5 ms·

> Yet another unambiguous data point that modern life is measurably worse for your body I’m not sure this is the takeaway. I feel there are many unambiguous d

> Yet another unambiguous data point that modern life is measurably worse for your body I’m not sure this is the takeaway. I feel there are many unambiguous data points that modern life is measurably better for your body. Infant mortality rate. Average life expectancy. The mortality rate for mothers during pregnancy. The mortality rate for random injuries (cuts, breaks, etc.). Death by food poisoning. Quality of life, and mortality rates, for mental and physical disabilities. It seems like, in nearly any circumstance, the modern human body is at considerably less risk than our ancestors. But there are trade-offs and missteps. It seems we’ve tossed the baby with the bath water in some cases. And getting the baby back further improves modern life.

martythemaniak 3y ago
All right, but apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?
- asdff 3y ago
  Jokes aside but ancient rome was probably a disgusting place where setting foot into it put you at severe health risk compared to a quaint village. There's a reason why the rich rich of rome lived in villas outside of town.
AndrewKemendo 3y ago
Obviously we don’t have records for the majority cause of death in 100,000BC, however I see no reason to believe that compared to Paleolithic man there are fewer risks now. Consider the top youth killers today: drug overdoses, automobile accidents, firearms, household accidents. These were just not possible ways that people could die in 100,000BC. Yet heart attack and cancer have always led death rates for as long as humans have been counting. My hunch is that people for the most part have always mostly died of “old age” (cancer, heart attack, pneumonia, infection) for all of human history and while overall rate had dropped - the type has changed to be less random biology and more social-cultural (which is worse IMO)
- AntiRemote 3y ago
  [dead]
- mtlmtlmtlmtl 3y ago
  People have used drugs since time immemorial and even "natural" drugs can kill you. For example dying from esophogeal rupture during those purging ceremonies where toxins are ingested to induce profuse vomiting. Though there were no firearms, there certainly were weapons and murder. Even human sacrifice. Before there were cars, being kicked by a horse was a significant risk. Or being killed by the animals you hunt, like mammoths and other large mammals. And I'm not sure what you mean by suggesting "household accidents". Accidents were possible before too. And way probably more lethal on average because there were no antibiotics, soap, or blood transfusions.
  - anthk 3y ago
    Or just a simple byte. A laceration. A simple fall with a random stone in the road. And so on.
asdff 3y ago
Our injury prevention and treatment is better. Our knowledge of kinesiology is better. However, how many people even care about the findings of kinesiology or public health? Not a lot as it were if you were to go out in public and observe the average state of health for most people, some people take good health advice and straight up take offense to it. People made political campaigns out of it not long ago with the pandemic. That being said, if you were to take your average hunter gatherer who is not ill or infected, compare them to your average american office worker, I'd guess you are comparing a slender low bmi person with great endurance, functional strength, and practical knowledge on survival to one who is overweight, doesn't know how to feed themselves without a modern grocery store, only walks to the car, and will probably end up dying sooner due to health issues stemming from being overweight, a poor diet, and general inactivity.
Aerbil313 3y ago
Stop saying that life expectancy thing. Old people _lived_. Modern people suffer a lifetime physically, mentally, and spiritually.
ramblenode 3y ago
> It seems like, in nearly any circumstance, the modern human body is at considerably less risk than our ancestors. I don't think so. I think the risk is just flattened. We've quashed deaths from injuries and trauma, but chronic disease has been getting worse, due in part to our diet and lifestyles. I'd be surprised if modern people have better vitality and stamina over their lifetime than our pre-agrarian ancestors did.

martythemaniak 3y ago

All right, but apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?

asdff 3y ago
Jokes aside but ancient rome was probably a disgusting place where setting foot into it put you at severe health risk compared to a quaint village. There's a reason why the rich rich of rome lived in villas outside of town.

AndrewKemendo 3y ago

Obviously we don’t have records for the majority cause of death in 100,000BC, however I see no reason to believe that compared to Paleolithic man there are fewer risks now. Consider the top youth killers today: drug overdoses, automobile accidents, firearms, household accidents. These were just not possible ways that people could die in 100,000BC. Yet heart attack and cancer have always led death rates for as long as humans have been counting. My hunch is that people for the most part have always mostly died of “old age” (cancer, heart attack, pneumonia, infection) for all of human history and while overall rate had dropped - the type has changed to be less random biology and more social-cultural (which is worse IMO)

AntiRemote 3y ago
[dead]
mtlmtlmtlmtl 3y ago
People have used drugs since time immemorial and even "natural" drugs can kill you. For example dying from esophogeal rupture during those purging ceremonies where toxins are ingested to induce profuse vomiting. Though there were no firearms, there certainly were weapons and murder. Even human sacrifice. Before there were cars, being kicked by a horse was a significant risk. Or being killed by the animals you hunt, like mammoths and other large mammals. And I'm not sure what you mean by suggesting "household accidents". Accidents were possible before too. And way probably more lethal on average because there were no antibiotics, soap, or blood transfusions.
- anthk 3y ago
  Or just a simple byte. A laceration. A simple fall with a random stone in the road. And so on.

asdff 3y ago

Our injury prevention and treatment is better. Our knowledge of kinesiology is better. However, how many people even care about the findings of kinesiology or public health? Not a lot as it were if you were to go out in public and observe the average state of health for most people, some people take good health advice and straight up take offense to it. People made political campaigns out of it not long ago with the pandemic. That being said, if you were to take your average hunter gatherer who is not ill or infected, compare them to your average american office worker, I'd guess you are comparing a slender low bmi person with great endurance, functional strength, and practical knowledge on survival to one who is overweight, doesn't know how to feed themselves without a modern grocery store, only walks to the car, and will probably end up dying sooner due to health issues stemming from being overweight, a poor diet, and general inactivity.

Aerbil313 3y ago

Stop saying that life expectancy thing. Old people _lived_. Modern people suffer a lifetime physically, mentally, and spiritually.

ramblenode 3y ago

> It seems like, in nearly any circumstance, the modern human body is at considerably less risk than our ancestors. I don't think so. I think the risk is just flattened. We've quashed deaths from injuries and trauma, but chronic disease has been getting worse, due in part to our diet and lifestyles. I'd be surprised if modern people have better vitality and stamina over their lifetime than our pre-agrarian ancestors did.