Agriculture harmed health yet spread because it fed more people.

Evidence

Unlike the more reliable supply of daily calories from hunting and gathering, domestication is a long-term affair fraught with risk. The diet of early agricultural peoples was poorer in protein content than the diet of hunter-gatherers. Evidence from prehistoric human remains suggests that early farmers were less healthy and less well fed than were hunter-gatherers. Despite negative effects on health and diet, early agriculture had one advantage over hunting and gathering: in the long run it could feed more mouths and sustain larger populations. — Norenzayan, Ara, Big gods - how religion transformed…, 390

Categorization

Category: Causal Relationships

• XREF: Parallels the classic ‘agricultural paradox’ debates; connects to the bigger question of why costly, cooperative strategies spread despite fitness costs — same logic as costly religious displays.

Related

• Early farming worsened health yet sustained larger populations than foraging did. (similarity 0.90)
• Cities may have preceded and enabled agriculture, not the reverse (similarity 0.81)
• Farming created a food surplus that enabled larger communities to form. (similarity 0.81)
• Local food efforts respond to urban health crisis and industrial agriculture’s harm (similarity 0.79)