Aurelia Posted February 10, 2010 Report Share Posted February 10, 2010 I guess it makes sense that 4,000 years ago men were already prone to baldness. Why should that come as a surprise? DNA suggests even ancient man had baldness issues Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M. Porcius Cato Posted February 11, 2010 Report Share Posted February 11, 2010 I guess it makes sense that 4,000 years ago men were already prone to baldness. Why should that come as a surprise? DNA suggests even ancient man had baldness issues It's even worse than mere baldness. As I pointed to an earlier thread, some Roman commanders were jeered at for their ancient comb-overs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurelia Posted February 15, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 15, 2010 I guess it makes sense that 4,000 years ago men were already prone to baldness. Why should that come as a surprise? DNA suggests even ancient man had baldness issues It's even worse than mere baldness. As I pointed to an earlier thread, some Roman commanders were jeered at for their ancient comb-overs. Oh I have no doubt that hiding one's bald spot is as ancient a practice as baldness itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northern Neil Posted February 15, 2010 Report Share Posted February 15, 2010 I guess it makes sense that 4,000 years ago men were already prone to baldness. Why should that come as a surprise? I think the problem is in the way journalists report these things. Unfortunately the term 'ancient man' is used to describe anatomically modern individuals from relatively recent times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.