Health and wellbeing | The State of Ageing 2025

What do the charts show?

• Across the regions, there is a clear north-south divide in average life expectancy at birth. The lowest life expectancy at birth for men and women is in the North East (77.4 and 81.4 years respectively) and the highest is in the South East (80.3 and 84.1 years respectively). Women in London also have a life expectancy of 84.1 years. This means there is a difference of almost three years depending on where you live.
• The picture is more complicated and more stark when we look at smaller geographic areas:  
  • At local authority level the lowest life expectancy for both men and women is in Blackpool (73.1 and 78.9 years respectively).  
  • Men living in Hart in Hampshire have the highest life expectancy (83.4 years), more than 10 years longer than for men in Blackpool.  
  • The highest life expectancy for women (86.5 years) is in Kensington and Chelsea in London. This is almost eight years longer than for women in Blackpool.  
• The ten local authorities with the highest life expectancies at birth for men and women are all in the south of England, and the ten local authorities with the lowest life expectancies are in the north of England and the Midlands (Nottingham and Stoke).
• There are places in the north of England, such as North Yorkshire, Ribble Valley and Westmoreland and Furness, that have higher life expectancies than the national average for both men and women. Similarly, there are places in the south of England, such as Folkstone and Hythe, Eastbourne and parts of London, that have lower life expectancies than the national average.

We also know that:

• Inequality in life expectancy persists across the life course. Men aged 65 to 69 in the South West can expect to live for another 19.3 years, on average, almost 17 months longer than men aged 65 to 69 in the North East (17.9 years).  
• Women aged 65 to 69 in the South West can expect to live for another 21.8 years, on average, more than 1.5 years longer than women aged 65 to 69 in the North East (20.2 years).
• Considering men and women together, the average life expectancy in the UK is 80.9 years, six months less than the average for the 27 countries of the European Union combined (81.5 years). In Switzerland, where the average life expectancy is 84.2 years, people can expect to live for three years and three months longer than people in the UK. In fact, when we just look at the countries that make up Western Europe, the UK has the lowest life expectancy of all. 

What do the charts show?

• For both men and women, the lowest healthy life expectancy at birth is in the North East (56.9 and 57.5 years respectively). The highest healthy life expectancy for women (64.4 years) is in the South East while the highest healthy life expectancy for men (63.9 years) is in London.  
• The gap between healthy life expectancy and life expectancy also varies across the country so that the proportion of life that a man or women can expect to be in good health is also unequal. A boy born in the North East can expect to live 74% of his life in good health compared with 80% in London.
• Women have a longer life expectancy than men in all regions. But in most regions their healthy life expectancy is only slightly higher than for men. In the East and West Midlands and the South West, the healthy life expectancy for women is shorter than for men. Therefore, although they live for longer, on average, women spend a smaller proportion of their lives in good health than men, ranging from 71% in the North East to 77% in the South East.

We also know that:

• The average healthy life expectancy across the 27 countries of the European Union (EU27) is 62.4 years for men and 62.8 years for women. So, where healthy life expectancy is concerned, England is about the same as the average, behind nine of the EU27 countries for men and 12 of the EU27 countries for women. The healthy life expectancy of men and women in England is almost eight years less than in Malta, which has the highest healthy life expectancy among the EU27 countries.  
• There is a strong association between caring and health – unpaid carers of any age are more likely to be in poor health than people who provide no unpaid care. It is also the case that the more hours someone spends caring, the more likely they are to be in poor health. These trends are reflected in the regional health data. The North East has both the smallest proportion of life lived in good health and the greatest proportion of people aged 50 to 64 who are unpaid carers. In fact, almost half of the carers aged 50 to 64 in the north of England provide 20 or more hours of care per week compared with 43% nationally. Similarly, the South West is home to the highest percentage of people aged 50 to 64 who provide low-intensity care (fewer than 20 hours per week), which is consistent with the fact that people in this region live the greatest proportion of their lives in good health.   

What do the charts show?

• The charts show the average life expectancy at birth for men and women in local authorities of England grouped according to their income deprivation quintile, which is based on the proportion of people in an area who are out of work or on low earnings. Local authorities are sorted into five groups (or quintiles). The local authorities in quintile one are among the 20% of areas with the highest levels of income deprivation while those in quintile five are among the 20% of areas with the lowest levels of income deprivation. We use the terms poorest and richest to describe the most and least income deprived areas.
• The average life expectancy at birth for men is 77 years in the poorest 20% of local authorities (quintile one) and 81.4 years in the richest 20% (quintile five), a difference of 4.4 years.  
• For women, the average life expectancy at birth in the poorest and richest 20% of local authorities is 81.2 years and 84.9 years respectively, a difference of 3.7 years.
• The geographic inequality in life expectancy is a reflection of inequality in income deprivation – the poorest places have the lowest life expectancy.
• Average life expectancy increases from the poorest to the richest local authorities. However, there is a considerable range in life expectancy across the local authorities in each of the five groups:  
  • Blackpool and Enfield are among the poorest 20% of local authorities but the life expectancy for women in Enfield (84.7 years) is 5.8 years higher than for women in Blackpool (78.9 years).  
  • There are places in the poorest 20% of local authorities such as Enfield and Haringey where the average life expectancy is similar to places in the richest 20% such as York and Melton.  
  • This indicates that a local authority’s income deprivation quintile does not tell us all there is to know about the chances of living a long life.  
• The poorest places tend to be in the north of England. Only two northern local authorities (Ribble Valley and York) are in the richest 20%.  
• Local authorities in the north of England make up the majority of local authorities in the poorest income quintile (quintile one) – 33 northern local authorities, 12 in the Midlands and the East, 12 in London and the South East, and just one (Torbay) in the South West.  
• The richest 20% of local authorities is almost exclusively made up of local authorities from the Midlands and the East of England (20 in total) and London and the South East (30 in total).  
• There is also a significant urban/rural dimension to income inequality and, by extension, to life expectancy. Rural places are more likely to be in higher income brackets. Just 5% of local authorities in quintile one are predominantly rural compared with 37% in quintile five. Of local authorities in quintile one, 57% are predominantly urban compared with 11% in quintile five.

We also know that:

• Health outcomes including life expectancy, healthy life expectancy and the prevalence of common conditions and disability are the consequence of all the social determinants of health acting across a person’s life course.  
• The factors contributing to the stark north-south health divide in England are many and disparate, but they have economics at their root, starting with the long-term and far-reaching impact of deindustrialisation in the previously highly industrialised north. This has had long-lasting, knock-on effects on employment levels and the quality of housing.  
• Blackpool has the lowest life expectancy in England. It also has the country’s greatest proportion of children in care and about £1,400 less per person to spend on its population than a decade ago. Its public health grant has been cut by £10 per person since 2013.  
• Overall, cuts to public health budgets have disproportionately hit the East Midlands and the north of England.  

What do the charts show?

• All local authorities that are predominantly rural, except Central Bedfordshire, have a larger than average proportion of people aged 65 and over.  
• All local authorities with a smaller than average proportion of people aged 65 and over are predominantly urban or urban with significant rural areas.
• Most predominantly rural local authorities have older populations with better than average health. County Durham, where 16% of people aged 65 and over are in bad or very bad health, is an outlier among rural areas.  
• In many local authorities with older than average populations, people aged 65 and over have better than average health (lower-right section of the chart). In North Norfolk, for example, more than a third of people are aged 65 and over but fewer than 10% are in bad or very bad health. These places are largely rural.
• A number of places have a population that is younger than the national average but an older population that is in worse than average health. These places are scattered across the country and are mainly urban in nature – for example, Coventry, Sheffield, Preston and many parts of London. In Tower Hamlets less than 6% of people are aged 65 and over but a quarter of this older population (25%) is in bad or very bad health.  
• Places that have older than average populations and an older population in worse than average health are mainly in northern regions, with just a few (Fenland, Great Yarmouth, Thanet, Swale, Brighton and Hove, Torbay and Plymouth) scattered across southern regions. Of note, the latter tend to be coastal areas that have been highlighted as rapidly ageing and in particular need of services. 

We also know that:

• The places where people are younger and in worse than average health are largely places with the largest concentration of people from Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) backgrounds. This is consistent with the fact that most ethnic minority groups have young age profiles (half of our BAME population is aged 29 and under) and, on average, the highest rates of bad or very bad health. Differences in health status between ethnic groups emerge as early as the age of 25. Ethnic health inequalities result from experiences of racism and racial discrimination, which have a direct impact on health by causing physical and mental stress, and an indirect impact through their effect on socioeconomic status.
• Ethnic makeup may explain why Central Bedfordshire is the only predominantly rural local authority where the proportion of people aged 65 and over is smaller than the national average. Among predominantly rural local authorities the proportion of the overall population from an ethnic minority background ranges from 1.8% in Torridge to 11.0% in South Cambridgeshire, with the proportion in Central Bedfordshire (9.8%) the third highest overall (see our technical report for more details).  
• It is possible that County Durham is an outlier among rural places because its history of heavy industry, particularly coal mining, has left a legacy of health issues such as respiratory diseases and other chronic conditions.  
• Analysis of data from the 2024 GP Patient Survey finds that 15% of people aged 55 and over in the North East and North Cumbria Integrated Care System, which covers County Durham, have lung or breathing conditions (this ranges from 9% of people in the least deprived 20% of the population to one in five (20%) in the most deprived 20% of the population). It is also notable that the average prevalence of lung or breathing conditions among people aged 55 and over across the London Integrated Care Systems is 11% compared with 15% in the North East and Yorkshire (see our technical report for more details).  

What do the charts show?

• The life expectancy at birth for men in England increased from 76.2 years in 2001/03 to a peak of 79.8 years in 2017/19, which is the last complete period before the pandemic (because data is averaged across overlapping three-year periods). For women, life expectancy at birth increased from 80.7 years in 2001/03 to a peak of 83.4 years in 2017/19.  
• Life expectancy underwent a steep decline between 2017/19 and 2020/22, particularly for men. The life expectancy for men and women in 2020/22 was ten and six months lower, respectively, than for the previous three-year period.  
• Life expectancy also declined in each region between the two time periods. The decline was only 1.2 months for women in the South West, while a decline of 8.4 months was seen for women in London and the North West. The steepest decline for men (14.4 months) was in London, bringing their life expectancy down to 79.1 years, a value last seen in 2009/11. This reflects the large minority ethnic population in London who suffered much higher rates of mortality during the pandemic.
• In 2021/23, life expectancy at birth in England and in the regions has increased (now 79.1 years for men and 83.0 years for women) but it has still not returned to pre-pandemic levels. The life expectancy for men in England is almost seven months lower than in the pre-pandemic 2017/19 period. For women, the difference is three months. It is notable that the data for 2021/23 includes pandemic-era deaths so the fact that life expectancy has not fully recovered to pre-pandemic levels is not surprising.
• There is a long way to go in this recovery, especially for some regions. The life expectancy at birth for men and women in the North West remains lower than before the pandemic, by ten and five months respectively. In contrast, the life expectancy for women in the South West is almost back to pre-pandemic levels (just one month lower) while the life expectancy for men in the South West is now four months lower than before the pandemic.  
• Healthy life expectancy at birth has undergone a striking decline, both in England as a whole and in all of the regions apart from London. And, unlike life expectancy, it has continued to decline. Nationally, healthy life expectancy is now 20 months lower for men and 22 months lower for women compared with the last pre-pandemic period of 2017/19.
• For men, the steepest decline in healthy life expectancy at birth is in the North West where it is now more than 2.5 years lower than before the pandemic.  
• The healthy life expectancy at birth for women in the South West and Yorkshire and the Humber is now 2.7 years lower than before the pandemic.  
• Only in London is the healthy life expectancy for men and women at birth close to what it was before the pandemic.
• The proportion of life spent in good health by men and women is currently the lowest it has been at any time since 2011/13, both in England as a whole and all regions of England except London. For example, the percentage of life spent in good health by men in the North East (where it is lowest) is now 74%, down from 77% in 2015/17. And the percentage of life spent in good health by women in the North East is now 71%, down from 74% in 2014/16. 

We also know that:

• Life expectancy at birth for men is still lower than it was during the last complete pre-pandemic period (2017 to 2019) in more than 80% of the local authorities in Great Britain, while life expectancy at birth for women is still lower in 70% of them.  
• Regional inequalities are expected to increase. Modelling by IPPR North projects a steady improvement in healthy life expectancy in the North West, London, and Yorkshire and the Humber up to 2030, but a steady decline in other regions. They suggest that, by 2030, the number of years people can expect to live in good health will be 2.5 years lower in the north of England and the Midlands than in the south of England, and 3.5 years lower than in London.  
• This is consistent with recent analysis that projects the length of time people will live with a major illness will increase from 11.2 years to 12.6 years by 2040, which means they will spend more than an extra year of life in poor health. 

What does the chart show?

The chart provides a measure of inequality in life expectancy at the age of 65 for men and women, where a larger number signifies greater inequality across the social gradient from most to least deprived (see our technical report for more details).

• The data for England as a whole is consistent with data showing regional inequality in life expectancy.
• There is also inequality within regions:  
  • For men, the North East is the region where there is the greatest inequality in life expectancy, while it is the North West for women. For both men and women, inequality is lowest in the South West.
  • Inequality in life expectancy in the North East, North West and Yorkshire and the Humber is higher than for England as a whole.
• Average life expectancy is lowest in regions where inequality in life expectancy is highest and highest in regions where inequality in life expectancy is lowest, demonstrating the damaging effects of inequality itself.  
• Inequality in life expectancy for men and women has been increasing over time in England and in all of the regions apart from the South West for men and the South West and London for women.  
• Since 2010/12 inequality in life expectancy at the age of 65 for men has increased most in the West Midlands and the East of England. For women, it has increased most in the North East and in Yorkshire and the Humber. In every region, except the East of England, London and the South West, inequality in life expectancy at the age of 65 has increased more for women than for men. 

We also know that:

• Inequalities within regions can be larger than between regions. A Pensions Policy Institute report points out that within the local authority of Westminster, the life expectancy for men in the Knightsbridge and Belgravia ward is 18 years higher than for men in the Westbourne ward. For women, the difference is around nine years.  
• There is an economic as well as a moral imperative to address health inequalities. It has been estimated that health inequalities cost society £31 billion in lost productivity (2010 prices). The NHS spends 22% more per person (£400 per person per year) on secondary care for women in the most deprived neighbourhoods compared with the least deprived neighbourhoods. For men, this figure is 16% more per person (£300 per person per year). This results in an additional spend of £4.8 billion per year before additional costs including social care provision.  
• Inequalities of all types, including health, accumulate across the life course. As our population ages and becomes increasingly diverse, there is a risk that health inequalities within our older population will become even more pronounced.  

What does the chart show?

• The prevalence of a long-standing illness or disability that limits activity among people aged 50 to 69 ranges from a quarter (24%) in the South West to almost two in five (37%) in the North East, reflecting patterns of life expectancy and healthy life expectancy.
• For people aged 70 and over, these proportions increase to two in five (39%) in the South West and more than half (55%) in the North East.  
• In the South West the prevalence of a long-standing illness or disability that limits activity is 15 percentage points higher for people aged 70 and over than for people aged 50 to 69. In the North East the difference between these age groups is 18 percentage points, which highlights the increasing health inequality between these regions as people age.

We also know that:

• Analysis of data from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing shows that half of people (49%) aged 50 to 69 and more than three in ten (63%) of those aged 70 and over report having a long-standing illness. Almost a third of people (30%) aged 50 to 69 and more than two in five (43%) of those aged 70 and over have a long-standing illness that limits their activities.

What does the chart show?

• The percentage of people aged 50 to 69 who self-report a long-standing illness or disability ranges from 41% living in the least deprived 10% of the country to 71% in the most deprived 10%.
• The prevalence of a long-standing illness or disability that limits activities ranges from one in five (20%) people living in the least deprived 10% of the country to almost three in five (58%) in the most deprived 10%.
• Among people aged 70 and over, the inequality by deprivation level persists but is less pronounced.  

We also know that:

• People living in the most deprived areas are not only more likely to have a disabling condition than people living in the least deprived areas, their ability to carry out day-to-day activities is more likely to be limited by the condition. Between the ages of 50 and 69, the proportion of Disabled people who are limited a lot by their disability is twice as high in the lowest deprivation decile as in the highest.

What do the charts show?

• Apart from mental health conditions, the prevalence of specific health conditions increases sharply with age. Half (48%) of people aged 85 and over have joint problems such as arthritis, and more than two in five (42%) have high blood pressure.  
• The prevalence of these conditions is correlated with the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) quintiles – see our technical report for more details on IMD. Among people aged 55 and over, lung or breathing conditions are twice as prevalent in the most deprived 20% of areas as in the least deprived 20% of areas (19% compared with 10%), while mental health conditions are more than twice as prevalent in the most deprived areas as in the least deprived areas (14% compared with 6%). 

We also know that:

• Although the prevalence of health conditions increases with age, the evidence indicates that older people are less likely to be offered the same care and treatment for these conditions than younger people. Examples of institutional ageism in health care can be found in mental health, in breast cancer and alcohol treatment, and in referral for surgery.  
• The number and proportion of Disabled people increases with age, from 27% of people in their fifties to 52% of people aged 80 and over, while the proportion of people experiencing difficulties with everyday activities rises from 18% of people in their sixties to 37% of people aged 80 and over.  
• Conditions caused or exacerbated by poor-quality housing are most common among the poorest people, consistent with the fact that lower-income households are more likely to be living in a non-decent home. In fact, over a third of privately rented homes with a household head aged 55 and over who is in the lowest income quintile are non-decent, compared with one in six homes with a household head in the highest income quintile. Several of the conditions shown in the chart – namely lung or breathing conditions, cardiovascular conditions, mental health conditions and restricted mobility – are caused or exacerbated by poor-quality housing.  
• Modelling by The Health Foundation predicts that the number of people living with a major illness will increase by 37% by 2040. This is based on an increase in the prevalence of 19 out of 20 diseases that were included in the model.
• This modelling also predicts an increase in multimorbidity (the number of conditions someone is living with simultaneously). In 2019, people aged 85 and over were living with an average of 5.2 conditions. This is projected to increase to 5.7 conditions by 2040.  
• The advent of long-term sickness is a major driver for exiting the labour market. And exiting the labour market and being diagnosed with a new health condition increases the risk of moving into poverty.  
• Besides inequality in health status by geography and IMD, there is also inequality between ethnic groups. Among people aged 50 to 64, Bangladeshi people have the highest rates of bad or very bad health (12.6% of men and 22.0% of women) while Chinese people have the lowest rates (3.4% of both men and women).
• Older LGBT+ people also experience health inequalities and unequal access to appropriate health and social care. Exposure to discrimination, both historically and more particularly for older trans people in the current hostile climate, can have a lasting negative impact on health and wellbeing, and affect housing and employment options

What does the chart show?

• Fewer than one in ten people aged 30 and over report a low level of life satisfaction. The proportion is greatest for people in their fifties (7%), followed by people aged 90 and over (6%).  
• The oldest age group is most likely to have low levels of happiness (14%) followed by people aged 50 to 54 (11%).  
• People aged 90 and over are by far the least likely to feel the things they do are worthwhile, but it is reassuring to see that just 9% of people aged 90 and over feel this way.
• High levels of anxiety are more evenly spread across the age groups but they are most likely among people aged 50 to 54, a quarter of whom feel a high level of anxiety.