Most of the skeletons found in graves at Aşıklıhöyük belong to women and children, Özbaşaran said. “It is interesting that there was a high number of deaths among children and women. Probably many deaths occurred during birth. Epidemic diseases were also prevalent. We determined that the average age of death was between 25 and 30 in Aşıklıhöyük, which is very young. A man who died between the ages of 45 and 50 had one of the longest lives.”
You’re cherry picking. Go back farther in time. The farther back you look the higher the mortality rates.
I… I’ve literally provided you with cited sources that also have further sources. Would you like me to gather all available studies on this subject for you?
The fact that you’re even arguing this is ridiculous
I’m not arguing anything. I’m trying to present you with new, relevant information concerning your initial statement since it’s a widely spread bit of pop science that’s been corrected updated.
Again, not trying to convince you of anything. The cited sources are thorough and well articulated. I encourage you to give them a read if you’d like to become better acquainted with more contemporary findings on the lifespans of our ancestors.
Ever notice that plastic taste in bottled water? There’s a reason it tastes like plastic.
Oh well. Gonna have to die some way.
I guess we all just prefer living in older times where you’re lucky if you live to 40.
Most people lived longer into their life if they survived past childhood. Their quality of life wasn’t as potentially as good in that age, obviously.
Right and the lack of medical intervention meant that most people didn’t make it past 40.
You can’t argue the fact that average life expectancy has increased significantly thanks to technology and advancement in medical science.
Back then people would die from a simple tooth infection. That’s extraordinary rare now a days.
People often lived well into their old age if they survived past their childhood. For instance, the average life expectancy during the Victorian era was about 73-75. (https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1258/jrsm.2008.08k037).
The average pre-industrial lifespan was around 40 but is skewed due to incredibly high child mortality rates. Wherein roughly a third didn’t survive their first year and almost half didn’t survive their second year (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1090513812001237#s0015).
You’re cherry picking. Go back farther in time. The farther back you look the higher the mortality rates.
The point is on average life expectancy has increased. It scales with technology.
The fact that you’re even arguing this is ridiculous.
Do you know WHY so many people died giving birth? Do you know why so many people died in childhood? Medical technology. It’s not a mystery dude. https://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/excavations-reveal-daily-life-of-10000-years-ago-30504#
I… I’ve literally provided you with cited sources that also have further sources. Would you like me to gather all available studies on this subject for you?
I’m not arguing anything. I’m trying to present you with new, relevant information concerning your initial statement since it’s a widely spread bit of pop science that’s been
correctedupdated.You’re trying to convince me that life expectancy hasn’t changed at all in the last 20,000 years. As if our medical break throughs have zero impact.
Are you high?
Stop.
Again, not trying to convince you of anything. The cited sources are thorough and well articulated. I encourage you to give them a read if you’d like to become better acquainted with more contemporary findings on the lifespans of our ancestors.
Take care.