Life expectancy for Californians still lower than before COVID — here's why
In 2024, life expectancy for Californians was 80.54 years — 0.86 years less than the 81.4 it was in 2019, according to the study, published Wednesday in JAMA.
Prior to the start of the pandemic, life expectancy in the state had been rising steadily; it fell sharply in 2020 (to 79.3) and 2021 (to 78.48) before rising again in 2022 (79.56) and 2023 (80.28).
But the 2024 data suggest that this progress is flatlining — a sign that COVID continues to have lingering effects on population-level health, despite the fact that it is no longer top of mind for most people.
'The reason why that's important is that the pandemic is still having effects on our health, even though everyone may have mentally moved on and wants to forget about it,' said study co-author Janet Currie, a professor of economics at Yale. 'It's still with us.'
The analysis, led by researchers at Yale, Northwestern, UCLA and Virginia Commonwealth University, used preliminary California data for 2024. National life expectancy data for 2024 is not yet available.
In California, 2024 marked the first time since the pandemic began that drug overdoses and cardiovascular disease both accounted for a greater share of the life expectancy decline than COVID. Drug overdoses accounted for 20% of the overall life expectancy decline, cardiovascular disease accounted for 16%, and COVID accounted for 13%.
That is the largest proportion of decline attributed to cardiovascular disease in several years.
The rise in cardiovascular-related deaths, which include deaths from heart attacks and stroke, is 'puzzling,' Currie said.
Some of it could be due to people not seeking health care during the early stretches of the pandemic, such as those who avoided the hospital even when they were having a heart attack or stroke, for fear of the virus. It may also be linked to rising obesity rates or long COVID, the latter of which can lead to inflammation and can be associated with higher rates of heart disease.
Drug overdoses skyrocketed during the pandemic but declined between 2023 and 2024 — accounting for 36% and 20% of the life expectancy drop, respectively.
'That's a piece of good news,' Currie said.
COVID has accounted for less and less of the life expectancy drop over time. In 2021, it accounted for 62% of the deficit. That fell to 36% in 2022, 16% in 2023 and 13% in 2024, the study found.
Out of all racial and ethnic groups, Hispanic residents experienced the biggest drop in life expectancy during COVID — more than five years, from 82.55 in 2019 to 77.37 in 2021 — but also rebounded relatively quickly in 2022 and 2023.
Asian residents continue to have the highest life expectancy — 85.51 years in 2024, compared to 81.11 for Hispanic residents, 79.94 for white residents and 73.42 for Black residents.
Economists study life expectancy because how long people expect to live impacts how much they need to save for retirement. And federal programs like Social Security and Medicare must factor in life expectancy when estimating costs.
Life expectancy in the U.S. improved significantly over the 20th century, Currie noted. Those gains happened in spurts thanks to advances like clean water, the development of antibiotics, major innovations in treating heart disease and cancer, and improvements in preventing infant mortality.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hamilton Spectator
2 hours ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Canada's obesity rate grew faster after COVID-19 pandemic with women and young adults impacted more, study finds
Obesity rates in Canada increased faster in recent years — including a jump among women and younger adults — compared to before the COVID-19 pandemic, a new study has found. According to researchers at McMaster University, obesity rates increased by an average of 0.5 per cent annually during the 11 years leading up to the pandemic. But between 2020 and 2023, the annual increase doubled to an average of just over one per cent. Over the 15-year study, women and younger adults in particular saw a larger increase in obesity rates than other groups — something the study points out has not been the case in the past. The findings — which were published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal Monday — were based on the health data of nearly 750,000 Canadian adults over 18. It was collected through the annual Canadian Community Health Survey between 2009 to 2023. Researchers used body mass index (BMI) as a metric for obesity — a measure that lead author and McMaster associate professor Laura Anderson acknowledged is not perfect. 'It is not a direct measure of body fat. It's also not a direct measure of health outcomes,' Anderson said. 'But for large, population-based studies where we're looking at screening, we can still use BMI because it is a proxy for obesity.' The study does not go into the potential reasons for the jump in obesity rates coming out of the pandemic, but Anderson said she and the other researchers hypothesize that it was the changes to physical activity and sedentary time from public health lockdowns that likely contributed. Anderson believes women and young adults were particularly affected due to added mental health challenges. 'We know that women had, in many cases, an additional burden of caregiving duties during the pandemic,' she said. 'It's possible the stress associated with caregiving and other different patterns of employment could be associated with the increased risk.' Whether obesity rates continue to increase or start declining remains unclear, but Anderson stressed that any treatments or preventions for obesity cannot be one size fits all. 'Obesity is a complex condition with multiple different causes,' she said, adding that it can't all be blamed on individual-level behaviours. 'Shifting to more of an upstream thinking about changing the policies that can support health behaviours is really the way forward.' Some of these changes could ensure people have access to healthier food or greater health education, or even making sure there are enough primary-care physicians available for people looking for help with their weight, Anderson said. Sanjeev Sockalingam, a psychiatry professor at the University of Toronto and the scientific director for the advocacy group Obesity Canada, said it's important any treatment avoids any stigma. 'We need to think about compassionate approaches where we can mitigate this stigma and bias as much as we can,' he said, noting that many people living with obesity might worry about talking to their doctor about their weight due to bad experiences in the past. Part of this means educating current and future health-care providers on how to have discussions around weight and obesity with patients, but also reducing biases within the greater public. 'Allies to patients who are living with obesity can be advocates as well to help with that change,' Sockalingam said.
Medscape
3 hours ago
- Medscape
Testing for LMNA Mutations Called ‘Woefully Underutilized'
People with mutated copies of the LMNA gene are at high risk for cardiac laminopathies, including atrioventricular block and atrial or ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) leading to dilated cardiomyopathy. These autosomal dominant mutations have a high penetrance, meaning that a high percentage of persons with a pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant will develop health problems related to the gene. For those with cardiac manifestations, about 90% of carriers of LMNA mutations older than 30 years have a high risk for sudden death from arrhythmia — even patients with minimal left ventricular dilation and mild systolic impairment — well before the onset of heart failure. A long-term follow-up study from 122 consecutive carriers of LMNA mutations with cardiac conditions showed that most had experienced arrhythmia, heart block, embolic events, or heart failure within 7 years of diagnosis. Could some outcomes, such as sudden cardiac death, be averted with a more precise view of LMNA mutations? New research published in JAMA Cardiology shows pinpointing the type and location of the LMNA mutation may guide clinicians toward earlier treatment approaches to improve prognosis for these high-risk patients. These interventions might include earlier placement of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) devices and family testing to detect the mutation before the onset of symptoms. 'Genetic testing for dilated cardiomyopathy is woefully underutilized,' said the paper's senior author, Neal Lakdawala, MD, an associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and a cardiologist in the Heart and Vascular Center at Brigham and Women's Hospital, in Boston. In fact, claims data showed that fewer than 2% of patients with dilated cardiomyopathy undergo genetic testing. 'Prior research has established the prognostic power of a genetic diagnosis,' Lakdawala told Medscape Medical News . 'We took it one step further within a specific genetic etiology, to show that the type of gene variant and the location of a gene variant also matter.' The retrospective cohort study examined international registry data from 718 patients (mean age, 41.3 ± 14.3 years) with pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants of LMNA . The participants in the study had no prior history of malignant VA. The primary outcome was time to malignant VA, defined as sudden cardiac death, placement of an ICD, or other manifestations of hemodynamically unstable VA. The secondary outcome, advanced heart failure, was defined as nonsudden cardiac death, implantation of a left ventricular assist device, or heart transplant. Reflecting the high risk associated with LMNA mutations, Lakdawala said, nearly one third of the study participants experienced sudden cardiac death, hemodynamically unstable VA, or an ICD procedure during the 4.2-year follow-up period. In addition, 15% developed advanced heart failure, defined as the implantation of a left ventricular assist device, heart transplant, or nonsudden cardiac death. These outcomes occurred despite many patients having a baseline left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) in the normal range (mean EF was 56%, well above guideline-recommended thresholds of 35%-45% for ICD placement, the researchers reported). Looking deeper into the genes, Lakdawala and his colleagues found participants who had truncating LMNA variants — an abbreviated version of the protein — had worse arrhythmic outcomes, regardless of the position of this genetic mutation on the DNA sequence. On the other hand, those who exhibited missense variants of the LMNA gene — an altered amino acid on the DNA sequence — had a lower risk for harmful arrhythmias and better overall outcomes. Taken together, the location and nature of the gene variants could lead to specific predictions of cardiac risk, according to the researchers. A man with an EF of 50% and a truncating LMNA gene variant, for example, would have a 12% risk for VA within 5 years, but a 7.2% risk if a missense variant were present. For a woman with EF 50%, this risk would be 7.5% for a truncating variant vs 4.5% for a missense variant, if no other risk factors were present. Why Genetic Testing Is Key In an editorial accompanying the journal article, Sharlene M. Day, MD, a cardiomyopathy specialist and presidential professor at the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, in Philadelphia, wrote 'the data from this study can also inform risk stratification even in healthy populations with incidental or secondary findings.' Integrating genetic findings into cardiomyopathy management should be 'a priority for all practicing cardiologists,' she wrote. 'The knowledge gap appears to be narrowing with respect to the importance of genetic testing in patients with cardiomyopathies,' Day told Medscape Medical News . 'But there's still opportunity to improve recommendations and referrals by cardiologists for genetic counseling and testing.' Testing typically consists of a broad panel identifying multiple gene variants, including LMNA , she said. If a gene variant is found in an individual patient, cascade testing of family members for that variant is often recommended. 'The current research study nicely highlights the impact of identifying not only the specific gene involved but the type of variation within that gene in terms of risk stratifying patients for adverse outcomes,' she said. Impact on Future Cardiology Guidelines Future clinical practice guidelines should emphasize the value of a genetic diagnosis for risk stratification in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy, especially for predicting sudden death and heart failure, Lakdawala said. The most recent guidelines on heart failure from the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association list a class 2A recommendation for placement of an ICD in patients with high-risk genes for dilated cardiomyopathy and an EF of 45% or lower, adding that primary preventive ICD may be considered for those with higher EF. The 2023 European Cardiomyopathy Guideline recommends placement of ICDs in patients with LMNA variants and an EF above 35% (class 2A if risk factors are present and class 2B if no risk factors are present). 'For updated guidelines, I think the most immediate impact would be to refine the LMNA risk score for ventricular arrhythmias to include the type and location of the LMNA variant,' Day told Medscape Medical News . 'Genetic testing has clinical ramifications that will help cardiologists take better care of their patients,' Lakdawala added. 'The take-home message is that they should order these tests!' Lakdawala reported receiving personal fees from Alexion, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cytokinetics, Lexeo Therapeutics, Nuevocor, Pfizer, and Tenaya Therapeutics and grants from Bristol Myers Squibb and Pfizer. Day reported serving as chair of the steering committee for Lexicon Pharmaceuticals, on the data monitoring committee for Cytokinetics, and receiving grants from Bristol Myers Squibb.
Medscape
12 hours ago
- Medscape
Are Americans Toking Themselves Sick?
This transcript has been edited for clarity. Welcome to Impact Factor , your weekly dose of commentary on a new medical study. I'm Dr F. Perry Wilson from the Yale School of Medicine. Whenever you see a headline that says something is 'on the rise,' there are basically two possibilities. One, the thing is actually on the rise — like pickleball. The other possibility is that we're capturing the information differently nowadays. Either we are getting better at measuring something that has always been common (autism spectrum disorder may fall in this category, at least for part of the observed increase) or we are measuring something worse with more false positives driving up the observed rate, like UFO sightings. Ubiquitous phone cameras mean every little bit of swamp gas from a weather balloon trapped in a thermal pocket and reflecting the light from Venus gets recorded. It's the job of epidemiologists to figure out what is driving observed changes in our health, and this week I want to share some data that show that the rate of a specific cannabis-associated problem is not just on the rise; it is absolutely skyrocketing. Let's see if we can figure out why. I'm talking about cannabis hyperemesis syndrome (CHS), a once-rare condition characterized by cyclic episodes of what can be intractable vomiting. The exact physiology of CHS is still being worked out, but it probably has something to do with chronic exposure downregulating cannabinoid receptors in the gut, leading to decreased gut motility. Regardless of how exactly this works, the numbers suggest it is becoming dramatically more common — at least among adolescents, as highlighted in this research letter appearing in JAMA Network Open. Researchers interrogated the Pediatric Health Information System database which collates data from 52 free-standing children's hospitals around the United States. They were looking for adolescents admitted to the emergency department (ED) with diagnostic codes consistent with CHS, typically a chief complaint of nausea and vomiting, and at least a second diagnostic code indicating a 'cannabis-related concern.' These could be things like cannabis abuse or dependence. The time frame of interest was 2016 to 2023. Let's just take a look at the raw numbers. To give you some perspective, in 2006, there were 6.8 ED visits for CHS per 1 million population. In 2016, the start of this study, that number had jumped to 160.4, a more than 23-fold increase over a decade. These rates increased around 40% per year through 2023. The most recent data showed around 2000 visits for CHS per million population; that's a 30,000% increase in less than 20 years. Crazy numbers. But… are they real? Remember, when we see the rate of anything going up, we need to make sure we're not measuring it differently. And I certainly have some concern here that we are potentially unmasking a problem that has been there all along but not well documented until recently. Adolescents show up in the ED all the time for nausea and vomiting. The AHRQ publishes some of these data. For example, in 2018 there were nearly 800,000 visits for nausea and vomiting among those under age 18 — about 2.5% of all ED visits. The question is, how many of those had CHS? The study we're discussing this week would call it CHS if, in addition to the nausea and vomiting, they had a secondary code for a cannabis-related issue. I have no doubt that we use those codes more frequently now. For one thing, the broad-scale decriminalization and legalization of marijuana has removed much of the stigma that existed in the early 2000s. Doctors might be less worried about 'outing' these kids nowadays. Another possibility is that knowledge about CHS is spreading; with more marijuana use, doctors are getting more sensitive to the diagnosis. So perhaps some of those things we used to call a 'stomach bug' now get appropriately diagnosed as CHS. The converse could also be true. Since we're more comfortable adding cannabis-associated diagnosis codes now than we used to be in the past, we may currently be misclassifying people with nausea from another cause as CHS. Just because someone has cannabis use disorder or cannabis dependence doesn't mean they are not allowed to get norovirus. Of course, the other possibility is that there is a lot more marijuana use going on and with that, more CHS. The authors hypothesized that, if that were the case, we might see a more dramatic rise in states that have legalized recreational marijuana use. This is where the data get a bit weird. Because, yes, states with recreational marijuana legalization had more ED visits for CHS — overall, about 1900 cases per million vs 800 cases per million. But the rate of growth of those visits was more dramatic in states without recreational marijuana legalization. The authors don't opine on what would cause this pattern of observations. That's probably wise since the data are relatively limited. But that has never stopped me before, so here is what I think is going on. I think a lot of this is real. I suspect there is a true increase in the amount of CHS that is commensurate with the broader availability of marijuana in the marketplace. This leads to higher rates in states that have legalized recreational marijuana use. But a significant proportion of the observed increase is due to uncovering CHS in people who would not have received the diagnosis in the past and misclassification of non-CHS syndromes in the setting of people who happen to use marijuana. This occurs in states without legalized marijuana because, let's face it: Even in those states, the stigma about marijuana use is nowhere near what it was 10 or 20 years ago. The times they are a-changin', as one former pothead noted. Is this all a problem? CHS can be bad. In fact, just under half of the kids in this study required a hospital admission; a bit under 1% required the intensive care unit. That said, we should still contextualize these ED visits in the context of other risks adolescents face. I pulled a bit of data comparing ED visits for CHS to those for depression, suicide, gun violence, and drug overdoses. You can see here that CHS rates aren't as high as, say, ED visits for suicidal behavior, but these are all in the same ballpark. Of course, that's assuming the numbers in this study are not inflated. Still, it seems like we can add CHS to the list of real risks adolescents face in the United States today. And, if growth rates of the syndrome continue as they did in this study, rising by 50% per year, well, we can assume that every American adolescent will be in the ER for CHS by 2040. That would be… unlikely. But I suppose we can keep a bloodshot eye on it.
