top of page
Oct 314 min read

Breaking Boundaries and Challenging Assumptions about Aging

Updated: Oct 24


A Stanford study revealing rapid aging at 44 and 60 kickstarts our exploration of how aging perceptions are changing. We examine ageism in workplaces and the nuances of intergenerational dynamics, from reverse mentoring to Gen Z bringing parents to interviews.  The story of a 70-year-old medical school graduate sparks debate about pursuing new careers later in life. Groundbreaking research on delaying menopause offers insights into extending women's health and longevity. Join us in questioning age-based limitations and imagining a future where age doesn't define potential. How can we co-create a world that values contributions at every life stage?





Selected Links:



Related Resources:



Episode Transcript:

Sue: Welcome to Signal Shift, by Horizon Shift Lab. We're your hosts, Lana Price, Raakhee Natha, and Sue Chi. Each episode, we explore the latest signals in technology, culture, and society, uncovering insights that will impact our daily lives in the future. Join us as we shift perspectives, explore possibilities, and delve into real changes in our world. Curious to learn more? Go to horizonshiftlab.com.


Sue: Hello everyone. Welcome to another episode of Signal Shift. This is Sue, and I've got Lana and Raakhee here. 


And I chose today's topic based on a study by Stanford Medicine that was published just a few weeks ago in Nature that we started talking about. And it found that humans go through two periods of rapid aging. It's around age 44 and around age 60. And it studied changes in molecules and microbes in various parts of our bodies. And they basically tracked 250 billion different data points just in how we age. 


So anyway, the study was really surprising around this, really thinking that aging is not linear. It just accelerates rapidly around these two periods. And so they got us wondering, does this have to do with lifestyle changes? Are they behavioral factors? What is really going into this study? And so there's a lot more to find out. 


But of course, aging has been a frequent topic in our episodes. And so we said, hey, let's actually dedicate an episode specifically to aging. And so I am curious, what signals have you picked up this week? What rabbit hole did you actually go down? I would love to know. 


[1:58]


Lana: This is Lana, I'll go. Yeah, thanks. So yeah, I have a couple of different things ready to talk about. But the one that came up for me immediately was about ageism. 


You know, ageism, it's really a critical issue in the discussion around aging, especially in the workplace. And unfortunately, there's persistent discrimination against older workers globally. And when you talk about that cliff of 44 and 60, aging discrimination is found starting at 45. So around the same time that we're experiencing these molecular changes, that also corresponds with what we see, not just in the US, but in countries across the world; you know, there's a couple of fundamental beliefs that employers and employees hold. 


And so, a recent report that was developed in partnership with the OECD that surveyed workers and hiring managers, employers expressed the belief that mid-career and older workers are less likely than younger peers to learn new technology and skills. And this, I thought, was totally crazy that employers are almost equally likely to interview someone with five years of experience as 25 years of experience. And of course, it really depends on the industry, right? But I think especially in technology, tech workers, those who are under 25 are becoming more common while the proportion of workers older than 40 shrinks, even though that's not what's happening in our actual population, it's what's being reflected in the workforce.


Y’know, I think this is sort of just one angle that I was thinking about with the future of aging is really how are we changing the culture of the perception of what, I guess, what our role is in society, right, as we age. 


And so a signal that I found, there's a couple of different ones, but maybe the one that I'll point out first is EY, which used to be Ernst & Young. They have a reverse mentoring program. So it pairs younger workers and older colleagues, but the younger workers are actually the mentors for the older colleagues, right? So recognizing that wisdom or valuable skills aren't exactly exclusive to older generations. And so how do they leverage this kind of digital nativity of younger workers? So that's one signal. 


And then another one that I thought was really funny was I found this recent study of Gen Z workers: one in four Gen Zers had brought their parent to a job interview. Either in person like their parent came with them, like to the building, right, like maybe they sat in the lobby, and in some went as far as to go with them into the interview room. And then for the virtual interviews of those who had brought their parents, 70% were off camera, but 30% were on camera in the Zoom interview. And so to me, I think kind of the irony of this is that even though we're facing some different perceptions of the value of older workers, younger workers really value the wisdom of their parents, right? Like enough so that they want their help and their advice like all the way through the interview process. 


So I don't know, I think this is just some of the things that I found as I was thinking about, you know, while we are wanting to age and have a healthier and longer lifespan, we still need to really face some of the cultural barriers that we have, kind of as we grow older.


Sue: Thanks, Lana. I'm just trying to imagine that situation, whether it's on a Zoom interview or an in-person interview. Yeah, lots to think of there. Raakhee, what about you? What's your signal for the week?


[6:30]


Raakhee: Yeah, I think it's somewhat related, I think, to what you brought up, Lana, which is around ageism and just perceptions around age, et cetera. 


So the signal is there was actually a story that came on in the last week or so about a man who I think is about 70 and he graduated from medical school. Now there isn't a way to confirm if he is the oldest or what that is, but he's definitely one of the oldest people to graduate from medical school. And it was particularly touching for me because I know his daughter, she went to grad school with me. So when I saw her kind of share that article and realized it was her father, I was like even more touched and I thought, wow, how inspiring, right? I mean, it sounded like it was really grueling that he had been through med school for five, six years, whatever it took, did the shifts of 30 hours, et cetera. And he said it was a real struggle, but he got through it, right? This is a man who's really wise, really smart, he's worked his way up in life, he's got other degrees. He was smart enough to do this, but having said that, quite an accomplishment. 


But I think for me, where the part of the discussion and the debate came in is -- I had a conversation with somebody who was, you know, strongly felt that they were like, sure, it's an inspiring story, but they didn't like the idea of somebody who was 70 setting a trend or an example for people thinking at that age, you should get this kind of degree where, you know, seats are limited and contribution matters, right? With his degree now, he himself feels, the gentleman with this degree, feels that, you know, he can't, he can't actually go and be a practicing doctor. That's way too grueling, but he's going to play an advisory role, something like that. And I would count that as contribution, but yeah, I had an interesting conversation with somebody who was like: at what age, you know, do you allow somebody to do a degree like this or not, when so many people are competing for seats and we have a shortage of doctors and we need actual practicing doctors, right?


So there's really something interesting there around… we're talking and we spoke in previous episodes about the world opening up and you being able to do anything at any age. Here's really more a question than of contribution to society beyond that and what parameters do we put around it and what I personally find it to be really inspiring. I feel like you could be 20 and you can go to medical school and you can come out at 25 and you can still choose another path. So there's no guarantee that even somebody young is going to say, I'm going to contribute to society, right? Like what does that even mean? How do we define that? So for me personally, I sit in the camp of, I love it, it's amazing. And why don't we fix the situation where we have more seats in medical schools, we can train more. Let's, let's solve that root issue, right, rather than look at it from that perspective. But I still think it was a really interesting point they made amdd a very valid one with the reality of where the world is today. So that was the angle around aging that came up for me.


Sue: Thanks, Raakhee. And you know, the idea of just open up more seats, like what in this is fixed in terms of the situation and what can you do to change it? So lots of assumptions there to debunk, which is really interesting. 


[9:47]


Well, yeah, my signal is a little bit different, but maybe we can relate this back into work eventually; but I thought, you know, there's so many different things about aging I was interested in. And I think specifically being a woman, I wanted to look for signals that were a little bit surprising that I hadn't heard of related to women and aging. 


And what I found was something, speaking of assumptions, I had never bothered to question, which is all women go through menopause later in life, but it's sort of taken as this eventuality that happens at a certain age. And the question that researchers are now saying is what if you could delay menopause to delay aging? 


And this is important for several reasons. Like the biggest one is once you hit menopause, not only do you end your reproductive ability, but also you age rapidly. And while on average, women live longer than men, they also live with many more diseases and disabilities. So I said, that's got to change. And so anyway, lots of different surprising things I didn't know about our reproductive health. 


So ovaries are actually, they’re organs that age before you're even born. Super interesting. Scientists don't really know why or how they work. And they affect basically all of our other vital organs and scientists are still trying to figure out how this happens.


So of course, lots of implications there. But the signal that I found were a couple of different articles recently that talked about a few different shifts that are happening in this field. So one is funding. Earlier this year, the White House announced a hundred million dollar initiative to fund women's health studies. And there is an increasing amount of philanthropy dedicated to this topic, even though it's still like nowhere enough. The Financial Times profiled a woman named Nicole Shanahan out of Silicon Valley, who she was frustrated with quote unquote, these longevity bros that get talked about so much, but reproductive health for women is not one of them. And so she decided to also invest $100 million into research. This profile basically credited her with creating this field. 


And so because of that, now they're also research centers. The one place that she helped establish is out in the Bay Area. It's called the Global Consortium for Reproductive Longevity and Equality. And they're basically reporting all these different breakthroughs that they're finding as it relates to women's health. 


The last are actually trials. So because of all this that are happening, there are a couple of different trials occurring right now. One is to see whether there's this hormone, the anti-mullerian hormone, AMH, to see if that will actually extend ovarian function by basically reducing the number of eggs released every cycle. And then the other use is this drug called rapamycin, which is used in transplant surgery. And more broadly, it has been seen as having a positive effect on longevity. And so now they're studying the use of that in fertility cases to see if they can extend the fertility window for women, mainly, again, to extend longevity and women's health.


And so there are actually a lot of benefits here, right? I think going back to the workplace, there was a stat that said for the corporate sector in the United States, menopause-related symptoms cost $1.8 billion in lost work time and more than $26 billion in medical costs, which was really astounding to me. 


And it just provides, if this is actually working, provides more options than what is already out there, right? I know a lot of companies are already providing like egg freezing, IVF procedures, things like that. And this would be one other tool in the toolbox there. 


But I think overall, for me, I was excited about this, obviously, because I want to know how, you know, how we can extend our healthy lives into the future. So anyway, my hope is that research in public opinion can catch up, especially for when I'm going to need it. So that's my signal.


[14:12]


So yeah, so we've got a couple of different signals around ageism, kind of this understanding and tension of what you can do in the future versus what younger generations are also wanting to do and similarly things about really breaking through preconceived assumptions and notions about our age and what to expect. And I'm curious, what are you seeing here? What kind of shifts are maybe you seeing through these signals?


Lana: Yeah, I think one thing I'm interested in this relates to some of the things we've talked about before with when we spoke about retirement. I mean, I think, I mean, going to Raakhee’s example of the man who became a doctor at 70, you know, I think there's something about doing things just because we enjoy them, you know, and that that is good enough, you know, in some ways and sort of our freedom to pursue our interests and our passions and, you know, even though I was talking about ageism for, you know, mid-career and older workers, I do also believe in the concept of late bloomers, you know, and that we might, we not just might, but of course we can make changes at any point to better our own lives and others in the process. And I think even the act of doing that is a contribution to society, you know? 


And so, and I guess sort of relating it to the, what you're saying with about menopause and, you know, the scientists and the funders who are rallying around that, well, first like -- finally-- we're getting this kind of attention, but also, you know, I think, I think my point of that is just to say, you know, even for people to pursue the research and to have more of it is kind of a win in and of itself, I think was sort of my point.


Raakhee: Lana, what you kind of said about ageism in the workplace and, well, two things. One is that it made me think of the movie The Intern. I don't know if you had seen that with Robert De Niro and Anne Hathaway, and it was kind of like the EY program, like he came in as an older intern, right? But it's a really sweet movie, but it really demonstrates that difference of what contribution different generations can make, right? And recognizing that, and I, yeah, I wish corporates would do that. 


But the other thing, the point it really leads me to around data is, well, why don't we assess them? On what basis? You know what I'm saying? One is enough data that shows diversity is really important in every sense, right? In for creative thinking and all of that. So we know that. But two, if I'm getting older and organizations worry that I can't keep up with the skill level, then there's a test I can take to prove that. So why don't you test me? Or why don't you do an MRI scan while I'm doing these exercises to actually see the neuroplasticity in my brain, right? And if it shows that I can make fast enough connections, then that's just discrimination. So we have ways, right? So that's just, that's like a cultural, that's just a stereotype, but it is pure discrimination then. And we have the data and stuff to, to change that. And here's a 70-year-old man who just proved, hey, I can go to medical school. So yeah.


Sue: Now, yeah, Raakhee, what these signals are bringing up for me is just the basis of where our assumptions are lying and just the need for all of us to question, what are we holding and why? And so for me, some of the assumptions that I have been holding, just listening to your signals are, one, like Lana, the idea of mentorship from a younger person, it's just a paradigm shift from what I've known. 


Same thing with the career extension, I think that's the biggest thing. We talked in an earlier episode how the notion of 65 as the retirement age comes from like ancient times. I think it said, it was the Ottoman Empire. Why? You know, when we're living longer and healthier lives, why do we have to think of 65 as the bookend for this? No. And that suddenly opens up yourself to so many more possibilities when you think about the trajectory of your professional career and what brings meaning to you. 


And that goes exactly to Raakhee, what you're saying, which is there are ways now to determine your experience and skill level for careers. And you may want a different career later in life, and you shouldn't, you should be able to pursue what you really want to do, you know, with the skills that you need to learn along the way. So that for me was really important. 


And the same thing goes for women's health again, there's actually a way to discover how you can enable your longevity and your health with some of these new research findings. So that's really exciting to me. So I'm just really appreciative of people who are boundary-pushers and those who can question assumptions and see them. And I think that's one challenge I'm leaving this episode with for myself. 


So yeah, any other thoughts that you want to leave with? Any big aha moments or other insights or even feelings that this is bringing up for you.


Raakhee: Well, I think I'm really hopeful about menopause and delaying that. So please keep us posted on that because that sounds amazing. But I think it's just echoing what you said, Sue, I think science is pushing the boundaries. So now it's up to us as a society to just step a little bit outside of what we've always known and stretch out our own thinking.


Lana: Yeah, I think that's right. And I think going back to Raakhee -- a point that you made: age-based limitations. So adding that to the list of things to question, why we're defining 65, for example, as like elderly. Like in Japan, they actually redefined it to 75. And maybe even that needs to be redefined. And what does that do when we create those, when we start naming those markers and putting labels on it? And so yeah, I think I also want to be clear-eyed about what exists in the world but also hopeful that in the next 30 to 40 years, we can make some headway on this.


Sue: Totally. It has to. That's a long time horizon. And yeah, it's good to hear that we're going from a world where there is restriction on our belief system, some of these limits and constraints, that's what I'm hearing. And we're talking about a world that is Raakhee, in your words, stretching boundaries, boundary breaking, which to me is hopeful and is a world I would love to see.

So let's end it there and thank you everyone for listening. If you like this episode, please go rate and review it. And of course, if you have any comments or even want a topic you'd like to see us cover, go to horizonshiftlab.com and leave us a message. Thanks so much and see you next time. Bye.


[21:54]

Tags:

Comments

bottom of page