3 ms·

There's much less wear and tear on our bodies, now that we have roofs and HVACs and clothing and cars to move us around. That's how we live till 80 instead of 5

There's much less wear and tear on our bodies, now that we have roofs and HVACs and clothing and cars to move us around. That's how we live till 80 instead of 50. That plus nobody trying to hunt and eat us. Animals also live significantly longer in zoos.

b112 3y ago
Human lifesoan hasn't changed, only average age of death has. (You may be alluding to this) Average age of death has gone up, due to asprin, antubiitics, vaccines, improved hygene, and so on. I don't buy the wear and tear side of thibgs, and zoo animals, pets have vaccines, health care, medicine, and checkups too.
- SilHunter 3y ago
  [flagged]
- thriftwy 3y ago
  Wear and tear is the key, especially in the regions with winter. You don't want ot be without walls and heating during winter. In warm regions, perhaps HVAC / having at least rudimentary shade is equally important.
  - b112 3y ago
    People have had walls and heating during winter, wood or coal for heat, going back 1000s of years. And houses for shelter just as long. Unless you think people lived without houses in the 1800s, and heat, it's modern medicine that's changed, dramatically, the outcome here. Ans there are plenty of moderate climates that had no better life expectancy than colder ones.
    - thriftwy 3y ago
      We didn't see much evolution of Homo Sapiens in the last 1000s of years. We had a lot of shaping by selection of existing traits but not that much long term evolution. We're essentially "running on the same hardware" as these pre-house Homo Sapiens. What allowed prehistorical Homo Sapiens to live for 50 years now lets us do so for 80.
      - b112 3y ago
        Leaving aside modern evolutionary theory, your assertion about the same hardware agrees with my position. You need to look at life expectancy rates for the last 200 years. The big change is in the 1900s. Not when we first built warm, heated houses, thousands of years ago.
        thriftwy 3y ago
        I agree with you, though I believe that live expectancy was very uneven back then. You want either modern medicine and sanitation, or low population density. The latter is very hard to combine with low wear and tear. So it's really both medicine and comfort.
mlyle 3y ago
> Animals also live significantly longer in zoos. Humans and many apes probably had similar lifespans in the wild, but humans have this huge post-reproductive lifespan in safe environments that other apes don't.
- thriftwy 3y ago
  You can turn that on the head and say human females have really short reproductive span. Human males don't, though. They're often reproductively capable at 60.
  - mlyle 3y ago
    Yah, that's the possible patriarchal effect mentioned elsewhere. But it's unclear how much that actually happened "in the wild."

b112 3y ago

Human lifesoan hasn't changed, only average age of death has. (You may be alluding to this) Average age of death has gone up, due to asprin, antubiitics, vaccines, improved hygene, and so on. I don't buy the wear and tear side of thibgs, and zoo animals, pets have vaccines, health care, medicine, and checkups too.

SilHunter 3y ago
[flagged]
thriftwy 3y ago
Wear and tear is the key, especially in the regions with winter. You don't want ot be without walls and heating during winter. In warm regions, perhaps HVAC / having at least rudimentary shade is equally important.
- b112 3y ago
  People have had walls and heating during winter, wood or coal for heat, going back 1000s of years. And houses for shelter just as long. Unless you think people lived without houses in the 1800s, and heat, it's modern medicine that's changed, dramatically, the outcome here. Ans there are plenty of moderate climates that had no better life expectancy than colder ones.
  - thriftwy 3y ago
    We didn't see much evolution of Homo Sapiens in the last 1000s of years. We had a lot of shaping by selection of existing traits but not that much long term evolution. We're essentially "running on the same hardware" as these pre-house Homo Sapiens. What allowed prehistorical Homo Sapiens to live for 50 years now lets us do so for 80.
    - b112 3y ago
      Leaving aside modern evolutionary theory, your assertion about the same hardware agrees with my position. You need to look at life expectancy rates for the last 200 years. The big change is in the 1900s. Not when we first built warm, heated houses, thousands of years ago.
      - thriftwy 3y ago
        I agree with you, though I believe that live expectancy was very uneven back then. You want either modern medicine and sanitation, or low population density. The latter is very hard to combine with low wear and tear. So it's really both medicine and comfort.

mlyle 3y ago

> Animals also live significantly longer in zoos. Humans and many apes probably had similar lifespans in the wild, but humans have this huge post-reproductive lifespan in safe environments that other apes don't.

thriftwy 3y ago
You can turn that on the head and say human females have really short reproductive span. Human males don't, though. They're often reproductively capable at 60.
- mlyle 3y ago
  Yah, that's the possible patriarchal effect mentioned elsewhere. But it's unclear how much that actually happened "in the wild."