3 ms·
Can't say something like "(which doubters are free to research themselves)" and follow it up with a claim like "many pre-Agricultural societies had (and have, a
by akiselev 14y ago
Can't say something like "(which doubters are free to research themselves)" and follow it up with a claim like "many pre-Agricultural societies had (and have, actually) far lower rates of the so-called "diseases of civilizations."
Actually you shouldn't even want to as there's a certain problem with gathering data on populations that lived 10,000 years ago with a geographically dispersed sample size of ... oh, I don't know, single digits?
- Tichy 14y agoThis information does not just come from fossil records but also from studying living specimen, who still exist in the world today. The article mention that those people also had time to evolve, but I don't think that is much of a killer argument. Then the question would still remain (speaking of diet, which is only one aspect) why they were able to adapt to their diet and we weren't able to adapt to our diet.
- reycharles 14y ago> Then the question would still remain (speaking of diet, which is only one aspect) why they were able to adapt to their diet and we weren't able to adapt to our diet. I think perhaps the point is that there isn't evidence that we haven't been able to adapt to our diet.
- Tichy 14y agoWe have certainly adapted to an extent, but not enough yet. Proof: civilization diseases do exist. (Not necessarily all about diet, but general lifestyle compared to traditional societies). The fact that these diseases exist shows that we haven't adapted to not have them.
- Evgeny 14y agoThe keyword, I would suggest, is paleopathology Here is what I consider a decent introduction into the subject http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com.au/2009/03/paleopathology-at-origins-of.html http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com.au/2009/03/paleopathol...