this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2025
25 points (70.5% liked)

No Stupid Questions

43733 readers
706 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

https://theconversation.com/a-new-study-shows-an-animals-lifespan-is-written-in-the-dna-for-humans-its-38-years-128623

Asking this because none of the 38 year olds I know are taking any medications and they look really young

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 15 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (6 children)

Nobody dies "naturally" of old age at 38.
But genetically we come from nomadic tribes, and the nomads of a 100000 years ago, had a far shorter average lifespan than after we settled and began farming. Also people of nomadic tribes in the rain forests of South America today, often don't live longer than that on average AFAIK.

When we look at animals, it is also not uncommon that a tamed animal pet can live twice as long or more than they usually do in the wild. For humans if modern environment has similar impact compared to the harsh life as a nomadic people, the double of 38 is 76 years, and that's pretty close to life expectancy today.

So I certainly wouldn't dismiss the claim outright, but the article is a bit thin on details on the science.

But it's not just medicine (as speculated by OP), it's also hygiene, food safety and work safety, so we avoid many external factors often until our body is simply too week to continue. We basically all reach an age where we are definitely ageing, and are very far from peak condition. Strength, speed and agility wise, very few sportspeople can compete over 40 years of age, despite the advantage of experience and more years of training.

[–] Tuuktuuk@piefed.ee 4 points 10 hours ago (5 children)

But genetically we come from nomadic tribes, and AFAIK the nomads of a 100000 years ago, had a far shorter average lifespan than after we settled and began farming.

This is mainly because of child mortality. When you get five children, of which two live to be 78 and 89 and the other three die at ages of 2, 14, and 8, your children's average lifespan is 38,2 years. Typically, you either died very young, or you lived old. And the average is, well, the average of those. Basically nobody died around the age of 38.

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 2 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (4 children)

Tribal nomads of 100000 years ago did not live anywhere near to their 60's.
AFAIK they rarely lived beyond 30.

https://www.discovermagazine.com/what-was-the-life-expectancy-of-ancient-humans-44847

Other research reveals that the lifespan of Homo sapiens may have changed from the Middle Paleolithic to the later Upper Paleolithic, since the ratio of older to younger remains increases. The same research shows that starting about 30,000 years ago at the beginning of the Upper Paleolithic, the average lifespan began to push past 30 years.

Note that Lifespan is not the same as life expectancy:

https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/articles/lifespan

Lifespan is the maximum length of time that a person can live

So 30000 years ago 30 years was pretty much the maximum age a person could achieve.
Life expectancy would probably have been around 15.

[–] village604@adultswim.fan 0 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

That still doesn't mean 30 was the maximum possible age for humans 30,000 years ago. The ratio of older to younger remains doesn't mean a whole lot unless you can prove death from old age.

It's not like we have a plethora of remains to draw these conclusions from.

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world -3 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

That still doesn’t mean 30 was the maximum possible age for humans 30,000 years ago.

Yes actually it does, above 30 would be an outlier.
Of course genetically they had about the same potential as modern people, but life was simply too harsh for people to survive above 30. The struggle to survive meant they were simply worn out at that point.
We see this even today in nomadic tribes in the rain forest of South America.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)