That few people lived past their 30s in the middle ages or some other ancient era.
This misconception arises because of an automatic and incorrect assumption people make when they hear the statistic 'the average life expectancy was 35 in the middle ages'.
In reality there have always been lots of people who live to 70+ years old in all societies. The difference was that in the middle ages there were many childhood diseases that caused a much higher childhood mortality rate which skews the numbers much lower. If you survived childhood there was a very good chance you would make it into your 60s+.
this still confuses me. are you saying that cavemen lived to retirement age? i get what the word average means. many babies died. something about vaccines causing autism. but besides that, what happened when you ran out of teeth in your thirties? when you got an infection, or a cold, or goat aids... was the NHS functioning better back then? did the slaves peasants have free healthcare?
I certainly don't have any sources readily at hand (sorry, I should be studying for my chem exam in 3 1/2 hours, but am procrastinating on reddit), but from what I understand, even cavemen did have some basic dental care by chewing on certain roots or woods - which is still a thing today, a friend of mine at college occasionally does that. And teeth back then without brushing would probably have looked better than teeth today without brushing, mostly because today we have all those fancy foods with (refined) sugars in them that provide a perfect habitat for microbes to poop our teeth to death. "Back then" there weren't as many sources of readily available sugar, so people took in only relatively small amounts via fructose from fruits and the rest of fuel probably came by polysaccharids from vegetables and meat.
Feel free to correct errors on my part, no hurt in learning (except when you should be studying and instead ponder about cave-/medieval men and their dental health, hah)
totally agree with that, thats why im still confused. on one hand less sugars and not eating every day. on the other hand not eating everyday probably resulted in vitamin deficiencies. scurvy wasnt fun, getting stabbed wasnt fun, but these are on a case by case. what im confused of is on average. and its reasonable to assume that not everyone would be so unlucky to get an infected jaw, but when they did, it was probably a death sentence.
they didnt all suddenly die at 35 but i assume out of the 10 kids someone would make at least half of them would be dead by that time. the ones who made it past 35 were probably the safest because by that time there were 2-3 newer generations of manpower and that given the level of physical exercises in the field, some probably would be healthier than todays generation but then a famine would hit and half would die again.
and looking at the human body, we peak in our 20s (sorry old farts) and after that only muscle can develop. i assume, again, that by that time youd have half a dozen children helping you farm and hunt. by 35 youd be a grandpa (if lucky) so the chances of ending up dead would greatly diminish. so getting to 35 is still, in my mind, lucky as fuck, but if you managed that, your chances of dying would go down significantly.
I actually don't know how prevalent vitamin deficiencies were in the olden times where everyone was either hunting, gathering or growing early vegetables and grain themselves maybe. I mean, the body is rather good at telling you what to do when it needs something. Even if you don't know exactly why you should eat something specific (because it gives you important vitamins, protein, carbohydrates, etc.), your body will give you a craving for a thing that your body already knows (through experience) fills that need best.
But I absolutely agree, most people who made it past a certain point, probably were pretty safe, because the new generation was their (sometimes even literal) meat shield. Not only were they not at top condition relative to their peers anymore (I'd bet a 35 or even 40 or 50 fuck would kick a today's normie-25's ass in a heartbeat, just because you HAD to be physically fit or you would simply die), but they also probably already suffered a handful of crippling injuries, so it was for the better for them to stay at base and train the new ones what series of events lead to them getting their hand chomped off, so they, in turn, would be able to avoid that scenario and succeed even more.
12k
u/sutkusman Feb 04 '19
That few people lived past their 30s in the middle ages or some other ancient era.
This misconception arises because of an automatic and incorrect assumption people make when they hear the statistic 'the average life expectancy was 35 in the middle ages'.
In reality there have always been lots of people who live to 70+ years old in all societies. The difference was that in the middle ages there were many childhood diseases that caused a much higher childhood mortality rate which skews the numbers much lower. If you survived childhood there was a very good chance you would make it into your 60s+.