It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Deny Arrogance
Am I supposed to feel guilty just because I am from European descent?
Natural selection is not always pretty but let's just blame all people of European descent alive today as if they consciously had intent to wipe out indigenous people through pathogens nobody knew about at the time.
It sucks that so many died but 99.9% percent of all species that ever lived have gone extinct and we all are going to die in one way or another.
I wonder how our own immune systems would hold up to the distant past or future, or even other life in the cosmos. What do you think? If we visited, or were visited by others, would this study be relevant to our world population?
...tribes living deep within the jungles and whatnot, while they may have been impacted by deforestation or something like that, which is still doubtful, are not being killed off in the same way. We aren't going in and slaughtering them or anything.
At least not in modern times. ....
originally posted by: chiefsmom
Goddess forbid there may be people living happily and healthy without "civilized" societies help. Let's go "help" them.
We should be ashamed, very ashamed.
And stay the HELL away from them!!!!!!
Sure, people don’t go in and kill entire tribes directly, they offer indigenous people the chance to assimilate into modern culture. But, as Hamilton notes, the trappings of modern society—access to better healthcare, technology, and education—haven’t improved tribes' overall outcomes.
“after the initial “crash”, indigenous populations are often able to recover, and some of the communities have some of the highest growth rates in the world. I’m not calling Hamilton out here—if that’s what the data shows, it’s what it shows. And it’s better that the population “rebounds” rather than dies out completely.
Most have had a little, at least indirectly. "There's always some contact with other isolated tribes, which have contact with other indigenous people, which in turn have contact with the outside world," says Spooner.
www.newscientist.com...
And it seems those who choose modern society and survive the initial bouts with modern disease are indeed happier.
Often, there is a lot of disease because the tribespeople are exposed to novel pathogens. It is not uncommon for half the population to die of respiratory illness – unless outsiders bring sustained medical care, says Hill. Also, the newly integrated tribespeople frequently end up on the lowest rung of the society they join. Still, he says, when he interviews such people years later, "I don't find anyone, pretty much, who would want to go back to the old situation."
Now I am not an advocate for destruction of said indigenous tribes but misleading is misleading.
edit on 5/2/2014 by DJMSN because: Addition
originally posted by: DJMSN
a reply to: soficrow
I believe this is a bit misleading as individuals are not dying as in buried dead but instead choosing modern lifestyles and leaving the isolation of the tribal life.
Uncontacted Tribes Die Instantly After We Meet Them
...Of those contacted, three quarters went extinct. Those that survived saw mortality rates up over 80 percent. This is grim stuff.
“Our analysis dramatically quantifies the devastating effects of European colonization on indigenous Amazonians. Not only did ~75 percent of indigenous societies in the Brazilian Amazon become extinct, but of the survivors, all show evidence of catastrophic population declines, the vast majority with mortality rates over 80 percent,” writes Marcus Hamilton of the University of New Mexico in a paper published in Scientific Reports.
that “despite the catastrophic mortality of indigenous Amazonians over the 500+ year contact period, the surviving populations are remarkably resilient and remain demographically viable.”
originally posted by: DJMSN
a reply to: soficrow
the story is contradicting itself
.... "the good news" which is that most tribes move ahead much better off than before. I
...“despite the catastrophic mortality of indigenous Amazonians over the 500+ year contact period, the surviving populations are remarkably resilient and remain demographically viable.”
originally posted by: GogoVicMorrow
a reply to: soficrow
Someone may have answered, but why? Are we talking introduced illness or what?