That sounds just like every other insurance speak out there. 

Even if one subscribe to an insurance at an earlier age, the cost of insurance is always tied to the current age of the policy holder. The difference in policy price that an older policy holder would pay lies on the fact that they would have started to pay for their policies a little later than the younger ones, thus contributing to their savings fund a little less. As such, it is still possible for 2 people, one older and the other younger to pay the same amount of premium (in my example below, RM2400 a year), the difference would be the amount of of cash value invested in their accounts.

Of course, agents will say that for an older person to pay the same amount of premium as the younger one, the cash value of their accounts would be less or in worst case scenario, depleted and thus they have to pay extra during their later years, I say so be it! It would be better for the clients to invest the money in a purely investment vehicle like UT than to do it on an insurance as part of the ILP due to the fact that the insurance companies are taking in up to 25% of the premium paid on the first 2 years of the policy inception, and a little less in the subsequent 4 years (but more than any other investment vehicles)
 
While I condone everyone taking their insurance at an earlier age, I am tired of the way the insurance agents are misrepresenting the information. To help illustrate, I've drawn these illustrations (not to scale): 

p/s That is not blood on the scanned paper, that is sambal.

http://i.imgur.com/5xNZJzi.jpg 

Take a good look and if anyone needs an explanation on it feel free to ask. 
What is your age, gender, and do you smoke?