Posted by IsoM on January 6, 2002, at 16:44:06
In reply to Re: WHY are we all so 'chemically challenged'? » CalvaryHill, posted by spike4848 on January 6, 2002, at 1:05:26
Many people read how the life expectancy for centuries past was only in the 30's to 40's & think that was considered old age. It wasn't!
The way statistics can be used can be very misleading. That was the AVERAGE life expectancy - in other words, when the age of every individual life span was added up & then divided by the number of individuals, it equalled around 40. But that's taking into account, babies that died at a few days old, mothers who died in child birth, children who died from infectious diseases, young men who were killed in battles & wars - ALL persons who were ever alive, even for one day.
Look at a country like Afghanistan. The average life expectancy is only around 46. Does that mean it's old age? No. Look at the number of old people you can see there & it's not just the harsh weather making them look old but you can find people there in their 70's & 80's. But one in four children die before the age of five & the death rate of babies is the third highest in the world. It all serves to bring the AVERAGE age of the population way down. But individuals who make it into adulthood, don't die from childbirth or war can often live into their 60's & 70's.
So the increase of our average life expectancy has nothing to do with depression.
*********************************
> (2) Prior to this century, most humans lived into their late twenties and early thirties. I think our bodies were programed to live to about that age comfortably. Now that we are living to an average age of late 70's we are seeing an explosion of all types of diseases. I personally believe the brain was not meant to absorb all of modern societies stresses for 70 plus years.
>
> Spike
poster:IsoM
thread:88953
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20020103/msgs/89079.html