>On Tue, 20 May 1997, Jeffrey Smith wrote:
>
>> And all these
>> diseases of civilization are the sort that don't appear until the latter
>> half of the lifespan, in most cases.  In short, paleoman may not have had
>> diabetes, cancer, etc. not because of diet, but because he didn't live
>> long enough to develop such a disease....

And Todd Moddy responded:

>But keep two points in mind.  First, the virtues of the
>hunter/gatherer diet are not based exclusively on paleontological
>evidence.  There is also the evidence of recent and contemporary
>h/g people.  Second, the fact that the average life expectancy
>for paleolithic people was about 30 doesn't entail that there
>weren't plenty of people who lived longer than that.  It just
>means that *lots* of them didn't live so long, for lots of
>reasons.

Also keep in mind that where actual data as been available, they show that
Palelithic peoples actually slightly outlived early Neolithic
(agricultural) populations. The lifespan of both groups was short because
the main causes of death back then were due to trauma, accident, and tough
environment, not degenerative diseases. I posted a summary of this data on
the Paleodiet list some weeks or months back. The average lifespan of late
Paleolithic people was early to mid-30s (depending on sex), while that of
early Neolithic man was less by a year or two. If you want to see the
actual results of the study (done by assessing age of skeletons at death
using standard paleopathological techniques) look in the archives of the
Paleodiet list for the summary of the study I posted. The actual reference
is: Angel, Lawrence J. (1984) "Health as a crucial factor in the changes
from hunting to developed farming in the Eastern Mediterranean." In Cohen,
Mark; Armelagso, George J. (eds.) Paleopathology at the Origins of
Agriculture. Orlando: Academic Press (pp. 51-73). You should be able to
find this book in any good university library.

--Ward Nicholson <[log in to unmask]> Wichita, KS