Look at some of the photos taken on the day of MLK's funeral services, and you will see Belafonte walking alongside Mrs. King and three of her children, Yolanda, Dexter and Martin III.

So why wasn't Belafonte in attendance at Mrs. King's funeral? He had planned to be there:

"Due to a recent tragic unfolding, the death of Mrs. Martin Luther King Jr., I have been requested by the family and my fellow leaders from the civil rights movement to deliver a part of the eulogy on the occasion of her burial on Tuesday, February 7, 2006 in Atlanta, Ga.,'' the news center at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio, reported on the school's Web site on Feb. 6 as to why Belafonte postponed a scheduled speech at Case Western.

"The loss of Mrs. King is profound. My relationship to Dr. King and Mrs. King and with their children since the time of their birth has always been evident. I could not imagine being required to speak in the church at her service and not be in attendance,'' the Case Western email quoted Belafonte as saying.

Sei Lee, a geriatric specialist at the San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, California, designed a 12-question form based on data from nearly 20,000 people aged 50 and over, who took part in the US-wide Health and Retirement Survey between 1998 and 2002. Lee's team looked at who had died by the end of 2002, and calculated which variables might predict their death.

They compiled a "death index" based on three classes of questions covering: gender and age; illnesses, such as cancer, diabetes and heart disease; and the ability to perform everyday activities, such as dressing and shopping. A score of 0 means there is a less than 1 per cent chance of death in the next four years. A score of 14 or over indicates a 65 per cent chance of dying. The study appears this week in the Journal of the American Medical Association (vol 295, p 801).

Lorna Layward of London-based charity Help the Aged says the index could be a vital tool for improving the health of older people, but worries that those judged likely to die soon might be refused vital treatment. "This is direct ageism and will only increase already growing health inequalities. It suggests that if you haven't got long left to live, then you are fit only for the scrap heap."