Why did Europeans give the Indians of the New World so many deadly diseases, but the Indians gave them so few?

Similar questions: Europeans give Indians World deadly diseases gave.

Blame it on crowded, dirty living conditions in Europe In "Guns, Germs and Steel", Jared Diamond explores this question in great detail. To summarize (from memory), it seems that Europeans lived in exceptionally germ-ridden conditions: crowded cities, filthy farms, pestilential ships. These environments enabled the development of new forms of disease that killed many, many Europeans, but the ones who survived developed some immunity.In contrast, the Native Americans did not live in conditions that bred disease to this level.

Thus, the transmission of disease was primarily one-way: European to Native American. On the other hand, don't forget that in South America, insect-borne disease killed many thousands of Europeans. Yellow fever, malaria, etc. Were the New World's contribution to human infection.

Conocimiento's Recommendations Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies Amazon List Price: $24.95 Used from: $14.60 Average Customer Rating: 4.0 out of 5 (based on 990 reviews) .

No contact between Asian epidemics and pre-Columbian American populations This is pure speculation, but consider that the majority of infectious epidemics have originated in East Asia (cholera, Black Plague, influenza, SARS; with AIDS being a notable exception). European populations have always had contact with east Asians by way of ancient trade routes, so they were routinely exposed to all these infections. Many died of these diseases, but those who survived developed immunity.In pre-Columbian America, on the other hand, the native population was "virgin," never exposed to the Asian epidemics.

When the European explorers and colonists imported these pathogens to the Indians, the latter were immunologically unprepared and suffered a very high mortality rate. Ed Uthman, MD Pathologist .

Access to germs The tribes, usually fairly small communities, only had the germs and diseases local to them. Relatively small amounts of trade and contact with other peoples. The Europeans had tons of trade with bunches of peoples from many cities and countries, not to mention the new germs they picked up along the way during their journey..

I remember reading this either in "1491" or in "Guns, Germs, and Steel" but the theory is that Indians did not live as closely with domesticated animals (no sheep, no cows, etc. ). Apparently, because of the close proximity to domesticated animals, people in Europe and Asia developed immunities to many diseases that crossed over from these animals. People from Europe and Asia simply had a larger variety of germs to carry and pass on.

I don't know if this is right. It is just what I've read. Kathy1226's Recommendations 1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus Amazon List Price: $14.95 Used from: $8.73 Average Customer Rating: 4.5 out of 5 (based on 151 reviews) Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies Amazon List Price: $24.95 Used from: $15.20 Average Customer Rating: 4.0 out of 5 (based on 992 reviews) .

Europe, crowded, developed many diseases and then antibodies against them; America, lightly ... populated by relatively isolated communities, developed few. There's also some thinking that Europeans deliberately introduced some diseases that they were resistant to in order to steal the land by means of genocide, but I don't have proof either way on that. Sources: recollection and speculation .

Three difficulties experienced by the europeans during the new world settlement.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.