And a 90 year old with a sharp mind in relatively good shape is better han a 50 year old about to drop dead. You're dealing in non sequitors that border on outright sophistry when you say such broad things as that to prove your point. In the real world, there is and never will be one single way to absolutely check every single pilot with complete precision on a real time basis. The current medical check doesn't even come close, and even the EU style ones don't either unless you want to quantify how much additional erosion into the safety margin is acceptable and for what "gain". That is why there are age minimums and maximums for many things. There's probably a 9 year old "Doogie Howser, ATP" out there that could do the job as good as the worst middle aged pilot out there, but there is no way to reliably screen and vet everyone in a profession like this with no limits on anything.

I agree with the bolded part, obviously, and I think that 60 was where it should have stayed, but we should in no way think about raising it past 65. Unless you're going to give full blown health and cog evals on pretty much a weekly basis, you will be cutting into the safety margin and doing so just so that some guys that already got 5 years in the bonus round at the top of a seniority list because of age 60 can stay for more bonus round years with absolutely no risk and no downside. If they want to fly airliners beyond 65, the industry will be hurting for regional FO's at the bottom of the list. No more bonus round.