Questioning a few of Asher's statements/arguments

Comments on Mukul G. Asher “Ageing Asia’s social protection imperative”, 9/12/2010, http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2010/12/09/ageing-asias-social-protection-imperative/comment-page-1/#comment-311738
I have some questions for Professor Mukul Asher as follows.

Firstly, what does the following statement mean without supplying the information on total population growth in the two regions, Asia and the rest of the world?

"Asia’s share of world population aged 60 or over will increase from 54 per cent in 2010 to 60 per cent in 2030. Asia will more than double its population above the age of 80 over this period."

If population growth is more rapid, doesn't it mean naturally Asia's share of all age groups could be higher?

Secondly, what does the next statement mean? “In China and India by the year 2050 the largest single age cohort will be women over 70 years of age, implying feminization of the elderly.” What are those other cohorts to compare to and where are the boundaries for each of them?

Thirdly, is the next statement correct? “Second, in global terms, there is little accumulated experience in designing and administering pension and health care systems for such large elderly populations. The only way for Asian countries to gain the relevant experience is to invest in social protection themselves.” Don’t we have the experience of population aging in many industrialised countries with pension and health care systems as the experience that could be applied to Asia in the future?

Another question: Why should the next statement be necessarily the case, if social and cultural backgrounds as well as public policies are very different between Asia and the rest? "First, Asian countries should reform their civil service and military pensions, bringing benefits more in line with the rest of the economy."

Why don't you ask the other way round?

PS addition: Professor Asher replied to my questions on the EastAsiaForum site and it is appreciated by me.