The time lag between (a) the occurrence of an initial Longevity Catalyst and (b) lower ultimate death rates can be significant as illustrated by the general Mortality Improvement Framework.   

 

Indeed, this journey can be punctuated by events which may be deemed by some to be Longevity Catalysts in their own right.  

 

For example, whilst the initial discovery of the link between smoking and lung cancer (Sir Richard Doll, 1954) might be deemed as an initial catalyst, the long journey to lower empirical death rates is signposted by other events such as

 

(a) Restrictions on tobacco advertising

(b) Changes to health warnings on cigarette packets

(c) Smoking ban in certain public places

 

A natural step to take is then to monitor key indicators in order to test whether the connection between initial catalyst occurrence and lower eventual empirical death rates is being established or whether this occurrence is having little or no impact on significant precursors to ultimate death rates such as identifiable changes in social behaviour.   

 

Examples of such indicators using the Mortality Improvement Framework include:

 

(a) Identifiable changes in social behaviour

(b) Identifiable changes in health outcomes

 

This section seeks to identify those key indicators that both (a) bridge the (sometimes long) gap between catalysts and empirical death rate data and (b) can be monitored in a regular, raliable and robust manner.

 

The metrics employed should be subject to scrutiny for

 

(a) objectivity

(b) regular availability

(c) effectiveness as a barometer for impact on future death rates   

​