3 ms·
While this is very interesting, sample size and variance is too small to be of significance. A less click-baity title would have been "why were medieval people
by charles_f 4y ago
While this is very interesting, sample size and variance is too small to be of significance. A less click-baity title would have been "why were medieval people so susceptible to worms"
- ravel-bar-foo 4y agoThe headline also over-generalizes the results: perhaps using human excement as fertilizer was more common at Cambridge, but the study did not look at other monasteries (or other Medieval time frames). I wonder whether there is a reason to expect that farming practices were shared between monasteries.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- last_responder 4y agoIt is hard for me to fathom that this article was written around such insignificant numbers . 11/19 Monks 8/25 Commoners One bad meal could swing those numbers and adding to that the monks were more communal than individual families so more likely to affect them all.
- charles_f 4y agoYeah exactly, especially when coming to diseases, locality has more to do with propagation than the type pf hole you are shitting
- hyperboreanChad 4y ago
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]