Actually, the lower lumbar region of the Neanderthals differed little from ours, researchers report. Previous assumptions about differences appear to have been based on comparing the spines of Neanderthals to those of contemporary humans, who are shaped by modern lifestyles. The features in the lower back area of our pre-industrial ancestors therefore hardly differ from those of the archaic human form. It wasn’t until the late 19th century that certain changes that might be related to the onset of back pain began to emerge, say the researchers.
Fiends crouching and chasing after mammoths. Many studies have now clearly refuted this primitive image of the Neanderthal: Although they differ from us in certain anatomical features, in many respects they were much more similar to us than had long been assumed. This also applies to their posture and the characteristics of their spines. It was already fundamentally clear from earlier investigations that the Neanderthals already had curved features of the spine that enabled them to walk upright in a stable manner. However, there were still some ambiguities, especially in relation to the lower back area – the so-called lumbar lordosis. “This is due to the characteristics of Neanderthals’ lumbar vertebrae – their spine appears to be less curved in this area than that of modern humans studied in the US or Europe,” says Scott Williams of New York University.
The “cross” in sight
But this very comparison with humans today raised a suspicion: by examining the spines of people who lived in the post-industrial era, previous studies may have incorrectly concluded that the different features of the spines are due to evolutionary developments. Possibly, however, these were characteristics that can be traced back to changed living and working conditions. Because, as the researchers explain, people began to sit more and more, especially since the late 19th century. This has notoriously reached unnatural levels associated with awkward postures.
Williams and his colleagues have therefore now investigated to what extent this is reflected in characteristics of the lower vertebrae on a broad scale. They examined the lower spine areas of male and female modern humans from around the world – both from the post-industrial era and using finds from the pre-industrial era. In total, the sample included more than 300 spines. The scientists then compared these results with analysis results of Neanderthal spines.
Effect of modernity is evident
As they report, their evaluations showed that, compared to the spines of the post-industrial period, those of pre-industrial people have an arrangement of the lumbar vertebrae that leads to a greater curvature in the lower back area. Apparently it is an effect of the modern way of life. The pre-industrial version is thus the natural configuration in modern humans, the results suggest. The pre-industrial shape also closely matched the characteristics the team found in Neanderthal spines: they differed significantly from those of modern people but not from those of pre-industrial humans. “Neanderthals appeared to differ little from modern humans in the configuration of their lumbar vertebrae, and thus likely had lower back curvature features like we do,” says Williams.
So, as for us today, it makes sense: “Reduced physical activity, poor posture and use of furniture, and other lifestyle changes that came with industrialization resulted in insufficient soft tissue structures to support natural lumbar lordosis during development,” explains Williams. “To compensate for this, our lower back bones have acquired a more pronounced wedging than those of our pre-industrial and Neanderthal ancestors. This may have contributed to the prevalence of low back pain that we find in post-industrial societies.”
Finally, the researchers also emphasize the importance of their study for anthropological research: When comparing spinal features between modern and archaic humans, it is important to consider pre-industrial modern humans, write Williams and his colleagues.
Source: New York University, professional article: PNAS Nexus, doi: 10.1093/pnasnexus/pgab005