I am a long time Primal eater (14 years). I no longer need to take blood pressure medication (after taking it for 12 years). The list of benefits for me go on and on. Not to mention it just makes sense...!
But I can never answer this question when I'm asked (by friends/colleagues to whom I am preaching...):
With modern food-related (insulin-related) diseases being so much more prevalent than previous decades and centuries, why does our average age continue to increase each generation?
Why did Grok live less long?
also wanted to add that grok lived to a ripe old age and most likely died in his sleep after a day of normal life instead of a year in a death bed.
Well, I would guess that the absence of saber toothed tigers, woolly mammoths, tetanus, polio, measles, tuberculosis, neonatal deaths reduced, increased shelter, antibiotics, treatment for cancers, heart disease medications, lower childbirth mortality all have just a teeny impact on the average age of death.
Just because we are living longer does not mean we are living healthier. In addition, the generation of adults who are reaching the age of seniority had diets that were pre-low fat craze in their formative years. This generation has a lower anticipated lifespan than the one before it.
And it is not increasing any longer. Life expectancy is decreasing now.
Why did grok live less long? It's in the book and the blog but to summarize
- infant mortality was huge until just a few generations ago. Grok lived as long....if he didnt die young.
-accidents. Go chase down a buffalo who is being stalked by a lion everyday and see how long you live. Oh, and you arent allowed to go to the doctor if you get a broken bone with a gaping flesh wound in the process. No antibotics.
If you take away all the Groks who's lifespan was 'artificially' shortened by lack of medical care and the dangers of primal living there is no reason to believe that grok wouldnt have lived well into his later years.
MTA: because it is rare I dont have more to say
"When I got too tired to run anymore I just pretended I wasnt tired and kept running anyway" - my daughter Age 7
Everything in moderation, including moderation.
Yep. Accidents and infectious disease claimed a lot of people. You typically see spikes of deaths from illness in children and from accidents, infected wounds and childbirth in younger adults. People who made it through that, though, had a very good chance of living to a vital old age without the signs of decline that we see in our elderly population.
Thank you all for the replies (so quickly!!)
I had considered qualifying my question a little more but decided to just put it up there and see what discussions ensued.
For instance, things like getting taken out by a predator, disease, infant death, etc. were, to me, a given. Better meds now, obviously. And the whole discussion of quality of life versus quantity -- of course.
I think the question was directed more toward those who managed to escape the predator's jaws their whole life, and managed to avoid disease etc. I was under the impression that even those folks still lived fewer years than we now do.
Following these posts however, I may have been wrong in that assumption. From some of what I'm reading, those primal ancestors (who escaped the perils of my last paragraph) actually lived as long as we now do.
Is there evidence of that?