I notice people saying "Hunter-gatherer life expectancy was only lower
than those of modern Europeans and Americans because hunter-gatherers
had a higher infant morality rate. When you factor out their higher
infant mortality rate, you find that if a hunter-gatherer lived past his
first year, he would have the the same life expectancy as that of a
modern Western European."
First off, I find it very conspicuous
that they talk about the hunter-gatherers' high infant mortality rates
as if it's no big deal. It's like, "Yeah, a large percentage of the
hunter-gatherer population dies before reaching 50, but most of those
people die as babies, so no big deal!" Likewise, they scoff at the
modern First World's considerably lower infant mortality rate as if
that's nothing. Contrary to those people, I think the reduction in the
infant mortality rate is a tremendous achievement. If not for that
reduction in the infant mortality rate, I might have died as an infant
and not been able to write all this.
Secondly, when
archaeologists look at the mass burial sites of hunter-gatherers, they
can ascertain the age at which someone died by looking at the bones.
Amidst the remains, they find people in their twenties, thirties, and
forties, but it's extremely rare to find the remains of someone who died
in his or her fifties, sixties, or seventies. This does indicate
that, even if someone born into a hunter-gatherer society survived past
infancy, that person would still have a lower life expectancy than a
modern American or European.
