THE consequences of declines in mortality for the health and functioning of the nation's older adults have been the subject of much interest over the last quarter century. Indeed, spurred by Manton, Corder, and Stallard's (1993) analysis of the National Long Term Care Survey, a vast literature has developed that explicitly focuses on trends in health and disability in late life. Although initially there was disagreement, a consensus has emerged among researchers in the field that there have been improvements in most measures of late-life functioning (see, e.g., Crimmins, 2004; Cutler, 2001; Freedman, Martin, & Schoeni, 2002; Freedman et al., 2004; Kramarow, Lubitz, Lentzner, & Gorina, 2007; Manton, Gu, & Lamb, 2006; Waidmann & Liu, 2000). A recent report by the Institute of Medicine on the future of disability in America (Field & Jette, 2007) suggests that despite these improvements, the numbers of adults with disabilities will likely swell in the coming years as the large Baby Boom generation—those born during the years 1946–1964—reaches the ages associated with the highest rates of morbidity and disability. Undoubtedly, such a trend would have important implications for the provision of medical and social services, for the ability of future older adults to participate fully in society, including the workplace, and more generally for their quality of life. However, although the number of adults reaching older ages and thus experiencing elevated risks for debilitating conditions will certainly grow, there is debate about whether the Baby Boom cohort will enter later life with better or worse age-specific rates of morbidity and disability than earlier cohorts. Only a handful of studies have taken up the question of trends in health and functioning of the adult population in the decades approaching retirement, and results have been conflicting. One study, using data from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), found from 1984 to 1996 an increase in the prevalence of needing help with personal care and routine household activities among adults aged 40–49 and 50–59 years, although the rates of such disability were very low (Lakdawalla, Bhattacharya, & Goldman, 2004). Another study, by Zack, Moriarty, Stroup, Ford, and Mokdad (2004), using data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), found an increase from 1993 to 2001 in the proportion of those aged 35–44, 45–54, and 55–64 years who reported poor or fair health. A third study, which relied on data from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS), suggested worse health and functioning among people aged 51–56 years in 2004 compared with 1992 (Soldo, Mitchell, Tfaily, & McCabe, 2007). However, Weir (2007) concluded from his analysis of the same cohorts using a different recode of the HRS data that although early Baby Boomers were more likely to report poor or fair health than the cohort born 12 years earlier, objectively their overall health and functioning were similar. Other recent analyses of health trends among the middle-aged adult population have been more positive. Using the NHIS, Martin, Schoeni, Freedman, and Andreski (2007) found a downward trend from 1982 to 2003 in reports of poor or fair health among adults aged 40–49 and 50–59 years. Mortality rates among adults also have continued to decline in recent decades (National Center for Health Statistics, 2007). Several lessons have emerged from studying late-life health and functioning trends that are relevant to this new and growing literature focused on adults under age 65 years. First, trends are best assessed over a relatively long time horizon with multiple observations (Freedman et al., 2002); given annual variation, two data points may not necessarily constitute a trend (Crimmins, 1996). Second, different measures may move in different directions (Crimmins, 1996, 2004). For example, despite declines in most measures of late-life disability, reports of many chronic conditions among older adults have increased in recent decades (Crimmins, 2004; Crimmins & Saito, 2000; Freedman & Martin, 2000; Freedman, Martin, Schoeni, & Cornman, 2007). There are many reasons for such divergences, not the least of which is that no single indicator is a pure measure of health. For example, self-reports of chronic diseases may be influenced by access to health care, which in turn is a function of socioeconomic status. Moreover, indicators of functioning reflect the gap between an individual's capacity and the environment in which activities are carried out. Accordingly, breadth of measurement is important before drawing conclusions about the health and functioning of a cohort. Third, care must be taken to ensure that methodological threats to validity—such as low response rates, use of screening questions, changes in question wording, changes in response rates, or omission of important groups such as the institutionalized population—do not bias conclusions (Freedman et al., 2002). In this paper, we heed these lessons and expand on existing studies by assessing trends in mortality and multiple nonclinical indicators of health and functioning (including general health status, health conditions, physical functional limitations, and need for help with daily activities); by using annual data spanning from one to more than two decades, depending on the measure; and by covering the full age range of the Baby Boom. Our goal is to investigate whether the health and functioning of Baby Boomers are better or worse than those of previous cohorts in middle age.