Ron,

I am inclined to disagree. I don't have any hard stats but just think of how many older people you do encounter on a daily basis. Can you count ten elderly you encounter in any given week. If PD were simply a mechanism of aging, then statistically would we not see a heck of a lot more stooped people with a shaking claw? Further if you see someone who has the signs of Parkinson's and that is simply old age than what does that mean about dopamine loss? According to the pundits, we show motor symptoms at 70-80% loss of our dopaminergic neurons. This too would have to apply to your pensioner. Why would he lose 70-80% pf his neurons, but ten of his mates walk upright with a normal stride and no tremor? Or are we saying that the other older folks who show no symptoms still have PD; it just hasn't become apparent yet? Also, statistically it hits when we are older, so perhaps because we see more older people because it is more prevalent ages 60 and up?

This is one of those things that doctors purportedly tell us; one of the many platitudes is that "We'd all get PD, if we lived long enough." To that I say "baloney". Statistics show; in fact; that the longer one lives the "least likely" they are to acquire PD. Oldest of people in 90's and over do not get it. I think there is indeed a window of likelihood that starts in 80's-89...I'll try and find a reference. I honestly don't even think that young onset PD and the later stuff are even the same thing. Why is there such a long latency in YO and a slower progression; with faster progression in older PD patients and that I know of not much of a prodromal period? I think what research has meant is that the neuronal loss imitates apoptosis or normal cell loss due to free radicals etc. that come with aging.

Finally almost always older onset PD can be correlated more with environmental factors. This is where we are all being harmed the most; there is such a profound lack or concern for epidemiological data it is truly PWP and Normals plus their families if concerned with recall and reliability. Further maybe those interviewed should all undergo DAT scans to compare brains of those equal in age and sex and perhaps lifestyle factors such as exercise, caffeine intake, smoking, etc. No one bothers because it is easier to compartmentalize PD into a disorder of old age.

The stats from The Cleveland Clinic:

Identifying an accurate number of patients with Parkinson's disease is difficult, especially in the early stages of the disease. Many people attribute the early symptoms to the "aging process" and do not seek help from their physicians. Diagnosis also poses certain difficulties because other conditions present similar symptoms. Therefore, some of those people diagnosed with Parkinson's disease may not have the disease and conversely, those diagnosed with other disorders may actually have Parkinson's disease. Research estimates that about 1,500,000 Americans have Parkinson's disease, with approximately 50,000 new cases diagnosed each year in this country.

Age seems to be the most clear correlation with the disease, at least in the onset of symptoms. Parkinson's disease, in general, affects those over age 50, with the average onset being at age 60. Recently, either due to early recognition of symptoms or earlier onset of the disease, physicians have reported more cases of Parkinson's under age 40. Some physicians estimate the incidence under age 40 to have risen to 5 to 10 percent over the past several years.

Laura