Enrique Diaz-Alvarez wrote:
> I am still confused.
I asked the original question -- let's see if I learned it.
Suppose the life expectancy at birth is 45. (This expectancy averages in all those who died at one month, 1 year, etc.)
But what is the life expectancy of someone who has *reached* 45? 50? 60? 75?
That tells you a lot about the general well being of the society without the distortion brought in by a high infant mortality rate.
In medieval europe there was a very high death rate between the ages of 2 and 4. (Presumably kids not watched after 2 so well and not able to see danger themselves until they were 4 or 5.)
That's a special feature, and life expectancy based on it is misleading. So try asking what is the life expectancy for someone who is already 5. That eliminates the bulge caused by the special circumstance.
Correct???
Carrol