>
>
> I wouldn't exactly say that sterilizing things makes us vulnerable to
> disease--that's an overstatement--but there is truth in what you say.  Our
> paleolithic ancestors didn't die of the sames things we die of today--the
> immune system diseases, heart disease, cancer, etc.  They died of either
> trauma or infection.  Our habits of cleanliness have saved far more lives
> than they've cost--that's beyond doubt.  The sickness and mortality
> statistics across cultures and across time are very clear.
>

At the risk of getting the anger of the eintire crowd poured over me, here goes:
And that is just the problem. From a genetic and natural point of view all those
that survived because of better cleaning and antibiotics were never meant to.
Don't get me wrong, I love my dear ones just as much and will do anything to keep
them alive.  But for the survival of the fittest, the natural sorting of all that
don't have a minor flaw in their genetic design, it was meant to die out. People
with heart disease, faulty livers and premature births etc were never (from
genetic point of view again) meant to stay amongst us and reproduce.  Only that
ones that could adapt best to their environment and with the strongest physique
and the cleverest (to hunt agile) would survive.
I would not be alive today if it wasn't for modern medicine but I realise that I
would not have had the chance to spread my genes in ancient times. Just as nature
has meant it to be....
In the animal world you still see mothers kiling the new borns that are not well.
Even puppies with a phsycological problem and unwanted behavior are killed by
their mother. Scary thought to project that on our society but I am not proposing
we do this. Just to show you that our developments may save loads of lives but we
pay a high price for it.