4 ms·

Actually, before we started to "poop in the hole", the rates of infectious diseases were way lower.

• rictic 13y ago
  Not a bad point, especially given that the current consensus seems to be that the agricultural revolution[1] was a net negative for most individuals in society (evidence of significant wear on the body from bending all day, evidence of worse nutrition), but it was a winning adaptation at the group level. Underscores the point that progress can make us less happy. That said, I strongly believe that we can do anti-aging right and improve the lot of humanity. [1] We only started needing a designated place to poop because we stayed around in one place and became numerous.
• nzp 13y ago
  What are you talking about? (serious question)
  • VLM 13y ago
    The era between the end of nomadic lifestyle but before civil engineering of water and sewer systems aka the centuries where the average woman had 14 kids and watched 12 of them die before adulthood. It kinda sucked.
    • maaku 13y ago
      Yes, but what the GP said was the opposite.
      • 11001 13y ago
        That's was what I meant, sorry if I didn't express it clearly. Ditching hunting and gathering for permanent settlements and agriculture was hygienically a terrible idea.
• derefr 13y ago
  Wait, what? Pooping in a (deep) hole, as opposed to, say, against a tree, is extremely good for people. Especially people who don't wear shoes. Ref: http://endtheneglect.org/2012/01/how-the-outhouse-helped-save-the-south-and-what-it-can-do-for-the-worlds-bottom-billion/ http://endtheneglect.org/2012/01/how-the-outhouse-helped-sav...
  • deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
• jaibot 13y ago
  Technically correct, but the pooping in the hole wasn't the cause of the disease - it was a necessary countermeasure against the effects of living in the same place for years on end.