Reckoning with age

Recently, when a senior politician in Karnataka was asked by journalists whether he would accept the post of governor if offered, his response was, “I am not so old as to become the governor.” The age of this senior politician is at least twice the minimum age prescribed for the post of the governor (which is 35 years).

Maybe we need to do some rethinking on the minimum and maximum age that have been fixed for holding various positions under the Constitution. The present age was fixed based on the then prevailing life expectancy. The minimum age for becoming a member of Rajya Sabha, for instance, is 30 years. The Rajya Sabha is known as the House of Elders. Can we call a person who has completed just 30 years of age an elder? He would, in fact, be considered a youth. We should prescribe the age of at least 50 years as the minimum age for the membership of the Rajya Sabha so that the august body can be called as the House of Elders in the real sense.

It is not uncommon to see those in their 70s and even 80s sprightly and zestful while those in their 30s, 40s and 50s, appear haggardly laggardly and lifeless. It is common that I hear people say, “you look too old for your age” and vice versa. I have myself been the recipient of the unsavoury remark (now I am really old, though). The reason for this is that there is a difference between chronological age and biological age.

One day, while I was in government service, two gentlemen made their way into my chamber with an instrument and said that it would tell me my biological age. They operated the instrument on my person and after getting to know my chronological age informed me that my biological age was much more than my chronological age. They also had some products with them which they claimed would help in retarding the pace of my biological age. I told them that I will take a call on buying the products later but I requested them not to disclose my biological age to anyone as I feared that if the government comes to know, there would be a likelihood of me being retired before I attained the chronological age of superannuation. Fortunately, they did no, and I superannuated when I reached the chronological age of 60 years. Unfortunately, there is no ‘product’ to reduce the chronological age except resorting to the strategy called ‘lying’.

It may not be surprising if in the future applicants filling up forms are required to mention both their chronological and biological age. Along with the regular medical tests, along with blood sugar tests, blood pressure tests and ECG; the biological age determination test may also may have to be conducted. What a horrifying prospect!