> But there was a study, using some *other* way of measuring the age of
> the bone-owner at death, that indicated that paleo people lived long
> lives (comparable to ours anyway), but without much bone
> deterioration.
> That study was mentioned on this list a number of times over the
> years, and I wish I could find it again, but I've been unable
> to do so.
> I think it was Ray Audette who first cited it on here, but it was
> quite a while back.
>
> Since this canard does keep coming back, it would be good to
> be able to
> look at this research again.
>
> Todd Moody
> [log in to unmask]
>
Maybe this is the study. Since the example was a neolithic person, however,
it wouldn't necessarily change the relative difference in lifespan between
Paleolithic and Neolithic people.
AGE CONCERN
http://www.northernearth.co.uk/78/news.htm
Many archaeologists share the view of philosopher Thomas Hobbes that life in
the distant past was "nasty, brutish and short". They gleefully pointed out
that most people died young, rarely making it beyond middle age.
A recent study by a group from Bradford University and a statistician from
the University of Leeds suggests that there is a bias in the techniques used
to estimate the age of a skeleton at death. This could result in an estimate
for age at death being up to thirty years too low.
This finding could explain at least one anomaly. The tomb of 7th century CE
Mayan king Hanab Pakal was excavated back in the 1950's and his skeleton was
examined. The experts concluded that he was in his forties when he died.
Thirty years later, after Mayan had been deciphered, the inscription was
translated. It declared that the king had died at the age of eighty! [MH.
New Scientist 161/2177, 13/03/99]
----------------------------------
These are more convincing arguments for the health of Stone Agers despite
short average life expectancy:
> Q: Since hunter-gatherers lived a "nasty, short, and brutal life," how can
we know if their diets were healthful or not? Don't their short life spans
suggest a poor diet?
A: It is certainly true that hunter-gatherers studied during modern times
did not have as great an average lifespan as those values found in fully
westernized, industrial nations. However, most deaths in hunter-gatherer
societies were related to the accidents and trauma of a life spent living
outdoors without modern medical care, as opposed to the chronic degenerative
diseases that afflict modern societies. In most hunter-gatherer populations
today, approximately 10-20% of the population is 60 years of age or older.
These elderly people have been shown to be generally free of the signs and
symptoms of chronic disease (obesity, high blood pressure, high cholesterol
levels) that universally afflict the elderly in western societies. When
these people adopt western diets, their health declines and they begin to
exhibit signs and symptoms of "diseases of civilization."
Source: ThePaleoDiet.com FAQs
----------------------------------
> p. 41: .... The average life expectancy of a Paleolithic hunter-gatherer
was approximately 33 years for men and 28 years for women [see Harris,
Marvin, and Eric B. Ross, Cannibals and Kings: The Origins of Cultures. New
York: Random House, 1977]. Most evidence of early death from this period
indicates that the principal causes were infectious disease, trauma, and the
perils of childbirth. A hunter-gatherer who survived these hazards could
expect to live as long as we do today. Moreover, the remains of those who
did survive into middle age showed few signs of the chronic tooth decay,
osteoporosis, obesity, diabetes, cancer, heart disease, and arthritis that
plague our older population.
The health of contemporary hunter-gatherers has also been studied
extensively. Perhaps the most in-depth survey ever done was performed in the
early twentieth century by a dentist, Weston Price, who investigated the
origins and causes of tooth decay. In his book Nutrition and Physical
Degeneration, he documented the almost complete absence of degenerative
diseases in the most primitive of cultures. ....
p. 50: The Neolithic diet had immediate effects on man's health. The
skeletons of Neolithic farmers show the effects of poor nutrition. They died
much younger [see Cohen, Leonard A., "Diet and Cancer." Scientific American
(November 1987), 42-48], were shorter, and had many more cavities, as well
as fewer teeth, than their immediate hunter-gatherer ancestors [see Harris,
Marvin and Eric B. Ross, Cannibals and Kings: The Origins of Cultures. New
York: Random House, 1977.] These same remains show the first evidence of
obesity in humans.
Source: NeanderThin, by Ray Audette
[Unfortunately, Ray says "much younger," but he doesn't say how much younger
Neolithic farmers died. Since all the data I've seen show only a small drop
in life expectancy with the advent of agriculture, it would be good to know
the actual figures that Cohen gave.]
----------------------------------
> While chronic degenerative diseases generally produce mortality in later
life, they begin much earlier, often in childhood. This allows comparison
between age-matched younger members of industrial and technologically
primitive societies. Biomarkers of developing abnormality such as obesity,
rising blood pressure, nonobstructive coronary atherosclerosis, and insulin
resistance are common among the former, but rare in the latter.
Source: Evolutionary Health Promotion: A Consideration of Common
Counterarguments. S. Boyd Eaton, M.D., Loren Cordain, Ph.D., and Staffan
Lindeberg M.D., Ph.D. Preventive Medicine 34, 119-123 (2002)
|
