago - if we think well, we'll be well. Don't hear much about all that any more, because it just doesn't work.

I don't think many people don't value the future - in fact, most people value the future above all else. Hope is the very essence of valuing the future, and it's what, perhaps, distinguishes us as human more than any other trait or ability.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Bhagwan Chowdhry
05:14 PM on 05/15/2010
Biologist George Williams' argument is this. Suppose we had a choice of allocating 100 units of strength. You could allocate 50 early and 50 later. Then we would look the same when young and when old. But it may be better to allocate 75 to when young and 25 to when old. This makes you stronger when young. I am grossly simplifying. Point of my article was to show that this also implies risk-aversion.

Yes, we do value future but not as much as present.

These models don't explain a lot of things but they apply not just to human beings but to many living organisms.
07:54 AM on 05/16/2010
This assumes we can't increase our resources, no?
07:14 PM on 05/15/2010
"Consider the whole 'Mind-Body' science stuff that was so popular a few years ago - if we think well, we'll be well. Don't hear much about all that any more, because it just doesn't work."

I couldn't disagree more with this statement. Mind-Body is alive and well, being incorporated into traditional medical practices as never before, and it is being incorporated because the benefits have been proven, whether they actually cause healing, make the body stronger while withstanding medical treatment (i.e., chemo), or help ease pain during medical treatment, their benefits are now widely accepted by traditional medical doctors and hospitals throughout this country and others.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
02:45 PM on 05/15/2010
After 60 years of living life full tilt to the hilt death is a welcome rest.
03:52 PM on 05/15/2010
When you're 59, you'll change your tune.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
KIVPossum
Moldova Marsupial
04:35 PM on 05/15/2010
:) Yeah.
photo
bryanzth
Honest to Goodness USA Patriot!
07:23 PM on 05/15/2010
Amazing how the change in tune you mention becomes evident, even as those Exit Signs start to light up. ;-) Fanned!

BZ.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DMSmith
06:48 PM on 05/15/2010
Speak for yourself. I'm 65 and happy to keep going - and I sure as hell have lived full-tilt.
I also have had a partner for 7 years who is now 30.
I'd suggest you're not 'curious' enough!!
09:45 AM on 05/16/2010
Fanned!
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Caru
Politics is fun to watch.
02:21 PM on 05/15/2010
Quotes:
"why is it that we get weak as we get older? The mechanistic answer that body parts wear out is not satisfactory because the body parts don't have to wear out. After all, we do in fact get stronger between infancy and early adulthood."

*facepalm*

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senescence
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
UnaBohemia
Offering a Mexicana Perspective
02:18 PM on 05/15/2010
Read it five times...... and.... I don't think I learned anything that I don't already know... which is: we are born, we procreate, we suffer because we get older and then we die.
... I am rushing to get my book printed!
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Bhagwan Chowdhry
02:26 PM on 05/15/2010
The insight by George Williams is to explain WHY we get weak as we get older - and he suggests that it is important keep the body strong when young, at the expense of making it weak when older.