[bspn]

Off topic: he's 95 years old?! I don't care how well connected he is, who thought it would be a good idea to have a nonagenarian on the board of a (supposedly) cutting edge health-tech company?!

[SophosQ]

Could you state reasons to support your assertion that a nonagenarian shouldn't be on the board of an innovative tech. Company ?

[aaron695]

95 years old do not have their full faculities.

Even if they were part if a very very small minority that did (if any exist), it would be hard to test for legally I'd imagine.

We judge people by their pasts, in extreme old age this is no longer applicable.

I do think it's a little sad the obvious has to be pointed out.

If not now, in the future you will have to deal with people getting old, hard truths will have to be dealt with at some point.

[SophosQ]

Such individuals are often chosen to be on the board for their experience and networking prowess.

It's quite true that testing their mental faculty would be a challenge. Therefore the decision could simply lie with other board members based on their observations of his behaviour and the direct contributions he makes to the company.

[ncallaway]

And what evidence, besides your random agism, do you have to argue that a 95 year old person shouldn't be on the board of a company?

[smohare]

To suggest that mental acuity is uniformly distributed with respect to age seems a bit "post-truth". The priors at play most definetly suggest much greater scrutiny of a 95 year old, but by no means should they be preclusive.

[toomuchtodo]

For the same reason an auto insurance company charges my 86 year old grandmother thousands of dollars per year more than myself; your faculties degrade with age.

[jstanley]

If nothing else, he'll almost certainly be dead soon.

[deepnotderp]

Lmao Morris Chang would like a word with your ageism.