3 ms·
The article needs to be taken with a grain of salt. Our infant mortality has gone down, leading to many more "weaker" individuals making it past five (of cours
by arghwhat 9y ago
The article needs to be taken with a grain of salt.
Our infant mortality has gone down, leading to many more "weaker" individuals making it past five (of course a positive thing for most). These individuals are likely to have a shorter lifetime expectancy (sometimes far too short), dragging down the average.
These individuals are sorted out entirely in the historic data, as they would not have made it till 5 years of age back then, which is the age they use for the comparison.
In other words, it does not produce any evidence that a healthy individual from back then is any healthier than a healthy individual now. It merely shows that our weak individuals live longer than back then, turning an infant death into a maybe decent life.
- unknown_apostle 9y agoYes but they also compare mid 1800s with late 1800s. No data readily available, but I assume it was still quite high in the late 1800s, especially with the working classes.