View Full Version : Worst Jobs in History
livius drusus
04-26-2005, 05:19 AM
It's a BBC 4 show (viewable in the US on Discovery and History International) hosted by Baldrick himself and covering the nasties, most treacherous, most gaggingly foul jobs history has ever had to offer.
The episode I saw tonight (http://www.channel4.com/history/microsites/W/worstjobs/stuart.html) was about the vilest jobs in the Stuart era, and let me tell you, I would not care to be a Nit picker, Saltpetre man, Seeker of the Dead (Orson Scott Card, anyone?), or Violin string maker. Some of them don't sound all that bad, but then you see poor Tony Robinson hands covered in shit, eyes tearing, trying not to puke on the cameraman and you realize there are some perilously low depths being plumbed here.
Check out this Sun interview (http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,7-2004442076,00.html) for some amusing (and chilling) commentary from Tony Robinson.
I must have done about 50 different awful jobs, although some of the ones in my book were impossible to do without contracting a foul disease.
In fact I was sick all last winter because of this, I've never been so ill. It's because you expose yourself to infection in a way that people nowadays just don't do.
...
Doing the series I threw up every day and always had the flu, coughs and colds. I was constantly being soaked in water and handling the most disgusting substances. So that was the price I paid.
I've just ordered the companion book (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0752215337/qid=1114483329/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-0087467-1292703?v=glance&s=books) and will make a point of seeking out all the other episodes. I can't believe King's Asswipe was once a coveted job... :eek:
Ymir's blood
04-26-2005, 06:03 AM
The book I just finished, The Great Mortality mentions 'rakers,' the Medieval equivalent of a street sweeper. Their job was to rake the animal viscera, dung and other effluvia into the gutters. When the gutters got blocked, they had to clear those as well. Besides being a filthy job, they were also looked down upon by the townspeople, who insulted and occasionally attacked them.
Gurdur
04-26-2005, 06:06 AM
I can't believe King's Asswipe was once a coveted job... :eek:
Look up the "mudlarks" of 19th century London.
There was FAR worse than King's Asswipe.
Dragoon
04-26-2005, 06:37 AM
Obviously none of you ever removed a "bean" from inside a gelding's glans, got squirted in the face while digging out a foot abscess or worked as an engineer for Lockheed Martin.
Yes, at good old Lockmart it was getting so that we were expected to do MORE than just WIPE asses. Way more. That's why I'm so glad to be out of there. :D
livius drusus
04-26-2005, 03:41 PM
Their job was to rake the animal viscera, dung and other effluvia into the gutters. When the gutters got blocked, they had to clear those as well.
How did they clear them, I wonder. Actually, now that I think of it, what were these gutters like? I'm picturing ditches on the side of the road, but that doesn't sound right.
Look up the "mudlarks" of 19th century London.
There was FAR worse than King's Asswipe.
Thanks to Dickens, I'm familiar with mudlarks. I suppose even wiping the king's ass still makes you a courtier with a comparatively great life.
Obviously none of you ever removed a "bean" from inside a gelding's glans, got squirted in the face while digging out a foot abscess or worked as an engineer for Lockheed Martin.
Okay. I know about the abscesses from the first thread you ever posted on here at FF. I'm not sure I want to know what the "bean" is, and I'm positive I don't want to know about Lockheed Martin. :D
Gurdur
04-26-2005, 04:14 PM
..... got squirted in the face while digging out a foot abscess ....
I did once get kinda squirted from the lancing of a patient's (cancer-caused) abcess in the corner of her eye socket.
That count ? Or must it be horses ?
TomJoe
04-26-2005, 06:04 PM
There is a job at the USDA which is directed towards figuring out which bacteria make pig shit stink.
Here is the job description:
DESCRIPTION OF DUTIES: The position is a Microbiologist in the Anaerobic Microbiological Processes in Animal Manure Management Research Program (AMP) located at the National Center for Agricultural Utilization Research (NCAUR), Fermentation Biotechnology Research Unit (FBT), Peoria, IL. AMP conducts interdisciplinary research aimed at uncovering the underlying microbiological basis for odor from swine waste. A primary focus of AMP research is to identify and quantitate the microorganisms present in swine manure and determine their contributions to the production of odor causing compounds. The incumbent employs modern anaerobic microbiological procedures and sophisticated molecular biological approaches such as 16s rDNA sequencing and quantitative real-time PCR techniques to identify, characterize, and quantitate the microbial species present in manure and elucidate the relationship between microbiological communities and the production of odorous compounds.
I'm going to pass on applying for this job.
Dragoon
04-26-2005, 06:15 PM
...
That count ? Or must it be horses ?
Only if the purulent exudate is dark in color, has a strong odor and instantly attracts flies.
Sounds like you might be a ophthalmologist Gurdur. :cool: My dad was an EENT that later specialized in eye surgery.
My greatest respect for any occupation is reserved for the (dedicated) members of the medical community and yet, what they cut, poke, probe, look into and touch, well it makes the job of the Royal Ass Wipe look positively glamorous. Still, after 34 years I meet people who remember my dad, but after being gone 1 year from the evil Military-Industrial-Governmental-Incestuous-Complex, nobody remembers me for shit.
Truth is, with all I've seen, smelled, touched and cut, no job seems all that "dirty" to me. The only really dirty jobs involve harming innocent people, all the rest clean up with a little soap. :yup:
Dragoon
04-26-2005, 06:27 PM
... ... ...
I'm going to pass on applying for this job.
Sounds like an interesting job to me TomJoe. If you have the qualifications, you could really learn something and really apply an education to something worthwhile. :cool:
I just bought something I've always wanted, but never needed: a semi-professional (bright field) microscope. I have collected a bunch of stains and made up some dark field stops for the condenser - I'm even thinking of buying a phase contrast condenser (more big $$). I've been having a ball looking at all kinds of really nasty stuff - it's fun and some of it is beautiful. :yup:
TomJoe
04-26-2005, 06:35 PM
Sounds like an interesting job to me TomJoe. If you have the qualifications, you could really learn something and really apply an education to something worthwhile.
I suppose everyone who ever drove through Amarillo, TX would thank me. :P
I am qualified. My current boss is actually on their oversight committee. Everything they do (the sequencing, real time PCR, etc etc), we do or have done. Which means my potential for learning new things at that lab isn't as great as it would be for me to go to a lab with a totally different focus ... something I should be (and am) looking at during my postdoc. That's probably a bigger reason for me not applying there than the stink ... :)
livius drusus
04-26-2005, 06:36 PM
Truth is, with all I've seen, smelled, touched and cut, no job seems all that "dirty" to me. The only really dirty jobs involve harming innocent people, all the rest clean up with a little soap.
I think you may be projecting modern standards onto the past a little here, Dragoon. Some of these jobs were very seriously dangerous. Rockclimbing with Medieval equipment leaps to mind, and I can't imagine tanners lived a full, healthy life. Even poor Tony Robinson got sick as hell and he was just dabbling at nasty jobs for a few hours each.
Dragoon
04-26-2005, 06:43 PM
Their undying thanks, no doubt. Why hell, you could be as famous a benefactor of the human race as the superb Louis Pasteur himself (well, maybe not quite). On the other hand, you would be destroying a large and important part of the character of Texas. :( Better check with Tom DeLay first before taking that job.
Dragoon
04-26-2005, 06:59 PM
...
I think you may be projecting modern standards onto the past a little here, Dragoon. ...
Yes, you are right and I was. Yet, here we are projecting our modern sense of "yuckeyness" onto the occupations of the past, aren't we? The "Germ Theory of Disease" (it's “just a theory" after all) wasn't known to anybody in olden times and smells were just smells. Can you imagine how powerful and stimulated their immune systems were? If the weak ones died off young, the survivors passed on to the human gene pool tendencies for immunity that we probably enjoy today (Dragoon's crackpot theory No. 762).
Probably the most dangerous, but not the most yucky job, was that of the mens hat maker. The very best leathers that went into hats were preserved with mercury salts. After several years a hat maker (hatter) would develop organic psychosis, hence "mad as a hatter." Believe me, I've met guys like that in the mining industry, they are for real.
Dingfod
04-26-2005, 07:00 PM
I would think one of the worst jobs in modern times would be that of sewer plant diver. Yuck.
livius drusus
04-26-2005, 07:15 PM
Yet, here we are projecting our modern sense of "yuckeyness" onto the occupations of the past, aren't we?
To some degree, but I suspect there's a reason these jobs were done by people who had little in the way of choice.
The "Germ Theory of Disease" (it's “just a theory" after all) wasn't known to anybody in olden times and smells were just smells.
Well, except they had the "Smell Theory of Disease"; ie, miasmas spread illness. Hence the whole pocket full of posies thing to ward off the plague.
Can you imagine how powerful and stimulated their immune systems were? I
Not really, no. Life expentancy was low and people died of disease far more than they died in their sleep, I'd wager. Besides, starvation/poor nutrition and physical hardships to the limit of endurance are hardly immune system boosts.
f the weak ones died off young, the survivors passed on to the human gene pool tendencies for immunity that we probably enjoy today (Dragoon's crackpot theory No. 762).
As far as I know, we don't have a "tendancy for immunity" to any of the diseases that ravaged Stuart England. We have immunity to some thanks to vaccines, but that's not a natural immunity. I seem to recall that milkmaids had developed an immunity to smallpox on account of their exposure to cow pox, and of course, survivors of smallpox wouldn't get it again, but that's more of a Lamarckian thing, isn't it? It's not really a genetic change that gets passed on.
I'm not really hugely versed in such things though, so I better leave it to the pros instead of propounding my own crackpot theory. ;)
Probably the most dangerous, but not the most yucky job, was that of the mens hat maker. The very best leathers that went into hats were preserved with mercury salts. After several years a hat maker (hatter) would develop organic psychosis, hence "mad as a hatter."
I've heard of the mercury poisoning of hat makers too. What makes you think that's the most dangerous, though? I'd say petardier's assistant was miles more dangerous.
Dingfod
04-26-2005, 07:17 PM
What did a petardier's assistant do, get hoisted up by his petard?
Dragoon
04-26-2005, 07:20 PM
I would think one of the worst jobs in modern times would be that of sewer plant diver. Yuck.
I would agree that it would be a "low class" job, but with all the modern protective gear and support machinery, why would it be any worse than cutting open a living human being? A thoracic surgeon is certainly a "higher class" occupation and pays better, but (to my mind anyway) it stinks as badly and your chances of getting something really nasty (from a scalpel or needle wound) is ever so much greater.
Once a person has his/her "uniform" off, cleaned up and sitting next to you as you're listening to that live performance of a Bach Cantata, who knows or cares what they do for money?
livius drusus
04-26-2005, 07:21 PM
Pretty much (http://www.channel4.com/history/microsites/W/worstjobs/stuart.html#3), warrenly.
Dragoon
04-26-2005, 07:40 PM
Pretty much (http://www.channel4.com/history/microsites/W/worstjobs/stuart.html#3), warrenly.
Our Huntsman's son is in the Royal Marines and that's just exactly his job. He is currently defusing land mines in Bosnia. What he is doing is heroic and a positive contribution to the welfare of the people of that region.
... ... ...
As far as I know, we don't have a "tendancy for immunity"... ... ...
I put that very, very poorly. I should have said something to the effect that the survivors passed their obviously superior congenital immune systems, systems that allowed them to develop resistance to diseases that were killing most of their peers, to their children and hence to the human gene pool.
I would love to discuss your points as they deserve liv, but I really have to get going now. Will try for more later.
:wave:
Dingfod
04-26-2005, 07:43 PM
I guess I never knew what a petard was. Man, I've been figuratively hoisted by my own petard a million times.
livius drusus
04-26-2005, 08:18 PM
Ever been called a toady (http://www.channel4.com/history/microsites/W/worstjobs/stuart1.html#5)?
Dragoon
04-26-2005, 08:57 PM
Ever been called a toady (http://www.channel4.com/history/microsites/W/worstjobs/stuart1.html#5)?
How about being called a "lickspittle" now there's a word to conjure images!!
Now I Reeeeeeeely have to go. :wave:
inland wave
04-27-2005, 02:21 AM
Obviously none of you ever removed a "bean" from inside a gelding's glans.
Dragoon you must tell everyone about the "bean"......
lady cop
04-27-2005, 03:01 AM
Ever been called a toady (http://www.channel4.com/history/microsites/W/worstjobs/stuart1.html#5)?
Thanks Livius, i cannot wait to peruse the entire site! :cool: :popcorn:
livius drusus
04-27-2005, 03:03 AM
Oh I bet you're gonna love it, lady cop. Try and catch the show on Discovery or History International if you have the chance.
Ymir's blood
04-27-2005, 03:23 AM
Their job was to rake the animal viscera, dung and other effluvia into the gutters. When the gutters got blocked, they had to clear those as well.
How did they clear them, I wonder. Actually, now that I think of it, what were these gutters like? I'm picturing ditches on the side of the road, but that doesn't sound right.
My OCR program didn't work on the XP machine, so I'll just sum up:
"The typical urban system began with shallow open gutters in small residential streets; these led into a network of larger central gutters, which in turn, fed into a central dumping point - usually a large river like the Thames or Seine. Where available, local streams were diverted to provide flushing power, but since urban streams were not widely available, most systems relied on gravity and rainwater. In theory, storms were supposed to flush waster through the downward-sloping gutters to a river dumping point. But dry weather was unkind to theory; large piles of fecal matter, urine and food would accumulate in the gutters, providing a feast for rats. Storms, when they did come, were not much help. Even a good rain rarely pushed waste much farther than an adjoining neighborhood. However enough waste matter eventually got to the end points in the system to make the urban river an insult to the senses and an affront to propriety."
Referring to London, it goes on to note that there were several classes of sanitation workers, the beadles, underbeadles who "probed, peered, sniffed and questioned their way along the medieval street." It goes on to describe how bodily wastes were disposed, into the streets, and then mentions 'sanitary piracy.' In once case, two people were arrested for piping sewage into a neighbor's cellar!
"Under the beadles were the rakers, the people who did the actual cleaning up. Rakers swept out the gutters, disposed of dead animal carcasses, shoveled refuse from the streets and alleys, and hauled it to the Thames or other dumping points, like the Fleet River."
From The Great Mortality, an Intimate History of the Black Death, the Most Devastating Plague of All Time. (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0060006927/) by John Kelly
pescifish
04-27-2005, 05:42 AM
...or worked as an engineer for Lockheed Martin.
.... and I'm positive I don't want to know about Lockheed Martin.That might depend on who is doing the telling. :hmm:
:flower: :flower: :flower:
:garden: :nosegay: :pansy: :rose3:
:bloom: :rose2: :nil:
:flower: :flower: :flower:
Gurdur
04-27-2005, 06:15 AM
...
That count ? Or must it be horses ?
Only if the purulent exudate is dark in color, has a strong odor and instantly attracts flies.
One out of 3 ain't bad. Cancers for some odd reason like to ulcerate smellily at times.
Sounds like you might be a ophthalmologist Gurdur. :cool:
Naw, on that particular occasion I was just helping out a GP lance the abcess and handle the patient. I have no ophthalmological qualifications.
Dingfod
04-27-2005, 07:04 AM
Our old gelding had to be sedated to remove the "bean" (http://www.equi-sense.com/articles/sheathcleaning.html), he wouldn't let anyone near his thing. Vet injected him with what he called "nails", so-called because it nails their feet to the floor, yielding them unable to kick or even raise a foot. In fact, he couldn't keep his head up.
livius drusus
04-27-2005, 01:23 PM
I'm going to boot now. :puke:
Dragoon
04-27-2005, 07:12 PM
Our old gelding had to be sedated to remove the "bean" (http://www.equi-sense.com/articles/sheathcleaning.html), he wouldn't let anyone near his thing. Vet injected him with what he called "nails", so-called because it nails their feet to the floor, yielding them unable to kick or even raise a foot. In fact, he couldn't keep his head up.
Was your guy still able to pee? I have never removed a bean from a completely blocked gelding, but I've been at a buddy's clinic when frantic horses were brought in wild with pain and definitely had to be sedated. :gottago:
I love to watch, help and do some of my own veterinary work and I think I would have loved being one (if I had the personality and smarts), but I've noticed that most of them are rather scared around horses and will stick needles in them (like pincushions) before even touching them. Can't really blame them as getting hurt will destroy their livelihood and careers. Of course, the more injections, the bigger the bill ($ :yup: $).
I remove my guys' beans once a year and I've done it for a couple of friends' horses where the pee was dribbling out slowly and, of course, have never used any sedation.
I take a couple of minutes to let the horse smell me while always acting gentle, slow and non-threatening around them. When I sense that the horse is OK with me - and it is so important to know that the horse is OK with you, I gently insert my liberally lubricated with dishwashing soap hand, into the sheath and quietly probe for the bean. If it starts getting a little dry in there, I take my hand out and use more soap.
I quietly back off if the horse starts to get upset and/or lifts a leg to kick, then I quietly start over. Rushing or trying to force the animal to accept what you are doing will surely get you kicked, IMO. I am careful to keep my head and face as far away as possible so if I do get kicked, I won't get kicked there. Knock on wood, I've never been kicked (not while doing that anyway).
The bean itself and all the yucky stuff in the sheath really stinks and even scrubbing won't remove the smell for a day or two. I've tried using rubber gloves, but can't get the fine feel necessary for working the bean out of the pocket.
Now that I think of it, I'm really curious to know what "nails" is. The only drug I've ever seen used is Ace (acepromazine). Not only does it sedate them, it caused 'it' to drop where 'it' can be easily worked on.
Anyway, I generally don't like to have an audience because, strangely enough, many people don't see sticking your hand in there as an unpleasant, but necessary medical procedure and something you don't necessarily take a lot of pleasure in. :eww: I've had friends and bystanders get all grossed out and then start making scurrilous jokes at my expense. :glare:
Dragoon
04-27-2005, 07:45 PM
...
To some degree, but I suspect there's a reason these jobs were done by people who had little in the way of choice.
I think everybody, then as today, kind of "drifts" into situations and slowly learns the accept the yuckyness that always accompanies certain aspects of life. Dragoon's First Noble Truth: “All Life is yucky.”
Well, except they had the "Smell Theory of Disease"; ie, miasmas spread illness. Hence the whole pocket full of posies thing to ward off the plague.
True, but once a person is "used" to the smells (or being around the germs), it's "just part of the job."
Not really, no. Life expectancy was low and people died of disease far more than they died in their sleep, I'd wager. Besides, starvation/poor nutrition and physical hardships to the limit of endurance are hardly immune system boosts.
Yes, but obviously the ones that had children survived to breeding age and that was waaaay better than most of their peers did.
I've heard of the mercury poisoning of hat makers too. What makes you think that's the most dangerous, though? I'd say petardier's assistant was miles more dangerous.
OK, poor example. Now that I think of it, the mercury poisoning probably protected them somewhat from syphilis and maybe some other common bacterial infections since "corrosive sublimate" (taken in tiny doses) was all they had in those days and it did work - somewhat.
I guess I was thinking that not all life destroying jobs in "the good old days" were yucky and was trying to use the hatters as an example.
TomJoe
04-27-2005, 08:03 PM
Yes, but obviously the ones that had children survived to breeding age and that was waaaay better than most of their peers did.
Given that the breeding age typically started in the teens, that's not saying much. You can take a whole lot of abuse before your body finally succumbs to disease, and that really is the purpose of the immune system (to get people to breeding age) if you believe one of my committee members opinion (who works on MHC presentation of HIV epitopes), but there are a whole lot of factors involved, but I'm not sure certain jobs provided a selective advantage for the offspring.
Dragoon
04-27-2005, 10:36 PM
Yes, but obviously the ones that had children survived to breeding age and that was waaaay better than most of their peers did.
Given that the breeding age typically started in the teens, that's not saying much.
Au contraire, mon amie (pardon my French!), IMHO, that's saying a great deal.
Back in those days, getting past five was a really big deal. Hell, most kids didn't live to one. If the person survived to say, 14, living through childbirth was an even HUGE-ER deal (especially if attended by a physician at a pauper's hospital).
Living to reproductive age and especially surviving multiple births was a pretty good indication of a superior physique, IMHO.
Up until a hundred years ago (and less), right here in the good old USA, a person generally had to be pretty strong (and lucky) to reach adulthood.
TomJoe
04-27-2005, 10:54 PM
Back in those days, getting past five was a really big deal. Hell, most kids didn't live to one. If the person survived to say, 14, living through childbirth was an even HUGE-ER deal (especially if attended by a physician at a pauper's hospital).
Living to reproductive age and especially surviving multiple births was a pretty good indication of a superior physique, IMHO.
Up until a hundred years ago (and less), right here in the good old USA, a person generally had to be pretty strong (and lucky) to reach adulthood.
Ok, you're right there. Infant mortality was tremendous. However, what I meant to say was that ... a particular job did not lend to a selective advantage merely by increasing exposure to certain biological agents, forcing the body to cope. How many five year old muckrakers were there? Did muckrakers have healthier children? I doubt it.
I guess my only objection is that being exposed made one healthier. I think the inverse would have been the case. Yes, while the immune system would have been more active, and these people would have staved off more diseases that the upper classes but these people would also be exposed to more lethal agents. You can only pull the trigger so many times before you reach the bullet.
Dingfod
04-28-2005, 05:10 PM
Our old gelding had to be sedated to remove the "bean" (http://www.equi-sense.com/articles/sheathcleaning.html), he wouldn't let anyone near his thing. Vet injected him with what he called "nails", so-called because it nails their feet to the floor, yielding them unable to kick or even raise a foot. In fact, he couldn't keep his head up.
Was your guy still able to pee?No, and hence the problem.
I have never removed a bean from a completely blocked gelding, but I've been at a buddy's clinic when frantic horses were brought in wild with pain and definitely had to be sedated. :gottago: The vet tried without it first and almost paid for it dearly when the old fellow kicked out. You couldn't get close to his private parts, he wouldn't let you.
Now that I think of it, I'm really curious to know what "nails" is. The only drug I've ever seen used is Ace (acepromazine). Not only does it sedate them, it caused 'it' to drop where 'it' can be easily worked on.Maybe it was Ace, I don't know. All I know is he couldn't have lifted a foot to kick if he'd wanted to, thus the reference to "feet nailed to the floor" or "nails."
Dragoon
04-28-2005, 06:34 PM
... ... ...
...what I meant to say was that ... a particular job did not lend to a selective advantage merely by increasing exposure to certain biological agents, forcing the body to cope. How many five year old muckrakers were there? Did muckrakers have healthier children? I doubt it.
I guess my only objection is that being exposed made one healthier. I think the inverse would have been the case. ... ... ...
You are most certainly correct.
However, in my obviously clumsy way, I meant to be talking about "Natural Selection of Superior Immune System Alleles" in a Darwinian sense. The population dynamics of a high birth rate and a high mortality in the young, in a highly challenging environment, tends to select those individuals for survival and reproduction that have alleles that are able to cope with this stressful environment. That's my thesis and if I'm wrong, I guess a lot of what I considered "my education" is wrong too.
I think I can safely say that the majority of my European ancestors lived for hundreds of generations in (what today we’d call) squalor and the individuals possessing the “right” immune system alleles, that were selected for that environment, survived. When those Europeans arrived in the new world, they carried those alleles along with acquired immunity, but then they encountered Native populations that didn’t, with horrific results. Tens of millennia of European natural selection was forced upon the Native Americans instantly and they died by the tens of millions. Or so I believe.
Do we see the same thing today? Thanks to the superb Luis Pasteur and those following him, NO. I say no, EXCEPT in certain places in Africa. When I traveled in remote parts of Tanzania, I met the Massai People. They pretty much reject Western medicine (and religions) altogether and by no means, want weak children to survive. Not all males get to reproduce and the one’s that do have to survive and prosper under very hard conditions. It’s not because they are stupid or even ignorant, they are a very proud people and they consider the rest of humanity as “weaklings.”
Are the Massai a “superior” meta-species? Well, when I trespassed in a sensitive area and was confronted by very unhappy spearmen, I wanted to “beat feet” back to my camp, but realized (luckily) that they would have outpaced be within a few yards and my flight would trigger an aggressive response (a spear in the back). For all my education and vaccinations, I don’t think I could survived out there for a week, living as they do and I know for a certain that I wouldn‘t have survived my first year. By the way, my encounter with the spearmen turned out OK - matter of fact, very interesting - and I’m still alive. From what I saw of the adult survivors, they are very tall, handsome, intelligent, happy and healthy people, all things considered.
Finally, I didn't mean to imply that exposure to ultra filthy environments would strengthened people's immune systems and therefore we today enjoy those benefits. No indeed, that would make absolutely no sense at all because, as Livius pointed out, that would be a Lamarckian thing. If you and Livius got the impression that that was what I was saying, I apologize for being obscure.
On the other hand, (up to a point anyway) exposure to infectious agents builds the immune system, at least for individuals within their own lifetimes and therefore can lead to a kind of “Societal Immunity” (if I can use that expression) outside of genetics. As mentioned before regarding Europeans invading the New World as well as with the high mortality of “Farm Boys” vs. “City Boys” in military camps. You’d think the larger, better fed rural kids would be stronger, but the small, half starved kids from the cities faired better, at least that was the case during the American Civil War. Of course, this acquired immunity has nothing to do with selecting for superior immune system alleles.
Gurdur
04-29-2005, 03:14 AM
Dragoon,
you're on the right track, but allow me to ... round off the picture.
What actualy happens there is selection through enviroment, with two very specific enviromental factors:
1) lots and lots and lots of humans jam-packed together (relatively speaking)
plus
2) lots of domesticated animals of a wide range of species very nearby too (i.e. fowl + horses + cattle + pigs + sheep + dogs + cats, for example).
Such a nasty enviroment does not weed out "weaklings", but tends to be bad news for anyone not able to handle multispecies pathogens and lots and lots of pathogens.
Anyone left alive after that tends to have disadvantages, like being smallish (lack of good food, too many people too close together), having sinusitus (all those pathogens and pollution), and so on; but they also tend to be walking reservoirs of lots and lots and lots of pathogens, which is really bad news for anyone not used to crowded living conditions with lots of domesticated animals nearby.
The key is the range and relative number of co-habiting domesticated animals; South American mainland Indians did a tick better than North American Indians because of more domestication of animals, Africans did far better than Australian Aboriginals for the same reasos, once these places were invaded by Europeans or Middle Easterners.
Dragoon
04-29-2005, 05:07 AM
... ... ...
Such a nasty enviroment does not weed out "weaklings", but tends to be bad news for anyone not able to handle multispecies pathogens and lots and lots of pathogens.
... ... ...
Oh lord, I think we're :deadhorse2: doing it again.
Except for the above snip, there is nothing in your last post I can disagree with, but I was trying to address the concept of the microevolution of immune system alleles within the overall concept of Darwinian selection. I was dumb to have brought in the subject of the immune systems of individuals acquired in their lifetimes to muddy the waters.
With regard to your statement above, a nasty environment does indeed "weed out weaklings" such that only those carrying the alleles for a robust immune system survive to reproduce thus concentrating that allele within a population just as the superb Mr. Darwin so insightfully said it would. Of course he didn't know anything about molecular biology, but he did understand variation within a breeding population and so he hit the concept right on the head.
Ain't that right all you smarty Biology types? :posting:
BTW, I'm going down for the races in Temecula tomorrow. Wish me luck. See you all next week.
MooseIBe
05-17-2005, 07:22 PM
Sorry to raise this thread but I just saw it for the rest time :). I did catch some of this series but not as much of it as I had wanted to .. it looked fascinating from the trailers! I didn't see the King's arsewipe one though .. was that really a job?! Dear God. I wonder if the royal family have those today? (wouldn't surprise me :)).
Still, I suppose they generally only had to work once a day .. what did they do the rest of the time?
livius drusus
05-17-2005, 07:44 PM
Oh, it was more than a once a day job. Picture Henry VIII: he ate pretty much nothing but meat and huge amounts of it, so there was likely more than one visit to the crapper a day, and that's on good days. The asswipe was in charge of giving the king enemas too. :shudder:
MooseIBe
05-17-2005, 07:57 PM
urgh. What happened if this person retched or something whilst he was doing it, did he get his head cut off?
livius drusus
05-17-2005, 08:07 PM
Well, actually, one royal asswipe did get executed, but it was only because Henry accused him of fucking Anne Boleyn so he could kill her on grounds of adultery.
MooseIBe
05-17-2005, 08:23 PM
ROFL! Which one was that .. I didn't know any of the people executed with regards to Anne Boleyn were arsewipes!
(btw is that insult used in the US?).
livius drusus
05-17-2005, 08:32 PM
I think it was Sir Francis Weston, Moosie, but I'd have to double check to be sure. Asswipe is most definitely an insult in the US too. :D
MooseIBe
05-17-2005, 08:47 PM
*dredges mental memory banks .. was he Anne's brother?
Jeez, what a thing to have on your CV ;).
Did Henry have to wipe his own arse after that?
Ymir's blood
05-18-2005, 12:14 AM
Wouldn't a diet low in fiber (fibre for Moosie) tend to decrease the number of times a day the king did the royal business? You didn't mention cheeze, but it was rather popular during the Medieval periods, iirc. That would make it even worse.
:gottago:
MooseIBe
05-18-2005, 09:43 AM
I still want to know what the royal arsewipe did for the rest of the day! ;)
Ymir's blood
05-18-2005, 12:16 PM
Wash his hands?
"Out, damned spot! out, I say!"
MooseIBe
05-19-2005, 02:41 PM
At the risk of descending to the purely scatological - too late - what did they wipe WITH, anyway?
livius drusus
05-19-2005, 02:58 PM
The finest, plumpest linen woven in a kind of jaquard pattern. In fact, the diamond shape of the pattern is where we get the root of the word "diaper". :)
MooseIBe
05-19-2005, 03:27 PM
LOL seriously? Did we used to say diaper for nappy here in the UK then? (well I suppose we must have).
Did they reuse these, erm, fine plump linen thingies? *thinks would have hated to be the King's laundress*
livius drusus
05-19-2005, 03:47 PM
Now that I don't know, I'm afraid. Baldrick didn't say. :giggle:
MooseIBe
05-19-2005, 04:04 PM
Well i thought I'd ask because, you know, the Romans apparently used sponges on sticks which were COMMUNAL to whoever was using the privy...
livius drusus
05-19-2005, 04:07 PM
Yeah, but nobody else used the king's privy. Besides, the Romans were a clean bunch as far as that goes. A wet sponge is a far more effective cleaning tool than paper or fabric after all, and I'm sure they rinsed it between uses. :sweaty:
MooseIBe
05-19-2005, 04:26 PM
yeah there was a stream running down the side of their privies and they rinsed it in that. But still, I wouldn't want to use a sponge that someone before me had just used :D
vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.