soens


...color fades over time, I think.

I'm shade blind.

spacey


it has real nice blue backlighting and one can make different areas different
colors.

Yeah, my lappy has that feature. Nice, innit?




Save a place on that (space)ship for me too please.

Hi Sharke,


If you wish you may view some info at this Wiki page:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_expectancy


The section titled: 
Life expectancy variation over time

has a chart.


If you read the right hand column it shows life expectancy of the subset that reached adult hood.


For example; Medieval Britan is rated with a life expectancy figure of 30 years, however if you only count humans in that population that made it to 21 years of age then the life expectancy of that subset of Medieval Britons averages out to a life expectancy of 64 years old... only 3 years less than the average age a person lives today.


You can see they have estimates for Classical Romans and Neanderthals as well.




This is a very cursory example. I have read a thorough and detailed analysis of this in the past but I can not recall where to refer you to it. I'm sure the info is easy to find if it interests you.


I am not trying to convince you or change your mind but I would like to comment that the purpose of the very detailed explanation that I read was an attempt to discourage a generalized assumption that people live longer today than at some other time.


Obviously you can use the stats to support any perspective you wish.


For example; If you are speaking strictly about population growth... your perspective and use of the stats seems pertinent and helpful.


There are many other perspectives or issues where it is useful to understand that there are many specific reasons why children died so frequently in antique societies and that once people matriculated through that period of fragility that they did indeed seem to live just about long then as people do now.

It's an issue that comes up when people want to speak about adult issues and the impact of choices made by adults on the life expectancy of adults.

Anyways... 

Like I say, I'm not trying to change your mind... just explain the idea behind my earlier comment.




All the best,
mike

sharke

mike_mccue


3) ...we managed to more than double our average life expectancy, simply by the application of our minds to the problem of human survival.






Can you verify this? I think you will find that this is misinformation. 


Average life expectancy stats, when stripped of death at childbirth incidents, which is something that has improved dramatically, are much closer than is popularly assumed.


I'm not going to go to trouble of proving it... but I suggest to you that if you wish to use this in your argument that sooner or later someone will point out that this is not accurate and will be willing to prove it. 


You might want to reconsider using this idea in your presentation.




very best,
mike 

I think the average life expectancy in America in 1800 was something like 35.  Globally, the effect is even more pronounced. This is one of many similar graphs online:





Nor do I think it's invalid to include death at childbirth. Are you talking about the death of the woman during birth, or the child? Either way, the improvement after the Industrial Revolution was staggering. I think we take current living conditions somewhat for granted. In Britain, for instance, life was pretty grim before the Industrial Revolution, and it was fairly commonplace for kids to die before age 10. In the 80 or so years after 1780 the population of Britain almost tripled. 


Another interesting stat I read (but can't find it now) went something (approximately!) like this: It took hundreds of thousands of years for the human population to reach one billion. After the Industrial Revolution, successive billions were added in 100 years, then 75, then 50 etc (actual number of years is different but I can't remember....you get the idea though!). This is without a doubt the greatest achievement of any species on Earth. No other species has been able to improve its living prospects so dramatically through the application of thought and action. 

I won't contribute to the ongoing facts battle, but I will observe that people now tend to outlive their usefulness.

Oh I'm open to the fact that if you discount young deaths the average LE is considerably higher, I'm just not open to the idea that premature deaths don't count in assessing how much the Industrial Revolution increased living conditions. Slashing the infant mortality rate is one of the greatest achievements of the Industrial Revolution. 

Though the direct consequence of that is that we're all turning into a bunch of weaklings.

When I grew up, I knew 2 kids w/ allergies and 1 w/ asthma in my school. Now it's almost like your kid is an exception if he isn't allergic to anything.

I was shocked when my little sister told me that her daughter who's just started kindergarden was not allowed to bring some things in school - like, nuts or milk - because OTHER kids may be allergic to them. 

I mean, what used to be an exception is now common enough so that everyone must abide by some rules.

Random article:
More U.S. children have developed food allergies over the years. The percentage of children with peanut or tree nut allergies more than tripled to 2.1 percent between 1997 and 2008, according to a 2010 study published in the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. Scientists can't explain the increase, though one theory suggests modern, clean living environments leave immune systems vulnerable to harmless proteins, the study said.

Ok,

Now there is yet another casual generality that inspires further investigation.

The industrial revolution happened from the mid 1700's through to the mid 1800's.




from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Revolution


The Industrial Revolution led to a population increase, but the chances of surviving childhood did not improve throughout the Industrial Revolution (although infant mortality rates were reduced markedly).[70][71]




70) ^ a b Mabel C. Buer, Health, Wealth and Population in the Early Days of the Industrial Revolution, London: George Routledge & Sons, 1926, page 30 ISBN 0-415-38218-1 ^ Bar, Michael; Leukhina, Oksana (2007). http://www.unc.edu/~oksana/Paper1.pdf]"Demographic Transition and Industrial Revolution: A Macroeconomic Investigation"[/link] (PDF). Archived from the original on 2007-11-27. Retrieved 2007-11-05. 


71) "The decrease [in mortality] beginning in the second half of the 18th century was due mainly to declining adult mortality. Sustained decline of the mortality rates for the age groups 5-10, 10-15, and 15-25 began in the mid-19th century, while that for the age group 0-5 began three decades later". Although the survival rates for infants and children were static over this period, the birth rate & overall life expectancy increased. Thus the population grew, but the average Briton was about as old in 1850 as in 1750 (see figures 5 & 6, page 28). Population size statistics from mortality.org put the mean age at about 26.



I'm guessing you meant from "then" to "now", rather than from then to then when you used the term Industrial Revolution.

I not in disagreement with your conclusion that more people overall survive to live long lives... I'm just commenting on the proofs you are offering, as they seem familiar and easy to agree with, yet leave me feeling as if they are some sort of convenient substitute for the discussion of nuanced details that will be required before any matters are settled on the subject of voluntary peaceful coexistence. 

In any event, the world certainly seems more crowded than ever.


all the best,
mike

What DID we do before Wikepedia.

jamesg1213


What DID we do before Wikepedia.

Basically? 

Under culture @
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cro-Magnon 

I should live so long...