ORIGINAL: robinsa
I don't believe this to be true. I remember reading somewhere that life expectancy at that time was around 18 years old, and even shorter before "modern" man came along. You might be correct that contagious deceases weren't as prevalent but people would still die from small scratches getting infected. I'm no expert on the subject so treat this as an opinion rather than a fact.ORIGINAL: Anthropoid
About 10,000 years ago our ancestors made some kind of "mistake" and now here we are paying for it. I agree that the intermediary steps from Paleolithic-Mesolthic-Neolithic-Metallic-Explosive-Atomic eras were generally a mixed bag, but based on what I know about Paleolithic peoples, I am quite confident life was pretty awesome prior to the decline into civilization . . . well, confident in a silly speculative and slightly wistful way!
Imagine you, your family, and all the other families in your group are all world-class naturalists, hunters and atheletes, mean body fat to muscle mass ratios that would make modern day triathletes envious, taller, stronger, more sturdy, healthier in many ways (low pop densities = most of the infectious diseases that have killed us in droves for the last 8 or 9K years would've been inconsequential; speculative, but many think no cancer, diabetes, obesity or related chronic degenerative diseases; no writing and no confusing written or recorded culture [apart from cave paintings, carvings, oral traditions]. About the worse thing back then would've been the preadators, physical injuries from accidents, the occasional intestinal parasite, and tooth decay.
So, I think there is some basis to the zeitgeist that "the good old days" were better. You just gotta go waaayyy back to be confident that they really were "better."
Edit: But I do agree that it does seem like some sort of utopia to walk around healthy and strong in the forest with you family.
Modern man has been around for about 200,000 years. We just know more stuff now.











