re: Why is it that Europeans brought diseases to the new world but didn't catch any?

They did. Just at a lower rate. The early settlements, including Jamestown were plagued by disease.

quote:

---

One of the things it would do is rot your face

---

And make you go insane...before eventually killing you.

quote:

---

The short answer is that Europeans simply had more robust immune systems. Several factors contributed to this: first, Europeans had been the caretakers of domestic animals for thousands of years, and had over time grown (somewhat) immune to the common diseases that accompanied the domestication of such food sources. Native Americans, on the other hand, were largely hunters and gatherers, and even in some domestication cases, it’s thought exposure was limited.

Second, Europeans lived in more densely populated areas than Native Americans. When so many humans live together in relatively close quarters (particularly with lack of good, or any, sewage systems and the like), disease spreads quickly with the general population continually getting exposed to numerous pathogens. The Europeans’ bodies had to adapt to dealing with many of those diseases, and for those who survived, their immune systems thrived as a result.

The third factor is travel and exchange. Groups of people and animals moved around a lot in Europe and had interactions particularly through war and trade, resulting in the spread of disease across continents—and, eventually, some level of immunity for the survivors.

---

LINK.

quote:

---

The short answer is that Europeans simply had more robust immune systems. Several factors contributed to this: first, Europeans had been the caretakers of domestic animals for thousands of years, and had over time grown (somewhat) immune to the common diseases that accompanied the domestication of such food sources. Native Americans, on the other hand, were largely hunters and gatherers, and even in some domestication cases, it’s thought exposure was limited.

Second, Europeans lived in more densely populated areas than Native Americans. When so many humans live together in relatively close quarters (particularly with lack of good, or any, sewage systems and the like), disease spreads quickly with the general population continually getting exposed to numerous pathogens. The Europeans’ bodies had to adapt to dealing with many of those diseases, and for those who survived, their immune systems thrived as a result.

---

And, with that or due to that, Europeans and other Old World groups had something like 15 or so antibody configurations(?) while the Native Americans had like 4. (I don't recall exactly what I'm talking about, but it's the immune systems ability to attack novel pathogens. Maybe types of sites that are found on a white blood cell? Any help would be appreciated.)

Also, some estimates people have out now suggest that the Native populations were much larger than we grew up being taught. It's quite possible that Europeans didn't encounter many aboriginal diseases in the New World because the original carriers were already dead/depleted by the time the explorers got to those areas.

The population numbers and some talk about the immune system can be found in the book "1491." Native Americans had much better hygiene than Europeans and were usually in better health and body condition too.

Native Americans are more prone to alcoholism and drug addiction too, even today.

quote:

---

This is likely to do thousands of years of alcohol consumption by Europeans.

---

Correct.

Whitey evolved to handle it better.

Them dirty Euros spread it..they don't catch it

pretty sure we caught some form of std's from them

while we gave them the cold and measles and such