Native Americans vs Europeans and disease

[JonnyRingo84]

if only they knew rudimentary animal husbandry techniques, they could have domesticated the GIANT SLOTH instead of eradicating them all.

each animal providing several tons of docile meat. Could probably ride them into battle too, but it'd be hella slow.

lol maybe, but the vast majority of animals cannot be domesticated for one reason or another. idk about this thing lol.

 

[Beechwood]

This is controversial obviously, but some at the time believed native Indians wide spread addiction to alcohol played a role in their susceptibility to catching diseases. North American Natives would not hunt or farm some reported, instead as with some alcoholics today, had an over riding desire to drink till drunk instead of work. Alcohol addiction lead to famine some report.

There are several books that write about this issue but one that comes to mind.

Deadly Medicine: Indians and Alcohol in Early America

https://www.amazon.com/Deadly-Medic...1181245&sr=8-2&keywords=deadly+medicine+peter

Sad book to read. Recently a Canadian Native wrote about how alcohol remains a huge problem for his people. It can be read here ~

Firewater: How Alcohol Is Killing My People (and Yours)

https://www.amazon.com/Firewater-Al...qid=1511181338&sr=1-8&keywords=harold+johnson

 

[RoryFan]

Because Europeans farmed livestock.

 

[Gunny]

This isn't conclusive. Interesting read but I don't know how you can assert what you said with that. I did not know about the mutation Europeans could have that prevents HIV from entering their cells. So I guess you got me there. Having said that, its disingenuous to link that mutation to the plagues because the articles you mentioned impliy the bigger consequence of knowing of this mutations existence leads to questioning what pathogen was responsible for the plagues. That still is not determined and if it was viral it would overturn the academic consensus.

The articles say the cause of the plague is in question, not it's connection to AIDS resistance. They were very specific on that.

This is just one quote to that effect...
"Although the potential cause of the Black Death might have changed, researchers in the field still suspect that exposure to it may have passed on resistance to HIV. Since the CCR5 mutation provides protection against the entry of a virus, there's good reason to believe that what caused the Black Death was also viral, and targeted the same cells as HIV," concluded Scott."

 

[kenetics]

Not at all. Just pointing out that cave dwellers had built modern societies when most of the rest of the world were still in the Stone Age.

I'm sure they took idea from other cultures and tribes during their transition.

 

[helltoupee]

@RIPWarrior @Seano @goldennirvana

Could it be possible that this entire thread proves that diversity is somehow a strength?

 

[WrestlingJudo]

The articles say the cause of the plague is in question, not it's connection to AIDS resistance. They were very specific on that.

This is just one quote to that effect...
"Although the potential cause of the Black Death might have changed, researchers in the field still suspect that exposure to it may have passed on resistance to HIV. Since the CCR5 mutation provides protection against the entry of a virus, there's good reason to believe that what caused the Black Death was also viral, and targeted the same cells as HIV," concluded Scott."

There is a correlation between the resistance and the plagues right now but it is not valid because it is dependent on the plagues being viral in the past. I am saying it is an interesting hypothesis but the plagues being bacterial is far more established as a theory and if it turns out that academics disprove that and they are indeed viral, that aforementioned correlation becomes far more valid.

I want to stress that it seems like a good induction but it needs to be worked out more before claiming it as fact.

 

[tramendous]

if only they knew rudimentary animal husbandry techniques, they could have domesticated the GIANT SLOTH instead of eradicating them all.

each animal providing several tons of docile meat. Could probably ride them into battle too, but it'd be hella slow.

Some animals can't be domesticated. Otherwise north Africans would have had rhino cavalry. Can you imagine a group of charging armored rhinos?

On another note, people don't use zebras really either.

 

[PolishHeadlock]

Some animals can't be domesticated. Otherwise north Africans would have had rhino cavalry. Can you imagine a group of charging armored rhinos?

On another note, people don't use zebras really either.

People have tried domesticating Zebras but it wasn't very fruitful.

 

[Gunny]

Some animals can't be domesticated. Otherwise north Africans would have had rhino cavalry. Can you imagine a group of charging armored rhinos?

On another note, people don't use zebras really either.

People have tried domesticating Zebras but it wasn't very fruitful.

Isn't the real point that the process of domestication forces the emergence of a new and different species? I.e. domesticated wolves turned into dogs, domesticated Aurochs turned into cows, etc. I can't see the reason why choosing the most docile, compliant zebras or giant ground sloths for selective breeding wouldn't produce a domestic variation given sufficient scale and human will.

 

[PolishHeadlock]

Isn't the real point that the process of domestication forces the emergence of a new and different species? I.e. domesticated wolves turned into dogs, domesticated Aurochs turned into cows, etc. I can't see the reason why choosing the most docile, compliant zebras or giant ground sloths for selective breeding wouldn't produce a domestic variation given sufficient scale and human will.

I could be wrong but I remember reading that dogs weren't originally selectively domesticated. It was more of a situation that wolves were scavengers following Hunter Gatherers to eat what remained of their kills.

The Wolves that were more docile weren't killed off by the Humans

 

[Unsurprised Diaz]

Limited contact perhaps?

Exactly -- life in Europe was more densely populated in urban city centers where filth was dumped into streets, and there was much more travel of people from city to city country to country exposing many bacteria and viruses to all nations. All these factors allowed people in Europe to build more immunity. Native Indians were exposed all at the same time not able to slowly build their immune systems, and they did not have access to medicine or warmer housing during winter, making it even more difficult to survive.

Many believe now that peanut allergies are a result of too 'sterilized' food and that by giving small amounts of peanuts/peanut butter to small children when they are young will actually help prevent having a peanut allergy later in life. Also, look at farmers -- they practically never get sick since living on a farm they are exposed to so much bacteria that their immune systems are incredibly robust.

 

[Gunny]

I could be wrong but I remember reading that dogs weren't originally selectively domesticated. It was more of a situation that wolves were scavengers following Hunter Gatherers to eat what remained of their kills.

The Wolves that were more docile weren't killed off by the Humans

I think what you describe is an inadvertent selective domestication - as in, it may not have been the intent, but it was the result.

 

[PolishHeadlock]

I think what you describe is an inadvertent selective domestication - as in, it may not have been the intent, but it was the result.

Right but we were talking about how some animals can't be domesticated.

I guess you can argue that given enough time and energy perhaps we can domestic anything but it's probably not worth which is why we've only domesticate like 14 animals over 100lbs that humans were able to domesticate.

 

[Gunny]

Right but we were talking about how some animals can't be domesticated.

I guess you can argue that given enough time and energy perhaps we can domestic anything but it's probably not worth which is why we've only domesticate like 14 animals over 100lbs that humans were able to domesticate.

Right. I think what we might say is that the ground sloth wasn't domesticated because the knowhow and ROI wasn't there for the people who would do the domesticating

 

[tramendous]

Isn't the real point that the process of domestication forces the emergence of a new and different species? I.e. domesticated wolves turned into dogs, domesticated Aurochs turned into cows, etc. I can't see the reason why choosing the most docile, compliant zebras or giant ground sloths for selective breeding wouldn't produce a domestic variation given sufficient scale and human will.

Yes and no. The animals that were domesticated all had distinct traits. I.e. they were herbivores that were largely docile and highly social. Horses, cows etc. If they were predators they weren't too powerful. I.e. you can domesticated a small cat, wild dog, wolf but not a lion/tiger. If the wolf or dog gets angry you can get nipped but if the lion gets angry you might be missing a hand or dead. Elephants meet the herbivore qualification because it's a social animal with a herd hierarchy but a rhino is too aggressive.

 

[Gunny]

Yes and no. The animals that were domesticated all had distinct traits. I.e. they were herbivores that were largely docile and highly social. Horses, cows etc. If they were predators they weren't too powerful. I.e. you can domesticated a small cat, wild dog, wolf but not a lion/tiger. If the wolf or dog gets angry you can get nipped but if the lion gets angry you might be missing a hand or dead. Elephants meet the herbivore qualification because it's a social animal with a herd hierarchy but a rhino is too aggressive.

I feel like what you're talking about is training wild animals to become domestic within a single generation and what I'm talking about is a selective breeding program to a domestic sub-species. I'm not sure we know about the process of domesticating the horse but wild horses are aggressive as fuck, much like the zebra, and I would think present the same challenges.

 

[freaky]

How come so many Native Americans died from European diseases, yet Europeans were not eradicated by diseases from the Americas?

Because they're European disease. European are most likely immune to it already.

 

[dfoster]

This is controversial obviously, but some at the time believed native Indians wide spread addiction to alcohol played a role in their susceptibility to catching diseases. North American Natives would not hunt or farm some reported, instead as with some alcoholics today, had an over riding desire to drink till drunk instead of work. Alcohol addiction lead to famine some report.

There are several books that write about this issue but one that comes to mind.

Deadly Medicine: Indians and Alcohol in Early America

https://www.amazon.com/Deadly-Medic...1181245&sr=8-2&keywords=deadly+medicine+peter

Sad book to read. Recently a Canadian Native wrote about how alcohol remains a huge problem for his people. It can be read here ~

Firewater: How Alcohol Is Killing My People (and Yours)

https://www.amazon.com/Firewater-Al...qid=1511181338&sr=1-8&keywords=harold+johnson

The same thing happened to the Australian aborigines. There are towns in Australia where you have them staggering around the streets, drunk all day. It's similar to the diseases: not enough time for adaptation.

The European cultures that grew up with their alcohols learned to adapt and live with drinking for thousands of years. Whoever genetically predisposed to uncontrollable/dysfunctional drinking were slowly weeded out for generations. Now their societies have adapted to living with their alcohols.

The native cultures like the American Indians and the Australian Aborigines did not have this long of a time to be adapted to the the European substances. They're living out their 'weeding out' process as we speak. Had they have enough time to develop their own alcohols and become genetically adapted to them it would be another story.

These things always happen when a sophisticated culture meets an unsophisticated one.

 

[superpunch]

The old world was more connected and the Europeans were full of diseases from all over the planet. EG - -the black plague was a Chinese disease. Europeans had it. Etc.

They wree just simply more diseased that anyone they came in contact with