FRIDAY, May 16, 2003 (HealthDayNews) -- The rich are indeed different from the rest of us -- they live longer.
But a new study of the highest levels of British society offers sobering news for the upper crust: Fancy titles don't provide the same life-extending benefits as boatloads of money do.
In a study of dead aristocrats going back to the 1500s, researchers found that dukes didn't live longer than marquesses, earls and viscounts, even though dukes stand at the top of the social ladder known as the peerage. Even those on the lowest rungs kept up with the dukes.
"Being at the top of the social hierarchy doesn't appear to confer a significant advantage," says study co-author Dr. John N. Lavis, an associate professor at McMaster University in Canada. "We were surprised."
The results of the study appear in the May issue of the American Journal of Public Health.
The researchers wanted to examine how wealth and social status combine to affect lifespan, Lavis said. "We know from many, many studies that there's a link between socioeconomic status and health: Poor people live shorter, less healthy lives. But we keep saying socioeconomic status is important without being able to disentangle how much is social and how much is economic."
Lavis and colleagues decided to turn to Britain's peerage, a system that has placed aristocrats into a rigid hierarchy for some five centuries.
The British king or queen awards the titles to men -- and only rarely to women -- who have provided service to the crown or can boast of a great accomplishment, Lavis explains. The titles are typically handed down to first-born sons. Dukes are at the top of the hierarchy, followed by marquesses, earls, viscounts, Scottish lords of parliament and baronets (who aren't officially part of the peerage).
The titles don't necessarily mean the holders are wealthy. "We can't say for certainty that they're all rich," Lavis says. "Some [families] have held the titles Some have held the titles for centuries and may have lost their wealth. But on average, this tends to be a very wealthy group."
The researchers examined the birth and death records of 9,529 male aristocrats from a reference book called Burke's Peerage & Baronetage. Dead female aristocrats were left out because there were only 87 of them.
When they adjusted the lifespans of the aristocrats for the century of their birth, the researchers found no statistically significant difference between the lifespans of the various types of aristocrats. Those who were named by the king or queen didn't live any longer than their peers who got their titles the new-fashioned way, by inheriting them.
"We found no link between social status and health," Lavis says. In general, he adds, it appears that "someone's economic position is more important than someone's social position."
But researchers don't know exactly what it is about wealth that leads to better health and longer lives, he says. "We're still struggling with the underlying reasons."
More information
Curious about how the aristocracy of Great Britain and Ireland ended up that way? Visit the website of Burke's Peerage & Gentry. Curious about the proper form of address for your favorite aristocrat? Check this Web site to learn the proper etiquette .
