6 ms·

I think the particular bit about the subway may be informed by very recent news that the air pollution in the New York subway stations is far in excess of what

I think the particular bit about the subway may be informed by very recent news that the air pollution in the New York subway stations is far in excess of what anyone had inspected. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/feb/10/subway-air-pollution-new-york-washington-dc https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/feb/10/subway-a... As for actual subway workers… I mean it’s not exactly a coal mine, but I would be pretty surprised if their mortality wasn’t at least somewhat measurably lower than, say, that of shepherds.

ehnto 6y ago
Just to point out how why this is a fairly nuanced topic, a shepherd may be breathing clean air but they're also exposed to UV radiation all day. They may have a higher morbidity due to increased skin cancer rates.
- darkwater 6y ago
  I'm no way an expert on the matter but by pure logic it's still amazes me how we survived (and evolved!) as a species for thousand of years without almost no shelter from direct sunlight and yet now (too much) sunlight exposure is seen as a cause of death. I know we lost almost all the body hair we used to have but still, we usually wear clothes when under the sun.
  - saiya-jin 6y ago
    Shepherds (like all folks) wear and wore clothes, long sleeves and often hats also in the summer. Also if skin is exposed to sun regularly, often, its much less sensitive compared to usual office worker seeing almost no sunlight and then having 2 weeks of mega exposure and sunburns on vacation.
    - TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago
      The last time I looked in to this, enough sun exposure to tan is also enough sun exposure for folk of northern European discent to badly increase skin cancer risks. This is why tanning studios have been banned in Australia.
  - yakubin 6y ago
    According to my naive knowledge: 1. We have more ozone holes now. 2. We weren't constantly in direct contact with sunlight. If you move past very early stages, we had shelter in forests, caves, tents, igloos. 3. When we were in direct contact with sunlight, we had a darker skin, which is more resilient to that. Correct me if I'm wrong.
    - onion2k 6y ago
      We have more ozone holes now. The global ban on CFCs (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreal_Protocol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreal_Protocol) is working, and although there are still big holes that open and close every year we're on the way to getting back to pre-1980 levels of holes by 2060. https://public.wmo.int/en/media/news/record-breaking-2020-ozone-hole-closes https://public.wmo.int/en/media/news/record-breaking-2020-oz...
      - TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago
        Maybe, if China would curtail their CFC usage perhaps. ...A recently reported slowdown in the decline of the atmospheric concentration of CFC-11 after 2012, however, suggests that global emissions have increased... We show that emissions from eastern mainland China are 7.0 ± 3.0 (±1 standard deviation) gigagrams per year higher in 2014–2017 than in 2008–2012, and that the increase in emissions arises primarily around the northeastern provinces of Shandong and Hebei. This increase accounts for a substantial fraction (at least 40 to 60 per cent) of the global rise in CFC-11 emissions. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1193-4 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1193-4 Still, the Montreal Protocol is a good example of what can be achieved when we finally reach an imminent crisis.
        Gravityloss 6y ago
        That's from 2019, they have since reduced the leaks, this from 2021: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03277-w https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03277-w
  - Eric_WVGG 6y ago
    Unless that skin cancer thing is also actually overblown… https://elemental.medium.com/what-if-avoiding-the-sun-is-bad-for-you-4c21585180da https://elemental.medium.com/what-if-avoiding-the-sun-is-bad... As the parent said, plenty of nuance to go around.
  - arisAlexis 6y ago
    comparing average lifespan of 30 to 80?
    - darkwater 6y ago
      That's actually a valid point, thanks. Although I don't know what's the age distribution for skin cancers.
  - asaddhamani 6y ago
    Why would sunlight cause us to lose hair but not other animals?
    - blunte 6y ago
      I don't see how sunlight would cause us to lose any animals, unless perhaps it was too bright.
  - rob74 6y ago
    If the shepherd has kids before dying (of skin cancer or something else), it doesn't really make a difference for the survival of the species...
  - steventharlow 6y ago
    Evolution (and survival) only cares about if you survive to reproduce. So human evolution (and survival) matters only until 14-40, and humans aren't dying of skin cancer at exceedingly large numbers at those ages. If we pushed back the reproductive age we'd eventually evolve to live longer (though would have more people dying without reproducing first). This experiment has been successfully shown in fruit flies.
    - Denvercoder9 6y ago
      > So human evolution (and survival) matters only until 14-40 Not necessarily. I'd imagine it helps the survival chances of your grandchildren if you're around when they're growing up (though it probably mattered less back when children were raised by communities than in the nuclear families we have nowadays).
      - notahacker 6y ago
        Sure, it would have helped homo sapiens even more if more of their children had lived to childbearing ages (if, say, they'd discovered antibiotics a few millenia earlier or evolved more natural immunities). But the infant survival rates back then were enough to ensure the species survived, just like the smaller fraction of the population struck down by skin cancer every year wasn't enough to put evolutionary pressure on us to develop resistance to it or develop sunlight avoidance traits. Evolution doesn't guarantee that every possible beneficial adaptation takes place.
      - throwaway0a5e 6y ago
        > I'd imagine it helps the survival chances of your grandchildren if you're around when they're growing up Keeping toddlers from walking off a cliff (and the other things unsupervised toddlers will do to kill themselves) is probably why he said 14-40 and not 14-30.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - yarcob 6y ago
      > human evolution (and survival) matters only until 14-40 I just don't think that's true. I think grand parents being around was important for human survival. If it wasn't, if all that mattered was having the most kids, then why would women go through menopause? Wouldn't it be better if women continued having children until they die? I think it makes sense that young people have kids (the sooner the better, faster evolution and less chance of DNA degradation) Then they should live as long as possible to help raise their grandkids to ensure their genes survive.
  - ehnto 6y ago
    I may be overly cautious given where I live has an 11+/Extreme UV rating all year round. Though I do want to point out that clothing doesn't protect against UV as much as you might think, and a sunburn or lack thereof doesn't tell you all that much about your UV exposure for the day. You could have exceeded your healthy exposure for the day without getting a sunburn.
  - kosh2 6y ago
    Skin cancer probably plays no role for your ability to reproduce. By the time you die from skin cancer you already had children and probably even grandchildren.
    - bluGill 6y ago
      The longer you live as a male the more children you can have. Also grandparents helping raise grandkids is a factor in their survival in the village ..
  - astura 6y ago
    Wide brim hat and long sleeves.
  - globular-toast 6y ago
    We also used to be black. Humans now move to places for which they do not have a suitable skin colour, like Australia.
- darkerside 6y ago
  Besides melanomas which are relatively rare, most skin cancers actually carry a net mortality benefit because of the association with being outside.
  - KMag 6y ago
    That's super interesting!
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- Symmetry 6y ago
  I'm sure their skin cancer morbidity is higher but the studies I've seen seem to show that sun exposure overall correlates with lower mortality and morbidity overall. There may be confounders like exercise at play but shepherds are probably getting more than most subway workers.
- vladvasiliu 6y ago
  I don't know about that. My memory of shepherds from when I was a kid in my grandparents' village was of a guy being covered head to toe in what looked like terribly hot clothing for the summer. And this wasn't some high-altitude village, either. I figure I was getting much more sun exposure as a kid running around in t-shirt and shorts then the local shepherds did.

ehnto 6y ago

Just to point out how why this is a fairly nuanced topic, a shepherd may be breathing clean air but they're also exposed to UV radiation all day. They may have a higher morbidity due to increased skin cancer rates.

darkwater 6y ago
I'm no way an expert on the matter but by pure logic it's still amazes me how we survived (and evolved!) as a species for thousand of years without almost no shelter from direct sunlight and yet now (too much) sunlight exposure is seen as a cause of death. I know we lost almost all the body hair we used to have but still, we usually wear clothes when under the sun.
- saiya-jin 6y ago
  Shepherds (like all folks) wear and wore clothes, long sleeves and often hats also in the summer. Also if skin is exposed to sun regularly, often, its much less sensitive compared to usual office worker seeing almost no sunlight and then having 2 weeks of mega exposure and sunburns on vacation.
  - TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago
    The last time I looked in to this, enough sun exposure to tan is also enough sun exposure for folk of northern European discent to badly increase skin cancer risks. This is why tanning studios have been banned in Australia.
- yakubin 6y ago
  According to my naive knowledge: 1. We have more ozone holes now. 2. We weren't constantly in direct contact with sunlight. If you move past very early stages, we had shelter in forests, caves, tents, igloos. 3. When we were in direct contact with sunlight, we had a darker skin, which is more resilient to that. Correct me if I'm wrong.
  - onion2k 6y ago
    We have more ozone holes now. The global ban on CFCs (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreal_Protocol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreal_Protocol) is working, and although there are still big holes that open and close every year we're on the way to getting back to pre-1980 levels of holes by 2060. https://public.wmo.int/en/media/news/record-breaking-2020-ozone-hole-closes https://public.wmo.int/en/media/news/record-breaking-2020-oz...
    - TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago
      Maybe, if China would curtail their CFC usage perhaps. ...A recently reported slowdown in the decline of the atmospheric concentration of CFC-11 after 2012, however, suggests that global emissions have increased... We show that emissions from eastern mainland China are 7.0 ± 3.0 (±1 standard deviation) gigagrams per year higher in 2014–2017 than in 2008–2012, and that the increase in emissions arises primarily around the northeastern provinces of Shandong and Hebei. This increase accounts for a substantial fraction (at least 40 to 60 per cent) of the global rise in CFC-11 emissions. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1193-4 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1193-4 Still, the Montreal Protocol is a good example of what can be achieved when we finally reach an imminent crisis.
      - Gravityloss 6y ago
        That's from 2019, they have since reduced the leaks, this from 2021: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03277-w https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03277-w
- Eric_WVGG 6y ago
  Unless that skin cancer thing is also actually overblown… https://elemental.medium.com/what-if-avoiding-the-sun-is-bad-for-you-4c21585180da https://elemental.medium.com/what-if-avoiding-the-sun-is-bad... As the parent said, plenty of nuance to go around.
- arisAlexis 6y ago
  comparing average lifespan of 30 to 80?
  - darkwater 6y ago
    That's actually a valid point, thanks. Although I don't know what's the age distribution for skin cancers.
- asaddhamani 6y ago
  Why would sunlight cause us to lose hair but not other animals?
  - blunte 6y ago
    I don't see how sunlight would cause us to lose any animals, unless perhaps it was too bright.
- rob74 6y ago
  If the shepherd has kids before dying (of skin cancer or something else), it doesn't really make a difference for the survival of the species...
- steventharlow 6y ago
  Evolution (and survival) only cares about if you survive to reproduce. So human evolution (and survival) matters only until 14-40, and humans aren't dying of skin cancer at exceedingly large numbers at those ages. If we pushed back the reproductive age we'd eventually evolve to live longer (though would have more people dying without reproducing first). This experiment has been successfully shown in fruit flies.
  - Denvercoder9 6y ago
    > So human evolution (and survival) matters only until 14-40 Not necessarily. I'd imagine it helps the survival chances of your grandchildren if you're around when they're growing up (though it probably mattered less back when children were raised by communities than in the nuclear families we have nowadays).
    - notahacker 6y ago
      Sure, it would have helped homo sapiens even more if more of their children had lived to childbearing ages (if, say, they'd discovered antibiotics a few millenia earlier or evolved more natural immunities). But the infant survival rates back then were enough to ensure the species survived, just like the smaller fraction of the population struck down by skin cancer every year wasn't enough to put evolutionary pressure on us to develop resistance to it or develop sunlight avoidance traits. Evolution doesn't guarantee that every possible beneficial adaptation takes place.
    - throwaway0a5e 6y ago
      > I'd imagine it helps the survival chances of your grandchildren if you're around when they're growing up Keeping toddlers from walking off a cliff (and the other things unsupervised toddlers will do to kill themselves) is probably why he said 14-40 and not 14-30.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - yarcob 6y ago
    > human evolution (and survival) matters only until 14-40 I just don't think that's true. I think grand parents being around was important for human survival. If it wasn't, if all that mattered was having the most kids, then why would women go through menopause? Wouldn't it be better if women continued having children until they die? I think it makes sense that young people have kids (the sooner the better, faster evolution and less chance of DNA degradation) Then they should live as long as possible to help raise their grandkids to ensure their genes survive.
- ehnto 6y ago
  I may be overly cautious given where I live has an 11+/Extreme UV rating all year round. Though I do want to point out that clothing doesn't protect against UV as much as you might think, and a sunburn or lack thereof doesn't tell you all that much about your UV exposure for the day. You could have exceeded your healthy exposure for the day without getting a sunburn.
- kosh2 6y ago
  Skin cancer probably plays no role for your ability to reproduce. By the time you die from skin cancer you already had children and probably even grandchildren.
  - bluGill 6y ago
    The longer you live as a male the more children you can have. Also grandparents helping raise grandkids is a factor in their survival in the village ..
- astura 6y ago
  Wide brim hat and long sleeves.
- globular-toast 6y ago
  We also used to be black. Humans now move to places for which they do not have a suitable skin colour, like Australia.
darkerside 6y ago
Besides melanomas which are relatively rare, most skin cancers actually carry a net mortality benefit because of the association with being outside.
- KMag 6y ago
  That's super interesting!
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
Symmetry 6y ago
I'm sure their skin cancer morbidity is higher but the studies I've seen seem to show that sun exposure overall correlates with lower mortality and morbidity overall. There may be confounders like exercise at play but shepherds are probably getting more than most subway workers.
vladvasiliu 6y ago
I don't know about that. My memory of shepherds from when I was a kid in my grandparents' village was of a guy being covered head to toe in what looked like terribly hot clothing for the summer. And this wasn't some high-altitude village, either. I figure I was getting much more sun exposure as a kid running around in t-shirt and shorts then the local shepherds did.