I wonder how the stats were in the stone age.
Comment on The Nature of Nature
Semjaza@lemmynsfw.com 4 months ago
Pretty sure that “dead by 50 thing” includes all the infant mortality.
I bet he’s also using the stats from peak mortality of European late middle ages with urbanisation but no good sewers.
rimjob_rainer@discuss.tchncs.de 4 months ago
Semjaza@lemmynsfw.com 4 months ago
We have plenty of bones of people who lived into old age with signs of disability or having been crippled.
The overall stats not only do I not know but since we only have a relatively minor number of data points it’s hard to say.
Does tend to point to being better than a medieval city, and I think the general consensus amongst anthropologists is that the transition to agriculture saw a decrease in life expectancy.
RandomVideos@programming.dev 4 months ago
Shouldnt fire and cooking meat count as science and technology?
Semjaza@lemmynsfw.com 4 months ago
That too.
Even the humble napped flint.
IMongoose@lemmy.world 4 months ago
50 actually seemed about right for me excluding infants so I looked it up.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2625386/
That study looks at lifespan after reaching 5, and 50 might still be a little generous with the care that humans could provide each other 50,000 years ago. 50 is about the lifespan of a king 3,000 years ago, I can’t imagine gen pop faired better.
Semjaza@lemmynsfw.com 4 months ago
It’s also a sample size of 15 all “King’s of Judah” which is already urbanised.
But it’s good to see some decent data. It’s a nice irregular line from there on, and women do gain a lot more improvement than men.
I wish I had access to scholarly journals still to do my own research, but I don’t so I’ll defer to your stuff for now. Thanks.