Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrus
You mean like Mexico City? Calcutta? Angkor Wat?
The real question is how places like that handled mosquito abatement. Heat & humidity on their own don't prevent cities, but malaria might.
|
Just comes down to immunity. It's why folks in regions that have had high exposure through hundreds of years, thousands in many cases... have developed blood cells that are of a sickle nature. A crescent moon. Why? Because Malaria can't efficiently bond to it. Granted nets have helped to slow the spread, at least preventing deaths under 5, which is a bulk of deaths but even than, cram enough people into an area, ideally one with agriculture potential and one has a mega city.
The thing I wonder is how large would some of these cities in India and Africa would be if things like smallpox were never around. Or even the black death bacteria. Imagine European city size should those mass eradication events had not occurred?
The world lost a ton of folks due to disease or war in the 20th Century. What cities would of looked like had those folks not perished and than went on to reproduce... that one has to wonder.
Surely would of accelerated the need for resources. Possibly the climate situation would of been way worse? Were things or are things like Smallpox, Malaria, TB, and many others actually good for the planet and potentially for people living at the moment... food for thought.
Fun fact that Smallpox literally shaped the world order to what it is today. The plague of Justine did wonders to destroy the Roman empire.