Were hunter-gatherers more happy and healthier than agricultural

Hunter-gatherers were more likely to kill and be killed.
Agriculturalists were more likely to work hard all day and die of disease.

>>1609416
>more happy
not measurable.

>healthier
pretty sure this has been established through archaeological evidence.

>>1609416
Did you get permission from The McGraw-Hill Companies Inc. for display, anon?

>>1609416
>healthier than agricultural farmers
Colonists noted that both Indians and Aborigines looked much muscular and healthier.

Fastforward to today and it is possible to combine the best of both worlds. I am not talking of paleodiet since there is no reason why some food not eaten by hunter-gatherers should be bad (though processed food often is).

Also even the Aborigines and Indians had agriculture. Amazonian people turned parts of the rain forest into food forests by selecting for edible plants, Indians used a sort of permaculture and Aborigines used fire and sowed seeds so certain edible plants were available.

>>1609502
>Colonists noted that both Indians and Aborigines looked much muscular and healthier
>get BTFO by disease and alcohol respectively

>>1609517
Stronger frame doesn't translate to immunity to diseases and new biological reactions.
An aboriginal man might die in his 40s from alcohol poisoning, but he can still beat up weaker white guys. This is one of the reasons why a lot of Olympians are Africans from small mountainous tribes.

>>1609416
Physically yes for the short term.

But in the long term, due to the safety of large agricultural civilizations and production capability of agriculture, agricultural farmers lived longer and reproduced more than hunter-gatherers could ever imagine.

>>1609544
Yes, but I'm talking about >healthier.

Agriculture exposes you to a lot of diseases which make you immune to them

>>1609552
There are many ways to define health.

Hunter-gatherers become swole within their lifetime.

Meanwhile us descendants of farmers gained our immunity through generations of carefully selective breeding and fighting against the disease.

No one knows, all we have are vague theories.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Original_affluent_society

>>1609552
They are only immune and adapted to that lifestyle.
We, as an agricultural people, and if you're Caucasian you most likely have been for a very long time, have both through environment, epigenetics and normal genetics adapted to civilization.
There's a theory about ADHD being a trait evolved in non-agricultural societies, since people with ADHD require constant simulation or they flip out, which is much why doctors recommend to children with ADHD to start sports. Not trying to /pol/ meme here but it might explain partly why blacks in general have more ADHD and mental problems on average, not only from shit diets and being raised in poor neighborhoods.

>>1609416

In terms of diet and fitness yes hunter gatherers were better off. However, the agriculturists had the advantage when it came to longevity because hunter-gatherers live in a state close to nature and lack such institutions as laws. The number one cause of death for modern day hunter-gatherer men is murder, so in terms of total lifetime happiness the agriculturalists probably have the edge.

>>1609517
>>get BTFO by disease and alcohol respectively
It is true but are you implying this is supposed to discredit what I said?