General Chat

Top tip - using the Genes Reunited community

Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!

  • The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
  • You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
  • And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
  • The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.

Quick Search

Single word search

Icons

  • New posts
  • No new posts
  • Thread closed
  • Stickied, new posts
  • Stickied, no new posts

Just a thought

ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date

Running Bear

Running Bear Report 9 Nov 2009 14:56

When you think of all the millions and millions of people killed in wars going back through history, if they all lived to have children so on so on, think the planet would have collapsed by now, and run out of resources.
Mmmmmmm?

MrDaff

MrDaff Report 9 Nov 2009 17:19

I remember reading or watching something on this a few years ago... it was something to the effect that more men than women were killed in a war... so the number of women remained relatively static... the number of babies born would therefore have remained fairly stable, as well.

The old *rape and pillage* thing meant that the gene stock was *improved* ie that new genetic material was introduced so the chances of inbreeding were reduced.... often women and young girls were removed from vanquished villages, as we know.

During times of famine and pestilence, it would seem that there were more babies born.... but the infant mortality rate was higher, and more women died in childbirth as they weren't nourished enough to fend off illnesses... so the population remained fairly stable.

When times are good, and plentiful... there would appear to be a corresponding drop in the number infant deaths... but the number of births in general dropped, too. So the population remained pretty much the same.

In times of hardship, adults died younger.... in times of plenty they lived a bit longer, but were then clobbered by the illnesses of older age.

What we have now is a rather weird paradox...... there is some famine, some glut.... and cures for many illnesses considered incurable even 10 years ago... so although there is an increase in live births in some areas of the world... famine has meant that there is an increase in illness and mortality... but not as much as there would have been in the past because of aid.... and now we have more older people than ever before in many parts of the world... we also have an obesity epidemic (it would seem) that is going to produce the cull of the population that would have happened through other illnesses before.

Sorry, long winded I know... I have no idea where that was all from.... but that is the gist of what I remember... it was about 10 or 15 years ago I first read or heard it... so it might not be exactly what was put forward.

But it does make interesting reading!

Love

Daff xxx

Annina

Annina Report 9 Nov 2009 19:49

Here is a thought provoking fact that I read somewhere,

The number of humans alive today,is the same as all the humans who have ever lived and died.

Dermot

Dermot Report 9 Nov 2009 20:27

Of course, population figures are also affected on a daily basis in this country & elsewhere by other things not connected to war.

Interesting topic.

AnninGlos

AnninGlos Report 9 Nov 2009 21:50

Interesting Daff, mine of information you.

Dermot, things like Tsunamis, earthquakes etc which all take life??

Dermot

Dermot Report 9 Nov 2009 21:55

Not too many Tsunamis or earthquakes in the UK lately, thank goodness.