[HN Gopher] Human parasites in the Roman World: health consequen...
___________________________________________________________________
Human parasites in the Roman World: health consequences of
conquering an empire
Author : GeoAtreides
Score : 117 points
Date : 2024-07-20 15:46 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.cambridge.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.cambridge.org)
| arbuge wrote:
| "Despite their large multi-seat public latrines with washing
| facilities, sewer systems, sanitation legislation, fountains and
| piped drinking water from aqueducts, we see the widespread
| presence of whipworm (Trichuris trichiura), roundworm (Ascaris
| lumbricoides) and Entamoeba histolytica that causes dysentery.
| This would suggest that the public sanitation measures were
| insufficient to protect the population from parasites spread by
| fecal contamination. Ectoparasites such as fleas, head lice, body
| lice, pubic lice and bed bugs were also present, and delousing
| combs have been found. The evidence fails to demonstrate that the
| Roman culture of regular bathing in the public baths reduced the
| prevalence of these parasites."
|
| I would think that the communal nature of the latrines and baths
| would actually have contributed to increasing the incidence of
| those parasites, rather than decreasing them.
| welder wrote:
| Especially because they used shared reusable sponges to wipe
| instead of bidet
| shaky-carrousel wrote:
| It was probably used as a toilet brush.
| jowdones wrote:
| I swear I read "toothbrush". Took me 4 or 5 passes to
| realize it's "toilet".
|
| Joking, maybe they did use the sponge alternatively as a
| bottom brush and tooth brush. Not in this order, probably
| :)
| ghodith wrote:
| I don't think there was anything to brush, normally just an
| elevated hole with running water underneath
| palisade wrote:
| Nope, it was use in the butt itself.
| brnt wrote:
| Username checks out...
| kuschku wrote:
| They didn't - they used ripped pieces of fabric and cloth to
| wipe themselves. They used the sponges to clear obstructions,
| somewhat like a combined toilet brush / plunger.
| palisade wrote:
| Hate to break it to you, the sponge was for their butt.
| And, in Asia they didn't have a sponge they just used a
| stick.
| quonn wrote:
| No it wasn't.
| palisade wrote:
| https://daily.jstor.org/this-is-how-they-wiped-
| themselves-in...
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shit_stick
| kuschku wrote:
| That was debunked over a decade ago.
|
| > The researcher Gilbert Wiplinger put forward a theory
| on the use of the xylospongium and it seems much more
| credible. He suggests it was used for secondary cleaning
| of ancient lavatories in a similar form in which modern
| toilet brooms are used.
|
| > The discovery of scraps of cloth in an ancient septic
| tank in Herculaneum led also environmental archaeologist
| Mark Robinson to conclude that scraps were used for
| wiping instead of a sponge.
|
| Take a look at the Spa Sanitas Per Aquam conference
| proceedings from 2009 for more details.
| robocat wrote:
| > ripped pieces of fabric and cloth
|
| I would have assumed that old fabric was a valuable
| resource. Used fabric is essentially rubbish now so we
| don't see that. Ragman or rag merchant used to be a job.
| Only the very wealthy would use rags that way I would
| guess.
| kuschku wrote:
| > The discovery of scraps of cloth in an ancient septic
| tank in Herculaneum led also environmental archaeologist
| Mark Robinson to conclude that scraps were used for
| wiping instead of a sponge.
| practicemaths wrote:
| I think contextually it depends.
|
| If you compare rural living to urban living, then maybe you
| could say latrines and baths contributed to increase in
| parasites.
|
| However that's a bad comparison.
|
| What would be better is compare similar levels of urbanization
| (population density) with and without latrines & baths. I
| imagine the latter may be more sanitary.
| prerok wrote:
| Exactly. I wonder/think that reports from medieval and early
| modern age London were much worse.
| LtWorf wrote:
| Not that london in 1850s was much better (see "the great
| stink")
| agumonkey wrote:
| I wonder how bad was the early onset of cities compared to
| small groups near clean natural resources. Did bathing in a
| river prove healthier ? the amount of flow would carry away
| toxic waste rapidly I guess.
| shaky-carrousel wrote:
| That's because you are comparing it with our current systems.
| You have to compare it with what it existed before, basically
| people relieving themselves everywhere.
| Wytwwww wrote:
| I don't think Romans invented sewage systems or plumbing.
| That existed all over the Mediterranean for hundreds of years
| prior we just don't know much about them (no written sources,
| less archaeological research/evidence etc.).
| AlbertCory wrote:
| > no written sources, less archaeological research/evidence
| etc.
|
| Makes sense. So how do you know?
| Wytwwww wrote:
| > So how do you know?
|
| less != none
|
| There are of course plenty of published papers and
| research. Just way less exposure in popular history
| AlbertCory wrote:
| > plenty of published papers and research
|
| such as?
| srean wrote:
| Hundreds of years and Mediterranean you say...
|
| It boggles my mind that Indus valley civilization had flush
| toilets. That would be roughly 3000~2600 B.C. Its both sad
| and ironic in the context of some of the poorly serviced
| parts of India (sanitarily speaking).
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flush_toilet#History
| Wytwwww wrote:
| > Hundreds of years
|
| Was being conservative. It was still thousands, if we
| must go that road e.g. the Minoans had sewage and water
| supply systems (IIRC earliest evidence is from 1900-1700
| BC, so I guess India "wins" this one...)
| srean wrote:
| I was being tongue in cheek about that one.
| Winning/losing, nah its not about that. Its about
| whetting one's curiosity and to be filled with wonder
| about human's accomplished with a strange attractor on
| scatological humor.
| fransje26 wrote:
| > Its both sad and ironic in the context of some of the
| poorly serviced parts of India (sanitarily speaking)
|
| Regression is real. We should not forget that when
| confronted with the level of nonsense threatening the
| very fabric of our social cohesion and societal model in
| recent years.
| kergonath wrote:
| No written sources from around the Mediterranean before
| Rome? Also, no archaeological evidence?
|
| You must be joking.
|
| I am not saying the Romans were the first, but surely we
| can do better than "of course there were others, but we
| don't know".
| Wytwwww wrote:
| > You must be joking.
|
| About what? Are there any surviving pre-Roman
| architectural manuals or treatises? Or other significant
| sources? (not rhetorical questions, I'm not a
| professional historian and might be missing something and
| in any case it would be very interesting to read about
| them).
|
| > we don't know
|
| We (well not we... usually only enthusiasts/people
| working in the area) do of course know a lot. Just quite
| a bit less than about the Romans. What matters the most
| here is that Greek/etc. plumbing/sanitary practices have
| very little exposure in popular history.
| YeGoblynQueenne wrote:
| Well, it depends on what you mean by "popular" history.
| Popular, were? I grew up in Greece and I learned early on
| about the Minoan palaces with running water (and internal
| heating). As to the sanitary practices of mainland
| Greeks, I remember this joke, variously starring Aesop or
| Socrates:
|
| Aesop (or Socraters) goes to the public baths. He takes
| off his clothes, enters the water, rubs himself, etc,
| then comes out and says to the official: "that was great.
| Now, were do I go to get cleaned?".
|
| Greeks had public baths, like the Romans and they were
| probably as filthy as those of the Romans. I've also seen
| plenty of archeological evidence of plumbing and sewage
| in various museums around Athens. IIRC there is a section
| of the floor in the Akropolis Museum covered by glass so
| one can see the underlying archeological layers,
| including the terracotta pipes used to carry water. These
| may have been from Roman times though, I can't say I
| remember.
|
| (Theories those pipes carried steam for ancient Greek
| robots with cogwheel brains have been debunked).
| larsga wrote:
| Not just what existed before, but also after. The normal
| toilet on Scandinavian farms into the mid-19th century was
| basically just a pole suspended between two houses. What
| people "produced" just dropped on the ground below the pole.
| space_oddity wrote:
| Agree, facilities such as latrines and baths likely contributed
| to the spread of parasites rather than mitigating it
| peoplefromibiza wrote:
| > rather than decreasing them
|
| Romans used sponges to clean their butt in public toilets, but
| sponges were shared.
|
| I guess that didn't help...
| wdh505 wrote:
| I think they got a daily vinegar ration to soak the sponge
| and make it less smelly. Some believe that the sponge offered
| to christ on the cross was a poo vinegar sponge.
| dredmorbius wrote:
| Centralised latrines _with waste diverted from freshwater
| supplies_ would be a net-net win over, say, backyard privvies
| which soaked directly into adjacent wells and surface streams.
| The latter was the case in cities such as London and New York
| well into the 19th, and early 20th, centuries. Keep in mind
| that the haulage of human waste itself ( "night soil" in some
| cultures) was a major activity with its dedicated labour pool
| (pardon the mental image...), though that was in part based on
| social shunning of those who were so employed.
|
| Concentrations of people create hygenic issues regardless. On
| balance, Romes latrines were _probably_ a net benefit, though
| of course the Romans lacked modern understanding of disease,
| both in parasitic and infectious forms.
|
| Even today, roughly 85% of the increase in human longevity,
| much due to decreased infant and child mortality, is
| attributable to general hygiene, municipal sanitation measures
| (both of wastes such as sewerage, solid rubbish, and of
| improved air quality; and of vastly improved water and food
| quality. Other public health measures, including quarantine,
| epidemiological surveillance, and vaccinations, also played a
| huge role. I first became aware of this through Laurie
| Garrett's book _The Coming Plague_ (1994):
| <https://search.worldcat.org/title/30701925>
|
| See "The Conquest of Pestilence in New York City" for a ...
| graphic ... expression of the trends in mortality from ~1800
| through 2000 or so:
|
| <https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-uTWEATUzgxk/TXQoTibILtI/AAAAAAAAA..
| .>
| mschuster91 wrote:
| > Even today, roughly 85% of the increase in human longevity,
| much due to decreased infant and child mortality, is
| attributable to general hygiene, municipal sanitation
| measures (both of wastes such as sewerage, solid rubbish, and
| of improved air quality; and of vastly improved water and
| food quality. Other public health measures, including
| quarantine, epidemiological surveillance, and vaccinations,
| also played a huge role.
|
| Additionally, humanity gained a broad selection of
| antibiotics in the same time. Infections that used to be
| pretty deadly (e.g. syphilis, the plague) or debilitating
| (meningitis, ear infections, wound infections) are easily
| treatable. Even extremely deadly viral infections such as HIV
| or mildly deadly but highly contagious ones such as SARS-
| CoV-2 have symptomatic and suppression treatments.
|
| The challenge is that bacteria evolved over the last 100-ish
| years just as well and a wide class of antibiotics are
| useless against some strains (e.g. e-coli) nowadays... and
| what used to be "reserve antibiotics" to be used only if a
| human's life was in danger is routinely fed to livestock to
| make it grow better, with the predictable result of
| resistance genes evolving in the livestock and mixing said
| resistance genes with bacteria prevalent in humans.
| dredmorbius wrote:
| There's a reason I'd linked the NYC "pestilence" chart.
|
| The first broad-spectrum antibiotic, penicillin, wasn't
| _discovered_ until 1928, wasn 't administered medically
| until 1930, and then still experimentally, and wasn't mass
| produced until near or after the end of WWII, with 2.3
| million doses available the invasion of Normandy (Spring
| 1944) and nearly 650 billion units by June 1945). General
| availability to the US public didn't occur until 15 March
| 1945.
|
| Yet if we look at the NYC mortality graph, mortality falls
| tremendously _during the latter part of the 19th century_
| and attains the level it sustained through most of the 20th
| century by 1920, well before penicillin was even first
| isolated, let alone applied broadly. If you compare against
| the date of penicillin general availability, _mortality
| actually rises_ until about 1970, after which there is a
| plateau, followed by a comparatively sharp decline (though
| minor in context with the 1850--1920 decrease) after 1990.
|
| Antibiotics are invisible on that chart.
| beloch wrote:
| If you go to the public latrine at Ephesus today, it looks
| pretty awesome. It's out in the air. Nice views in all
| directions. If you can get over the communal nature of it, it
| seems like a fantastic spot to do your business.
|
| In Roman times, public latrines were places of last resort.
| They were typically enclosed, poorly ventilated, and notorious
| for rats and explosions[1]. For most Romans, making it home to
| your own commode was vastly preferred.
|
| This brings us to a funny quirk of roman home design. Toilets
| were usually located in kitchens and "flushed" with wastewater
| from the kitchen. In most homes these toilets were connected to
| cesspits that were periodically emptied, and not to the sewers.
|
| [1]https://www.ancient-origins.net/ancient-places-
| europe/rats-e...
| notnmeyer wrote:
| aside from this being appalling, "notorious for rats and
| explosions" is pretty funny
| elcritch wrote:
| So basically what it's like today with porta potties?
| omnicognate wrote:
| You have a porta potty in your kitchen?
| heywoodlh wrote:
| > https://www.ancient-origins.net/ancient-places-
| europe/rats-e...
|
| This was a fascinating read, thanks!
|
| For anyone curious of why public latrines exploded:
|
| > Even worse, these public latrines were notorious for
| terrifying customers when flames exploded from their seat
| openings. These were caused by gas explosions of hydrogen
| sulphide (H2S) and methane (CH4) that were rank as well as
| frightening.
| bbarnett wrote:
| A similar thing, caused my grandma to be "blown up" as she
| used to say.
|
| Barns explode sometimes, if the hay is too green, and
| hasn't finished off-gassing. Luckily female gonads are
| internal, otherwise I might not be here.
| Mistletoe wrote:
| Well let's look on the bright side, did they have less auto-
| immune diseases?
|
| https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1618732/
| lps41 wrote:
| I remember reading that autoimmune diseases are more common in
| people descended from regions that survived the bubonic plague,
| and that it's believed this is because the survivors of the
| plague had mutations which meant they had a more active immune
| system.
|
| https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/genes-protective-during-...
| Mistletoe wrote:
| Interesting!
| BobbyTables2 wrote:
| The headline made me think that that the "parasites" were going
| to be the Romans!
| space_oddity wrote:
| The Romans had advanced public health infrastructure, it was
| inadequate in preventing the spread of parasites still.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-07-21 23:11 UTC)