5 ms·

So - how did this virus spread through the population? 20 kyrs ago people didn't live in cities but in small bands of a few dozen people. It's easy to see how a

So - how did this virus spread through the population? 20 kyrs ago people didn't live in cities but in small bands of a few dozen people. It's easy to see how an epidemic might spread through a village but how would it move between isolated groups?

CyberRabbi 5y ago
I’m not an expert but scientists have found that coronaviruses are aerosolized. So i think the process of aerosolization probably played a part. Source for reference: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7293495/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7293495/
- kadoban 5y ago
  I don't think aerosolization matters when you're not in the same building and you're any reasonable distance away (certainly when you're miles away from the closest infected, you're safe, right?)
colechristensen 5y ago
Groups interacted with each other. A large reason that humans are found more or less everywhere on the planet was pressure from interacting with other humans.
- HarryHirsch 5y ago
  They absolutely did but how frequently? The first villages in China are attested 7500 BCE, that's 10 kyr later, if the dating is correct.
  - Tainnor 5y ago
    As far as I am aware, large meetings of different tribes did occur during the paleolithic at regular intervals, although not very frequently. In any case, such meetings don't have to be frequent for such a virus to spread once they do occur. The virus could have originated in a single tribe, killing some of the people and immunising others and then remained endemic in that tribe for years before they came into contact with others.
  - tablespoon 5y ago
    > They absolutely did but how frequently? The first villages in China are attested 7500 BCE, that's 10 kyr later, if the dating is correct. There were obviously viruses before urbanization (especially given there are viruses that spread in wild animal populations), they probably just spread more slowly. At the minimum, there was probably regular deliberate contact/mixing between adjacent groups to avoid too much inbreeding, and that would imply other social contacts (e.g. an adult who married into another group returning home to catch up with his/her parents and old friends). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fission%E2%80%93fusion_society#Structure https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fission%E2%80%93fusion_society...
    - cyberlurker 5y ago
      Nitpicking here, but there probably wasn’t anything we would define as “marriage”. That Wikipedia article says “copulate” instead. Now I want to go down the wiki rabbit hole about the history of human marriage. Also, I’d imagine there were at least far fewer viruses before urbanization. My understanding is early civilization was really good for diseases.
      - refurb 5y ago
        Early civilization would have been brutal in terms of diseases compared to today. There are plenty of diseases where humans are a part of the reproduction cycle - malaria is a good example. You don’t need groups of humans together. Then add in human-animal transmission and you have endemic malaria, tuberculosis, parasites, disease causing bacteria. If you look at remote, isolated tribes today they have a very heavy burden of non-fatal (but quality of life decreasing) diseases.
      - tablespoon 5y ago
        > Nitpicking here, but there probably wasn’t anything we would define as “marriage”. That Wikipedia article says “copulate” instead. That specific passage was talking about chimpanzees.
  - gumby 5y ago
    There are certainly older settlements (not just remains) in the americas, australiasia, India and of course Africa. Undoubtably older ones in China too, just no traces yet found. Genetic and linguistic studies demonstrate significant mixing of communities.
bigpumpkin 5y ago
Maybe the virus was not a pandemic 20k years ago. Small tribes that carried genes that are resistant to the coronaviruses spread later on as they established larger communities/cities.
autokad 5y ago
Human civilization was probably much more developed back then than 'experts' believe. Look at a satellite map, most of that light blue you see was land during that time. The East China sea was mostly land. You think people, like the majority of people, weren't living there? Just look at the gobekli tepe story.
Florin_Andrei 5y ago
They were less "isolated" than you imagine. They traded with each other, intermarried, fought wars. You can see that in populations having a similar life style nowadays (there's very few of them now).
tinus_hn 5y ago
And how did they ever survive, without masks, lockdowns and vaccines?
- Spellman 5y ago
  With a lot of them dying?
- f6v 5y ago
  We also survived the Black Plague.
  - HarryHirsch 5y ago
    And people locked down and quarantined themselves. (Also Marseilles where a merchant wanted to unload a cargo of wool early, and that's how plague came to town.)
- aj3 5y ago
  They didn't. That's what drives accumulation of specific mutations which are mentioned in the article. To be clear, large part of population died off (before they could reproduce) simply because they happened to get slightly more susceptible genes.
- outside1234 5y ago
  50% of them didn't
  - tinus_hn 5y ago
    For a disease for which at least a third develops no symptoms whatsoever, and about 80% of the rest develops only mild symptoms, I doubt that.
- rsynnott 5y ago
  Well, likely, many of them didn’t. Back in the day, when there was a plague, with no preventative treatment and no (or incorrect; until the 19th century measures against respiratory disease were often actively counterproductive) public health measures, many, many people died, it burned out, then flared up again, repeat ad infinitum. Flu epidemics have been on the go for at least 8000 years, say. Like no-one at all is claiming that if we don’t use vaccines or take precautions against covid, humanity will be wiped out.
f6v 5y ago
The same way the infectious face cancer spreads among the Tasmanian devils.

CyberRabbi 5y ago

I’m not an expert but scientists have found that coronaviruses are aerosolized. So i think the process of aerosolization probably played a part. Source for reference: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7293495/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7293495/

kadoban 5y ago
I don't think aerosolization matters when you're not in the same building and you're any reasonable distance away (certainly when you're miles away from the closest infected, you're safe, right?)

colechristensen 5y ago

Groups interacted with each other. A large reason that humans are found more or less everywhere on the planet was pressure from interacting with other humans.

HarryHirsch 5y ago
They absolutely did but how frequently? The first villages in China are attested 7500 BCE, that's 10 kyr later, if the dating is correct.
- Tainnor 5y ago
  As far as I am aware, large meetings of different tribes did occur during the paleolithic at regular intervals, although not very frequently. In any case, such meetings don't have to be frequent for such a virus to spread once they do occur. The virus could have originated in a single tribe, killing some of the people and immunising others and then remained endemic in that tribe for years before they came into contact with others.
- tablespoon 5y ago
  > They absolutely did but how frequently? The first villages in China are attested 7500 BCE, that's 10 kyr later, if the dating is correct. There were obviously viruses before urbanization (especially given there are viruses that spread in wild animal populations), they probably just spread more slowly. At the minimum, there was probably regular deliberate contact/mixing between adjacent groups to avoid too much inbreeding, and that would imply other social contacts (e.g. an adult who married into another group returning home to catch up with his/her parents and old friends). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fission%E2%80%93fusion_society#Structure https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fission%E2%80%93fusion_society...
  - cyberlurker 5y ago
    Nitpicking here, but there probably wasn’t anything we would define as “marriage”. That Wikipedia article says “copulate” instead. Now I want to go down the wiki rabbit hole about the history of human marriage. Also, I’d imagine there were at least far fewer viruses before urbanization. My understanding is early civilization was really good for diseases.
    - refurb 5y ago
      Early civilization would have been brutal in terms of diseases compared to today. There are plenty of diseases where humans are a part of the reproduction cycle - malaria is a good example. You don’t need groups of humans together. Then add in human-animal transmission and you have endemic malaria, tuberculosis, parasites, disease causing bacteria. If you look at remote, isolated tribes today they have a very heavy burden of non-fatal (but quality of life decreasing) diseases.
    - tablespoon 5y ago
      > Nitpicking here, but there probably wasn’t anything we would define as “marriage”. That Wikipedia article says “copulate” instead. That specific passage was talking about chimpanzees.
- gumby 5y ago
  There are certainly older settlements (not just remains) in the americas, australiasia, India and of course Africa. Undoubtably older ones in China too, just no traces yet found. Genetic and linguistic studies demonstrate significant mixing of communities.

bigpumpkin 5y ago

Maybe the virus was not a pandemic 20k years ago. Small tribes that carried genes that are resistant to the coronaviruses spread later on as they established larger communities/cities.

autokad 5y ago

Human civilization was probably much more developed back then than 'experts' believe. Look at a satellite map, most of that light blue you see was land during that time. The East China sea was mostly land. You think people, like the majority of people, weren't living there? Just look at the gobekli tepe story.

Florin_Andrei 5y ago

They were less "isolated" than you imagine. They traded with each other, intermarried, fought wars. You can see that in populations having a similar life style nowadays (there's very few of them now).

tinus_hn 5y ago

And how did they ever survive, without masks, lockdowns and vaccines?

Spellman 5y ago
With a lot of them dying?
f6v 5y ago
We also survived the Black Plague.
- HarryHirsch 5y ago
  And people locked down and quarantined themselves. (Also Marseilles where a merchant wanted to unload a cargo of wool early, and that's how plague came to town.)
aj3 5y ago
They didn't. That's what drives accumulation of specific mutations which are mentioned in the article. To be clear, large part of population died off (before they could reproduce) simply because they happened to get slightly more susceptible genes.
outside1234 5y ago
50% of them didn't
- tinus_hn 5y ago
  For a disease for which at least a third develops no symptoms whatsoever, and about 80% of the rest develops only mild symptoms, I doubt that.
rsynnott 5y ago
Well, likely, many of them didn’t. Back in the day, when there was a plague, with no preventative treatment and no (or incorrect; until the 19th century measures against respiratory disease were often actively counterproductive) public health measures, many, many people died, it burned out, then flared up again, repeat ad infinitum. Flu epidemics have been on the go for at least 8000 years, say. Like no-one at all is claiming that if we don’t use vaccines or take precautions against covid, humanity will be wiped out.

f6v 5y ago

The same way the infectious face cancer spreads among the Tasmanian devils.