• DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      2 months ago

      It was an average largely brought down by childhood mortality. If you made it to ten you’d probably see thirty, if you made it to 25 you’d probably see 50ish.

      • BreadOven@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        2 months ago

        This (at least I think) exactly. There were so many deaths at birth/during childhood from things that are easily fixed now. I’ve also seen some places say if you made it to the teens, you’re pretty likely to hit 50ish.

          • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            So then why does it matter that the average was brought down by higher child mortality? We’re just comparing average life spans, not adding conditions, right?

      • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I think everybody else was inferring a healthy 25 year old man, not life expectancy from birth (counting children).

        Or their idea of “natural” is 18th century France.

    • Disgracefulone@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      No? Medical care and sanitation. Unless youre speaking of a specific event in time. But yes it has tripled in the 25yo cases? Avg life span now is in the 70s.