Flu kills older people, so it makes sense.
Is 57 considered "older" these days? I thought 50 was the new 35. Or all the marketing departments just lying in an attempt to appeal to the baby boomer generation?
Biology and Physiology don't subscribe to anything but science.
Science has made it so that people can live longer, healthier lives. So, considering the improvements in science and medicine, is 57 still considered "older" these days?
Patrick Stewart doesn't seem too old at 75. Christopher Lee, while definitely "older" was pretty active and accomplished up until he died last year at 93.
Of course, those may be outliers. But my point is that years are just numbers. There's nothing, biologically speaking, that says no matter our circumstances, health, diet, etc., that we are "old" at a certain number of years. The numbers seem to be trending higher (meaning people are still looking "young" and being healthy at increasing years). And while these things tend to vary wildly, most people I know in their 50s don't seem that old to me. But there are a lot of possible explanations for that.
And since "older" is a relative term which isn't well defined, you and I may have different ideas what it means to be an "older" person. Really that's probably the issue here. I didn't really mean anything by my comment about 50 being the new 35. I guess I was just surprised at 57 being considered "older" because to me it doesn't seem to fit my idea of an "older" person. Time for me to adjust my perspective.