F E D E R A L SECURITY A G E N C Y

UNITED STATES PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE

NATIONAL OFFICE OF VITAL STATISTICS

UNITED STATES LIFE TABLES

and
ACTUARIAL TABLES
1939-1 941

BY
THOMAS N. E. GREVILLE
Actuarial M a t h e m a t i c i a n /

Prepared under the supervision o/

HALBERT L. DUNN, M. D. .
CHIEF, NATIONAL OFFICE OF VITAL STATISTICS

UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : I947

For role by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington 45, D. C. - Price 31 .P5
 *
\

LIFE TABLES 23 .
obtain some information or to make some assumption figure 11. Perhaps the most obvious characteristic of
as to the number and age composition of the net mi- this distribution is that it is bimodal: that is, it has two
grants each year, and to adjust the number of survivors modes or maxima, one in the year of age 0-1 and an-
accordingly. other ib the year of age 75-76. The mode at age 0-1
I
Estimation of the populations at ages under 6 on is the higher, more deaths occurring in this than in any
April 1 , 1946, would require a knowledge of the number other single year of age. It is also clear th&t the fre-
of births during each of the 6 years. For example, sup- quency distribution is decidedly skewed toward the
pose 51,000 white males entered’ the group through left: that is, the frequencies rise very gradually from the
birth during the year April 1, 1943, to April 1, 1944. “trough” at age 10 to the ‘“peak” at age 75, and then
On April 1, 1946, the survivors of lhese births would be drop off sharply above age 75. T h e arithmetic mean of
between exact ages 2. and 3. Now, in the life table the distribution is the average age at death in the hypo-
population, the number of births during m y yew is the thetical cohort, or in other words, the average duration
radix of the life table-in this case, 100,000-while the of life. Its value in this case is 62.81 years (column 7
number. of survivors on a date just 2 years d t e r the end of the life tabl;) :It is clear that the value of the arith-
of the year in which the births occurred would be metic mean is very much influenced by the large num-
merely the number at age 2 in the life table population ber of deaths in the first year of life. If the deaths
(or 94,592 in column 5). Therefore, the survival rate to occurring in the first year were excluded from the dis-
be applied to the 51,000 births is 94,592 divided by tribution, the average age a t death of the remaining
100,000 which is .94592; and the estimated number of 95,188 individuals would be one plus the average future
survivors is 51,000 multiplied by .94592, which gives lifetime at age 1: that is, 65.98 years. This represents a t

48,242. ‘In algebraic terms, the survival rate to be difference of more than 3 years in the value.
applied to the births of the nth year preceding the date The median of the distribution (that is, the value
of the estimate is L,,J?o.
I n the original example of the 32,000 enumerated at
which has the same number of elements on either side
of it) is the median length of life, or probable lifetime,
I
sage ‘47, suppose it had been desired to estimate the another possible measure of longevity to whick refer-
number of survivors 6 months later, on October 1, 1946. ence was made in part I.3 Since the distribution of I

These individuals would then be at ages ranging from ages at death in a life table cohort is always character-
exact age 53j4 to exact age 54:h. Now the number of ized by a greater’ dispersion below the median value
persons between these ages in the life table population than above it, the median always exceeds the arith-
is approximately Z, (column 3) : that is, the number of metic mean. I n the particular case under considera- , I
survivors to age 54 out of the life table cohort of 100,000 tion, the median is 68.67 ypars, which exceeds the mean
live births, as indicated in column 3: I n this particular value by 2.69 years.
case, the figure is 76,380. Therefore, the survival rate I n part I the longevity of differqt subdivisions of
to be applied is 1541L47, or 76,380 divided by 82,568, the population was compared also by means of a third
which is .92506; and the estimated number of survivors criterion, the number of persons-surviving to specified
is 32,000 multiplied by .92506; which gives 29,602. ages in the hypothetical cohort. Which of these is
If the population data are given in’5-year age groups, the better measure of longevity is a question that
or can be combined into such groups, it is possible to cannot be answered categoricdy. The answer per-
shorten the arihhmetic wi,th very little loss of accuracy haps depends primarily on the purpose such a measure
by using an average survival rate for each 5-year age is intended to serve. Certainly no one figure can con-
group as a whole. Thus, the survival rate over a 6-year tain within itself all the information which is provided
period for the age group x to s+4 would be by the complete frequency distribution.
I n view of the pronounced skewness of the distribu-
(TI+B- TZ+IJ+(Tz- TZ+3. Other situations which may
arise can be dealt with along similar links. tion, it may belfelt that the arithmetic average is not
sufficiently rcpresentative. The layman, in inquiring
The life table as ;frequency distribution I what is the ‘(life expectancy” of a newborn infant,
The agegat death in the hypothetical life table cohort probably has in the back of his mind the idea of an
(as show; in colunm 4 of the life tables on pp. 26 to 49). age to which the infant has a reasonably good chance
cpnstitute a frequency distribution. I n the following of surviving. If he is told that the infant’s “expecta-
I discussion, the case of the life table for white males tionrof life” is 62.81 years, he may be surprised to be
(table‘5) will be taken as an illustration, but the remarks told later that more than 62 percent of whjte male
to be made will apply equally to all the.life tables, ex- infants alixe at birth outlive their expccthtion of life
cept for some difference in the ages and numerical while less than 38 percent die’before reaching that age.
values quoted. The fiequency distribution based on The alternative statement that 68.67 years is the prob-
the white males life table is exhibited graphically in able lifetime, the age to which the infant has a fifty-fifty
chance of surviving, is probably a more satisfactory
P of a life table is the number of births with which thc lifctahle cohort
T ~ rodf
begins, or, in algebraic terms, the value of 1.. In the tables on pp. 26 to 49, this is
answer to the. layman’s question.
&own In column 3 opposite the year of age 0-1, and is always 100,000. ‘see P. a.
 ? *'
rn

24 UNITED STATES LIFE TABLES AND ACTUARIAL TABLES

~L-FREQUENCY
FIGURE OF AGESAT DEATH
DISTRIBUTION I N A COHORT.STARTING W I T H 100,000 LIVEBIRTHS,
OF W H I T E MALES:U N I T E D STATES, 1939-1941
BASEDON THE MORTALITY .

4mJ

.-E
h
a
2 3mo
2,
b
a
@u
0
2000
P
E

1.000

0
0 IO 20 40 .so 60 70 80 90 100
Age at death in years

On the other hand, the objection may be made that mortality' a t any age, or in the ages at death in the life
the probable lifetime is not SufEiciently sensitive. to table cohort.
changes in the ages at death of the members of @e life Use of the life table in studying there productive capac-
table cohort. In fact, its value is not 'affected by any ity of populations
change in which the age at death of a0 individual is
Another important application of life tables in demo-
not actually shifted from one side to the other of the
graphic research is their use in conjunction with fer- .
probable lifetime its'elf. If, for example, the deaths of
tility rates in investigating the inherent capacity of a
the 4,812 dying before age 1 in the white males life
population to reproduce itself. This is studied, for the
table were equally spread over all the years of age
most part, by means of certain specific measures devised
between birth and- age 68, many of these individuals
for that purpose, the most important of which are the
would live much longer; yet the value of the probable
gross and net reproduction rates and the true rate of
- lifetime would be unchanged. However, the effect of
natural increase: While life table survival rates are
transferring deaths from one age to another in the
an important component in the-calculation of these
hypothetical life table cohort is not entirely relevant,
measures, they involve other considerations of a highly
since the mortality rates in the life table were not ob-
technical-nature, which are outside tho scope of this
tained by observing a single cohort over a period of
volume.
time, but rather by observing many cohorts simul-
taneously, a different one at each age. Therefore, the Mathematical notation employed
important thing is the effect of a specified change in the One of the mathematical symbols used in the head-
rate of mortality at a particular age, without reference ings of table 13 represents a departure from the stand-
- to any offsetting change elsewhere. Any chmge in ard notation in use by actuaries. This is the symbol
the'mortality rate at any age less than the probable See Robcrt It. Kuczynskl, The BaZance a/ Births and Deafhr, 2 vols., The Mac-
4

Co., New York, 19% Ferlility and Reproduction, Falcon Press, NPWYork, - 1
lifetime (unaccompanied by other changes) will ' alter millan
1932; The Alenduremmf of Populntion Growth, Oxford University Prcss, Now York,
the value of the probable lifetime. However, changes 1%?.70D. ; V. Qlasr, .Populalion Polieie8 and Mouemenls in Europe (Appendix), Oxrord
in mortality rates at ages greater than the probable University Prcss, I,ondon, 1040.
8 Soc Louis 1. Dublin and Alfrcd J . Lotka. Length o/Li/c, The Ronald Press Co.,
lifetime will have no .effect whatever on its value. New York, 1936; On the True Rate nl Nafural Increase, Journal nf the Americnu Statls-
Similar remarks apply to the third criterion suggested, tical Asaocintion, \-ol. 20,No. 151. pp. 305-339, Scplcmher 192.5; AIrrcd J. Lotka. The
Qeoyraphic Distribution @jIntrinsic Natural Increase in f k c United Slafea, and an Eram-
the number of survivors to a designated age. The inotion OJ the Relation Bctmeen Scueral Alrasures OJ Ne1 Reprodudiofy, ibid., vol. 31,
value of the average duration of life, on the contrary, is No. 101, pp. 273-204, June 1936; Some Recent &&a in Population Analyais, ibid.,
vol. 33, No. 201, lip. 164-li8, March 1038. Sce also Glass' book citcd In the preceding
affected in some measure by any change in the rate of lootnolo.
 ..
I

LIFE TABLES ?5
#qZ, which appears in .the heading of column 2 and 92, where the rates of mortality for separate classes
which is used here to denote the probability that an were extrapolated from the data for earlier ages, and
individual alive at exact age x will die within time t those for the va.rious combinations were obtahied by a
thereafter, both x and t being measured in years. The spccial process in order to insure consistency.
standard actuarial symbol for this probability is ltqz Such consistency 8,s regards the rates of mortality
when t is 1 year or less and I #, when t is greater than 1 does not, however, guarmtee the same kind of con-
year. The latter notation has been conceded by sistency in the values of the other life table functions.
actuaries to be awkward and unnecessary.s Moreover, This would follow if the rates of mortality were ob-
a subcommittee designated by the Permanent Com- tained by observing a fixcd cohort of persons from birth
mittee of the International Congresses of Actuaries to until death, but does not hold when the persons under
study the revision of the international actuarial nota- observation at different ages belong to distinct cohorts,
tion has gone on record recommending -the replace- sometimes differing greatly in their race and sex com-
ment of the two symbols just me.ntioned by the one position. Under these conditions, in fact, such appar-
employed here.’ The latter symbol has also been ent inconsistencies are to be expected, and are not
widely used, even by actuaries, on the continent of properly regarded as inconsistencies at all. In the life
Europe18and has also appeared in several publications tables in this volume, such situations are few in num-
in this country? ber and are largely concentrated ab the old ages and in
Consistency of the tables the life tables for “other races,” and in all these cases
the numerical magnitude of the differences involved is
Consistency requires that t,he rates of mortality in
the life tables for combinations of classes shall always small. It may be remarked that such situations have .

be intermediate between the rates at the same ages for arisen in earlier life tables: For example, in Glover’s
the component classes. This is true in every case, life table for total males in 1910, the mo@ality rate I

notwithstanding the fact that the interpolation lo of is, a t every age, intermediate between the correspond-
the rates of mortality for the combination ta.blcs was ing rates for white males and Negro males.” Never-
carried out entirely independently of the corresponding theless, the values of I, at ages 96-98 and d, at age 55
interpolation for the separate classes, except above age for total males exceed the corresponding values for both
8 See Notation Infcmatlonalc, pamphlet issued by the Comite Permanent des
white males and Negro males.12 .
Congrhs Internationam d’Actuaires, p. 6, Bruxelles, FBvrier 1939.
1m. elf., p. 91. 11 U.8. Bureau of theCensus, United Sfale8 Li/e Tabl~s,ISHI, 1901, 1810, and 1801-
1810, pp. 58-59, 68-69, 80-81, Government Printing _OWce, Washington, D. C., 1921.
8 Op. dt., p. 62.
i 0 See, for cxample, American Journal of Hygiene, vol. 30, No.2, p. 36 et seq., Sep- , 12 While it is true that the total males include a small number of males of “other
tembcr 1939; Record, American Institute of Actuaries, vol. 32, Part I, No.65, p. 29 races,” thls group constituted only 0.16 of 1 percent of the deaths of 1909-1911 at all
et seq., June 1943. ages and only 0.17 of 1 percent of the total estimated population, so that this Is not
For a detailed t:chnical description of the process of interpolation, see pp. 122-126. likely to be the explanation of the peculiarity noted.

t
 *.
,
26 UNITED STATES LIFE TABLES AND ACTUARIAL TABLES
TABLELIFE TABLEFOR THE TOTAL
POPULATION
OF THE UNITED
STATES:1939-1941

MORTALITY VERAGE FUTURE

YEAR OF AGE OF 100,000 BORN ALIVE STATIONARY POPULATION
RATE LIFETIME

Number d ing Lveraee number

per 1,900 n5ve Number living Number dying In yenr of age nnd
Period of llfe between two exnct ages stnted a t beglMing Of nt beginning of during ycnr In year of age all later ycnrs
yenr of age . yenrofagc of nge
.-
(4) (5) (7)

L, T, d.

47.10 100,000 4,710 96,058 6,362,494 63.62

5.21 95,290 496 94,997 6,266,436 65.76
2.67 94,794 254 94,660 6,171,439 65.10
1. 88 94,540 177 94,448 6,076,779 64.28
1. 51 94,363 143 . 94,288 5,982,331 63.40
1. 32 94,220 125 94,157 5,888,043 62.49
1. 17 94,095, 110 -94,041 5,793,886 61.57
1. 05 93,985 * t' 98 93,936 5,699,845 60.65
..96 93,887 91 93,841 5,605,909 59.71
. 01 93,796 86 93,754 5,512,068 58.77_
.90 93,710 84 93,668 . 5,418,314 57.82
. 92 93,626 86 93,583 5,324,646 56.87
.97 93,540 91 93,495 5,231,063 55.92
1. 07 93,440 100 93,399 5,137,568 54.98
1. 22 ' 93,349 114 93,292 5,044,169 54.04
1. 39 93,235 130 93,170 4,950,877 53.10
1. 57 93,105 03,031 4,857,707 52. 17
1. 73 92,959 92,878 4,764,676 51.26
1. 88 92,707 92.711 4,671,798 50.34
2.03 92,623 92,529 4,579,087 49.44
2.17 92,435 201 92,334 4,486,558 48.54
2.30 92,234 212 92,128 4,394,224 47.64
2.42 92,022 223 91,911 4,302,096 46.75
2.50 91,799 229 91,084 4,210,185 45.86
2.56 91,570 235 91, 452 4,118,501 44. 98
2.62 91,336 239 91,216 4,027,049 44.09 '
2.67 91,096 243 90,974 3,935,833 43.21
2.75 90,853 250 90,728 3,844,859 42.32 '
2. 85 90,603 258 90,473 3,754,131 41.44
2.95 90,345 267 90,212 3,663,658 40.55
3.07 90,078 276 89,939 3,573,$46 39.67
3.20 80.802 288 , 89,668 3,483,507 38.79
3.35 80;514 299 89.365 3,393,849 37.91
3.51 89,215 313 3,304;484 37.04
3.69 ' 88,902 329 3,.215,426 36.17
3.90 I 88: 573 345 88,401 3,126.689 35.30
4.12 88,228 363 88,047 3,038,288 34.44
4.36 87,865 383 87,674 2,950,241 33.58
4.62 87,482 404 87,279 2,862,567 32.72
4.91 87,078 428 S6,864 2,775,288 31.87
5.24 86,650 454 86,423 2,688,424 31.03 !
5.59 86,1!)6 482 85,955 2,602,001 30.19
5.99 85,714 513 85,458 2,516,046 29.35
6.43 85,201 548 84,927 2,430,588
2,345,861 28.53
6.91 84,653 ,584 84,361 27.71
7.44 84,069 83,756 2,261,300 .26.90
8.01 83,443 83,109 2,177,544 26.10
8.62 82,775 82,418 2,094,435 25.30
9.28 82,061 761 81,680 2,012,017 24.52
9.99 81,300 813 80,894 1,930,337 23.74
10.76 80,487 866 80,054 1,849,443 22.98
11. 59 70,621 923 79,160 - 1,769,389 22.22
12.49 78,698 982 78,206 1,690,229 21.48
13.46 77,716 1,047 77,193 1,612,023 20.74
14.51 76,669 1,112 76,113 1,534,830 20.02