Cognitive decline can begin as early as age 45: study

The brain's capacity for memory, reasoning and comprehension skills (cognitive function) can start to deteriorate from age 45, finds research published in the British Medical Journal today.

Previous research suggests that does not begin before the age of 60, but this view is not universally accepted.

Researchers, led by Archana Singh-Manoux from the Centre for Research in Epidemiology and in France and University College London in the UK, argue that "understanding cognitive ageing will be one of the challenges of this century," especially as life expectancy continues to rise.

They add that it is important to investigate the age at which cognitive decline begins because medical interventions are more likely to work when individuals first start to experience mental impairment.

Therefore the authors observed 5,198 men and 2,192 women over a 10-year period from 1997. They were all aged between 45 and 70 and were part of the Whitehall II cohort study established in 1985.

Participants' cognitive functions were assessed three times over the study period. Individuals were tested for memory, vocabulary and aural and visual comprehension skills. The latter include recalling in writing as many words beginning with "S" (phonemic fluency) and as many animal names (semantic fluency) as possible.

Differences in were taken into account.

The results show that cognitive scores declined in all categories (memory, reasoning, phonemic and semantic fluency) except vocabulary and there was faster decline in older people.

The findings also reveal that over the 10-year study period there was a 3.6% decline in mental reasoning in men aged 45-49 and a 9.6% decline in those aged 65-70. The corresponding figures for women were 3.6% and 7.4%.

The authors argue that robust evidence showing cognitive decline before the age of 60 has important ramifications because it demonstrates the importance of promoting healthy lifestyles, particularly cardiovascular health, as there is emerging evidence that "what is good for our hearts is also good for our heads."

They add that targeting patients who suffer from one or more risk factors for heart disease (obesity, high blood pressure and high cholesterol levels) could not only protect their hearts but also safeguard them from dementia in later life.

In an accompanying editorial, Francine Grodstein, Associate Professor of Medicine at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, says the study "has profound implications for prevention of dementia and public health."

She adds that more creative research, perhaps using telephone and computer cognitive assessments, needs to be undertaken.

Related Stories

In women, caffeine may protect memory

Aug 06, 2007

Caffeine may help older women protect their thinking skills, according to a study published in the August 7, 2007, issue of Neurology, the medical journal of the American Academy of Neurology.

Recommended for you

Suddenly health insurance is not for sale

Apr 18, 2014

(HealthDay)— Darlene Tucker, an independent insurance broker in Scotts Hill, Tenn., says health insurers in her area aren't selling policies year-round anymore.

Study: Half of jailed NYC youths have brain injury (Update)

Apr 18, 2014

About half of all 16- to 18-year-olds coming into New York City's jails say they had a traumatic brain injury before being incarcerated, most caused by assaults, according to a new study that's the latest in a growing body ...

Autonomy and relationships among 'good life' goals

Apr 18, 2014

Young adults with Down syndrome have a strong desire to be self-sufficient by living independently and having a job, according to a study into the meaning of wellbeing among young people affected by the disorder.

User comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

kevinrtrs
2.3 / 5 (8) Jan 06, 2012
I'd guess that although water, food and air pollution probably plays a big part, the biggest culprit would be lifestyle - eating the wrong kinds of foods and quantities, lack of exercise plus inability to deal with stress from life choices or social interactions.
finitesolutions
2.6 / 5 (9) Jan 06, 2012
By the age of 70 everybody should have open the option of euthanasia. No questions asked. There is no real reason to prolong the inevitable and use up resources. Life's up.
dogbert
1.2 / 5 (17) Jan 06, 2012
I would suspect that failure to use one's mind in challenging ways might be the largest contributor to early decline.

Perhaps it is significant that the study was composed 100% of civil servants?
Squirrel
2 / 5 (3) Jan 06, 2012
The article is open access
http://www.bmj.co...mj.d7622
dogbert
1.7 / 5 (20) Jan 06, 2012
finitesolutions,
By the age of 70 everybody should have open the option of euthanasia. No questions asked.

Why would you limit such a basic human right to people who exceed 69 years of age?
There is no real reason to prolong the inevitable and use up resources. Life's up.

You are not alone in the desire to kill people you don't like. That position is immoral, but it is common.
Squirrel
2.3 / 5 (3) Jan 06, 2012
The data has been analyzed in way that hides whether the decline applies to all individuals or only a subgroup. People are known to differ in cognitive reserve that protects against the effects of aging on the brain; some individuals are exposed to risk factors to which others are not. Shame on the BMJ for not publishing more detailed data in a supplementary section which could determine this issue key to the generalizations been made from it in the press.
javjav
4.5 / 5 (4) Jan 06, 2012
By the age of 70 everybody should have open the option of euthanasia.


Please go to Youtube and listen Kempff playing piano at his 80's. If it does change your thinking then you are probably ready for euthanasia.

By the way, why is euthanasia being permitted more and more while smoking is being forbidden more and more?

javjav
5 / 5 (1) Jan 06, 2012
This is what I mean:

http://www.youtub...ulR9Fymg

Listen this guy and then tell me the live is up at 70. The article is only about statistical trends, it has not to be like that for everybody.
tadchem
5 / 5 (2) Jan 06, 2012
I always thought that it could begin much earlier, but that may just have been the guys I was hanging with back then.
Xbw
1.9 / 5 (23) Jan 06, 2012
45? Sometimes I walk to the refrigerator and forget what I was getting...and I'm only 26.
wealthychef
4.4 / 5 (14) Jan 06, 2012
By the age of 70 everybody should have open the option of euthanasia. No questions asked. There is no real reason to prolong the inevitable and use up resources. Life's up.

I think everyone at any age should have the option, with appropriate safeguards to ensure that no third party (e.g., the state or greedy relatives) have the ability to pull the trigger without full consent. Tricky subject
FrankHerbert
3.4 / 5 (21) Jan 06, 2012
Euthanasia should be treated like sex changes in a way. Make the person live as if their time is up for a certain period of time. Make them go to counseling. Make them tell everyone they know. Make them exhaust all options. Then if they still want to, let them.

Suicide is the ultimate freedom.

finitesolutions,
By the age of 70 everybody should have open the option of euthanasia. No questions asked.

Why would you limit such a basic human right to people who exceed 69 years of age?
There is no real reason to prolong the inevitable and use up resources. Life's up.

You are not alone in the desire to kill people you don't like. That position is immoral, but it is common.


Can you not read? He said they should have the "open option". This isn't soylent green you moron. Everyone here knows you're dishonest.
freethinking
1.7 / 5 (23) Jan 06, 2012
Dogbert, you took my comment away! Civil servents starts to have cognitive decline when they start working for the government not at 45.

Seriously, I wonder why progressives think the solution to everything is death. An unborn baby is not wanted, kill them. An unborn baby is defective (unless it is stephen hawkins) kill them. A person has cognitive decline, kill them (but of course have some safeguards). A race of people (like jews) you accuse of causing problems, kill them.

Look at some of the most progressive posters on this Board. VD, SH, FH, Otto, and you will see this pattern.
Deathclock
3.8 / 5 (16) Jan 06, 2012
I've always said when I am retired and the kids have moved out and have families of their own I am going to relax and smoke pot all day long, maybe even experiment with some harder stuff why the hell not?

About assisted suicide, I agree that it should be legal after a certain age or in given situations. I don't agree that it should be legal for anyone for any reason but ONLY because of the potential for corruption.
Xbw
1.9 / 5 (23) Jan 06, 2012

Look at some of the most progressive posters on this Board. VD, SH, FH, Otto, and you will see this pattern.


With them I see more of a pattern of hate. If you aren't ultra liberal like them, you are branded an enemy of the sockpuppet nation and all your posts are summarily voted down. It's his/their only way to attack people since he/they don't believe in owning a gun :D
rubberman
3.2 / 5 (6) Jan 06, 2012
I would suspect that failure to use one's mind in challenging ways might be the largest contributor to early decline.

Perhaps it is significant that the study was composed 100% of civil servants?


This has actually been proven. If they had used scientists or university professors....or even most physorg posters, they wouldn't have found these percentages of deterioration. Keeping your mind working keeps it sharper.

Civil servants may not have been the best choice but I would imagine, given the quantity of subjects and duration of this experiment that they would have the most free time.....
HealingMindN
1.5 / 5 (12) Jan 06, 2012
If civil servant = lack luster, sedentary lifestyle, then yes, I agree.
spacealf
5 / 5 (1) Jan 06, 2012
All the negativity in today's world. Listen I am not buying any brain function no matter who is selling it. I like being a skeptic who is tending towards senility. It's a wonder this Planet has not been sucked into a black hole with all this negativity that is always given out.
kochevnik
3.6 / 5 (20) Jan 06, 2012
@freeofthinking A race of people (like jews) you accuse of causing problems, kill them.
Hitler was a christian like you. A practicing catholic.
dogbert
1.2 / 5 (18) Jan 07, 2012
Hitler was a christian...

No, but it is a common practice for activist atheists to try to associate Christianity with evil. Doesn't work, but it is a continual effort.
Callippo
2.6 / 5 (5) Jan 07, 2012
This finding contradicts the experience, in which elderly and single scientists outperform these married and younger ones in productivity

http://www.anxus....le-ones/

http://www.kellog...ses.aspx
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.4 / 5 (18) Jan 07, 2012
With them I see more of a pattern of hate. If you aren't ultra liberal like them, you are branded an enemy of the sockpuppet nation and all your posts are summarily voted down. It's his/their only way to attack blah
THAT'S FUNNY. You're supposedly new here 2 weeks and youre already disparaging pirouettes enemies? Lessee:
1) you defend pirouette/ritchieguy
2) you're a flooder
3) you go out of your way to emphasize your age (26 in the above comment and your BIRTHDATE on your profile page -?) whereas pirouettes profile says she's retired
4) you tend to post inane comments

-So. From this unfortunate evidence we may begin to suspect that pirouette has abandoned her clumsy attempts at constructing tuffguy sockpuppets (namvet666, her imaginary bf) and is now trying something new and equally transparent.

Like I said dear you are too dim to realize that you are not nearly smart enough to be attempting this shit. What I HATE is bullshit like this. You are outed once again.
FrankHerbert
3.4 / 5 (23) Jan 07, 2012
Hitler was a christian...

No, but it is a common practice for activist atheists to try to associate Christianity with evil. Doesn't work, but it is a continual effort.

http://www.logica...cotsman/
Real-World Examples

"An argument similar to this is often arises when people attempt to define religious groups. In some Christian groups, for example, there is an idea that faith is permanent, that once one becomes a Christian one cannot fall away. Apparent counter-examples to this idea, people who appear to have faith but subsequently lose it, are written off using the No True Scotsman fallacy: they didnt really have faith, they werent true Christians. The claim that faith cannot be lost is thus preserved from refutation. Given such an approach, this claim is unfalsifiable, there is no possible refutation of it."

Hitler was a Christian.
dogbert
1.2 / 5 (19) Jan 07, 2012
Frankie,
Hitler was a Christian.

No, he was not, but you will continue to assert that he was a Christian because you despise Christianity.
Noumenon
1.4 / 5 (22) Jan 07, 2012
Hitler was a Christian. - Al Sharpton


"A Christian [...] is a person who adheres to Christianity, an [...] religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth." - Wiki or any source of knowledge

Since Hitler advocated murder, he did not follow the teachings of Jesus, ergo, he was not a Christian.

That was easily.
FrankHerbert
3.6 / 5 (21) Jan 07, 2012
You claim to be a philosopher yet are ignorant of the no true Scotsman fallacy? You are pathetic Noumenon.
Noumenon
1.4 / 5 (18) Jan 07, 2012
Apparently you're ignorant of it because you don't know how or when to apply it.

It only works as applied by you, given a faulty premise,--> if one believes that Christianity is an intrinsic and unalterable characteristic of an individual, (as in a Scotsman).

But nobody thinks this way, not even most Christians, so application requires a faulty premise to start.

Christianity, is not an intrinsic attribute of a person,... it is a behavior and adherence to a moral philosophy.
freethinking
1.4 / 5 (19) Jan 07, 2012
Progressives hate Christianty that is why they accuse Hitler of being a Christian. Yet Hitler was demonstratively a socialist and progressive, so was Stalin and Mao, the founder of Planned Parenthood.

Using the posts of VD and FH who are very progressive, you see that they have much in common with Htiler and Stalin, and other famous Progressives.

Progressives have no problem with voting early and often.
Progressives have no problem re-writing history (Hitler was a christian, only a idiot believes or repeats that lie)
Progressives have no problem with hate and the use of violence to destroy those that opose them. (see VD's profile)
Noumenon
1.4 / 5 (19) Jan 07, 2012
,.. and also, they have no problem in using the ad hominem attack of charging "racism" in lieu of rational argument.
julianpenrod
1.4 / 5 (18) Jan 07, 2012
In fact, the flaws in this that purports to be "research" are massive, even to the point of being critically delegitimizing.
Limited to only one particular group of people, civil servants in England, can be an extremely significant disqualifying characteristic.
Too, the choice of "tests" gives all the appearance of an engineered "experiment", namely, one in which the "conclusion" was decided and then the "methodology" defined to ensure that. Here, for example, "tests" as, frankly, imbecilic as "listing all the words that begin with a particular letter". Carefully ignored are that younger respondents might be tempted to include "Spiderman", "Superman", "Symantec", "Sony" and "Superfreak" among words that begin with "s", while someone who's mroe mature might look for terms from the dictionary. And, some older respondents might be more laden with important concerns crowding their thoughts than younger respondents, cutting into response time.
julianpenrod
1.4 / 5 (18) Jan 07, 2012
And requiring them to recall in writing verious terms apparently is designed to fail to take into account the possibility of such things as arthritis interfering with many respondents' ability!
In short, this "experiment" is a complete and utter fraud. If there is not an investigation resulting in the punishment of these "researchers" by the community, it will be an admission that programmed research is embraced wholly and absolutely by the marausding deceit calling itself "science".
As with "old wives tales", the perception that intellectual decline was not inevitable at an early age came from somewhere. They didn't just make it up! There was a reason they considered people mentally sound for quite a long while. Indeed, the "studies" claiming intellectual loss at later ages must now necessarily be taken into consideration and subjected to scrutiny at the most minute level.
julianpenrod
1.2 / 5 (17) Jan 07, 2012
Among other things, this can be part of an overall effort not only take make every will invalid, because the New World Order will define everyone of that age at necessarily "not of sound mind", but also to require that no one beyond the age of witless video game addicts should be allowed to affect government policy!
LEVI506
1.5 / 5 (13) Jan 08, 2012
For those of you that believe in euthanasia, feel free to practice on yourselves. I don't want you in my world any way!
dogbert
3.9 / 5 (11) Jan 08, 2012
LEVI506,
The term euthanasia simply means "to allow to die" and by extension, "to assist death in those seeking it".

Why would you want to live in a world without compassion where people are forced to bear extended intractable pain?
RitchieGuy
1.3 / 5 (11) Jan 08, 2012
julianpenrod says:
Among other things, this can be part of an overall effort not only take make every will invalid, because the New World Order will define everyone of that age at necessarily "not of sound mind", but also to require that no one beyond the age of witless video game addicts should be allowed to affect government policy!


I agree. If the study is not exposed as fraudulent, people will be categorized and catalogued into fitting within a tight, narrow niche according to the governments' future use of people according to gov't needs. The people will become puppets for governments to do with what they will. No dissent will be allowed. Allready, people (especially the youth) are being lulled into submission by those in power whose goals are to transform the country's populace into a mob of willing robots. The first thing to do is the reeducation of the mind to accept the power of the new world order. That will be the NEW STATE RELIGION.
Isaacsname
not rated yet Jan 09, 2012
....I'm sorry, what was the question again ?