Is paleopathology a relevant predictor 

 of contemporary health patterns? 



Susan Pfeiffer 



(current actions in many parts of the world toward deacces- 

 sion or reburial of skeletal material have stimulated more 

 public discussion of paleopathoiogists' goals and achieve- 

 ments. The motto of the Paleopathology Association, Morliii 

 viventes docent (the dead are our teachers), suggests that we 

 are learning things that are relevant to our contemporary 

 context. As Kerley and Bass noted in 1967, "having some 

 knowledge of past history, one is better able to predict the 

 course of future events." But how specific can these predic- 

 tions be? Our past research has often demonstrated the effects 

 of ecological change on morbidity profiles (cf. Saul 1972). 

 Our lobbying material contains references to the potential for 

 insights into disease processes and analogies between past 

 and current ailments (cf. Neiburger 1987; Pfeiffer 1980). 

 However, information about past populations' mortality and 

 morbidity is only scientifically useful if it is somehow predic- 

 tive: if it can help us predict for a specific population their 

 susceptibility to a pathogen, or the incidence of a congenital 

 anomaly, or the effect of an environmental stressor on their 

 growth/aging. Hence, while accepting as given the very val- 

 uable historical function performed by paleopathology, I 

 wish to explore its ability to help us anticipate and solve 

 contemporary health problems. I will argue that methodolog- 

 ical limitations constrain the role that paleopathology can 

 play. Nevertheless, it can help us predict modem disease 

 susceptibility. Its value may sometimes lie in simple con- 

 tinuities or analogies. In other instances it may help us under- 

 stand the commonalty of biological response which in an- 

 cient times led to one outcome, but in modern times may lead 

 to quite another. 1 intend to search for such links in popula- 

 tions where palcopathological study has been relatively in- 

 tensive, and with which I am familiar, namely the Indian and 

 Inuit populations of Canada. 



What makes the past relevant? 



The dead can teach us about the living only if there is com- 

 monalty between the two. This commonalty may be genetic, 

 behavioral, and/or environmental. Genetic continuity from 

 past to contemporary populations is never complete, and 



quantitative estimates of genetic heritage are rarely available. 

 Perhaps wisely, literature on population differences in disease 

 pattern usually refers to "ethnicity" (a sociological term) 

 rather than "race" (a biological term ) (Cooper 1 986). Associa- 

 tion with an ethnic group may indicate only a general hint 

 about biological heritage. For example, through Canada's 

 Indian Act of 1 876 one was defined as a status Indian only if 

 one's male line was Indian in 1874. If an Indian woman 

 married a non-Indian, all subsequent progeny were disen- 

 franchised, while the progeny of an Indian man and a non- 

 Indian were all status Indians (Price 1979). Federal legislation 

 changed this operational definition in 1987. Such arrange- 

 ments illustrate how tentative the genetic links between past 

 racial groups and current ethnic groups may be. 



Partial behavioral continuity may occasionally occur be- 

 tween past and present populations, in that contemporary 

 populations may eat the same diet, build the same dwellings, 

 or perform the same subsistence activities as their pre- 

 decessors. However, such situations will be rare, such as 

 purposeful attempts by northern Canadian natives to "go 

 back to their roots" or "live off the land." Ostensibly, pal- 

 copathological evidence could tell such groups what health 

 risks they might face. In practice, however, no large groups 

 have fully adopted prehistoric native technology and di- 

 vorced themselves from outside institutional support (Tung- 

 avik Federation of Nunavut 1987). 



Environmental continuity of past and present populations 

 is certainly possible. Although the mix of large plants and 

 animals may change, as well as the intluences of human 

 population density, there may also be continuity in some of 

 the pathogens endemic to a region. And, obviously, the arctic 

 stays cold, the tropics stay hot. Paleopathology could in 

 some special cases offer information about the climatic or 

 pathogenic hazards of an environment. However, such infor- 

 mation is likely to supplement other sources, and is very 

 unlikely to be superior to those other sources. 



Hence, there appears to be genetic/behavioral/cnviron- 

 mental continuity between past and present populations only 

 if these categories are sketched very broadly. In certain cases, 

 any of these three overlapping categories may offer a strong 



12 



Zagreb Paieopalhology Symp. 1 988 



