Guild Wars 2

I was just reading a thread about the declining or at least damaged human population and started wondering… if the populations of each species are roughly equal now as they appear to be (apart from the Sylvari who are much lower in number and humans who are larger, if you count Seperatists), which species would be more populous in, say, 50 years?

I would assume that to rebuild the population of humanity, there would be some sort of breeding program. Similar to Caucescu’s Romania, women who had more children may be assigned a ‘hero mother’ status to encourage them to have more offspring. Asura on the other hand seem romantically nervous and reluctant and may only have a few children but with extremely long life expectancies.

So from this I derive the question: What are the breeding rates per female of other species? Do we know the gestation periods and rough lifespans?

The query may not even have to stop at the controllable races. Will Skritt one day outpopulate all other species due to their birth rates?

Any ideas, let’s hear them!

Charr, they actually breed at incredible rates, but because they have so many enemies the population is kept balanced. A civilization can not exist in a state of eternal war and civil war and have a normal birth rate.

Also look at GuildWars 1 unbelievable amounts of Charr are killed in Prophecies alone, but still in the last game they were beyond counting in their numbers.

Because the Charr are a carnivorous race, and without considering the additional nutriens required for a race of their size, and the possibility of different metabolism, their ecosystem can only support half of what an omnivorous race such as the humans could support. This is compensated by having more land than everyone else. However, they have to compete and share it with other species.

The number one challange to the Charr, as it is for the Mongols and Russian Empires, is transportation. The Charr Khanate is an extensive landlocked landmass with no options for fluvial or sea transport to send their goods cheaply and easy within the country. Their main breadbasked, the Blood Legions homeland, is located far to the north, probably resulting in shorter growing seasons, compared to those of the latitude of Ascalon and Kryta. Getting food from distant sources and mantaining the massive infrastructure is difficult incredible expensive, especially when there’s no hint, as far I am aware, of the existence of refrigerators and trains. A chronic problem for Russia as it would be for the Charr. The Charr can produce enough food to feed themselves, but they can’t transport all the food all over their Empire before the meat spoils or risking the travel to far away population centers. The Charr would probably still outnumber any of the races due the size of their territory, but their population would be dispersed.

The Asura faces a different problem. Jungle terrain is among the worst for agriculture production. The soil is too acid and poor in nutriens for most crops. Thus nations living in tropical areas are often forced to use artificial fertilizers or even terraforming the land even for the most basic crops. Because there’s no evidence of an advanced Chemical Industry, I would assume this is not even an option. Hoewever, because the Asura are a formerly subterranean race, and due their smaller stature, they might have less nutritional needs than other races. Grain is not their main source of nutrition, for example.

Kryta is Tyria’s breadbasket. With a template climate and probably the most fertile area in the entire continent, this area is perfect for agriculture. The humans are well-versed in it and use this to their advantage with extensive fields all over Kryta. This allows the humans to have a sizable superplus of food compared to other races and thus more population over the same area.

I believe Charr would have lost a lot of prime agricultural land to the Brand as well, further diminishing their numbers and thinning those who are left. Their remaining supply lines through Diessa and Plains of Ashford would also be beset by Flame Legion attacks. Whereas, as you say, DR has a huge area of fertile land around them.

I contrast to Humanity’s population swelling programs, I would not be surprised if the Charr are implementing population control. Indeed, the clincher for the pact may indeed be logistical, since with them only having an Asura gate to LA, this would likely be their key to trade and transportation of goods. No matter how friendly they may be with the humans right now, there is no Asura gate directly between Black Citadel and human held lands.

As for the Asura, they may be somewhat dependant on the Sylvari for their agriculture at this point. Previously, they would probably have simply dominated Caledon Forest but the Sylvari now stand in opposition. Still, we are not really sure what their dietary requirements are. Maybe they eat Golems, who knows?!

That leaves the Norn. I do not know much about nutrition, but I can hardly believe that their diet is completely carnivorous. Yet they come from an icy area, and apparently came from somewhere even colder. I would think that Norn would breed at a relatively low rate (as is usual with larger creatures anyway) but be particularly long-lived. Maybe 3 or more times longer than humans.

Do we even know what lies above the Hirathi Hinterlands, btw? I am not a GW1 veteran so I don’t know a lot about that era.

The only race I have seen anything in-lore about is the Heket, who were described as “prolific and belligerent” in the Nightfall manuscripts. The Tyrian Hylek are far from belligerent, but they may well be prolific. There certainly used to be a lot fewer of them 250 years ago (a few hostile, isolated tribes in the Tarnished Coast).

Honestly we know very little abotu the area above Harathi Hinterlands. We went to 1 tiny area up there filled with Quetzal Tengu and skelk if I remember right. It was also the location of the Slaver’s Exile elite dungeon.

GuzziHero.2467:

I believe Charr would have lost a lot of prime agricultural land to the Brand as well, further diminishing their numbers and thinning those who are left. Their remaining supply lines through Diessa and Plains of Ashford would also be beset by Flame Legion attacks. Whereas, as you say, DR has a huge area of fertile land around them.

I contrast to Humanity’s population swelling programs, I would not be surprised if the Charr are implementing population control. Indeed, the clincher for the pact may indeed be logistical, since with them only having an Asura gate to LA, this would likely be their key to trade and transportation of goods. No matter how friendly they may be with the humans right now, there is no Asura gate directly between Black Citadel and human held lands.

As for the Asura, they may be somewhat dependant on the Sylvari for their agriculture at this point. Previously, they would probably have simply dominated Caledon Forest but the Sylvari now stand in opposition. Still, we are not really sure what their dietary requirements are. Maybe they eat Golems, who knows?!

That leaves the Norn. I do not know much about nutrition, but I can hardly believe that their diet is completely carnivorous. Yet they come from an icy area, and apparently came from somewhere even colder. I would think that Norn would breed at a relatively low rate (as is usual with larger creatures anyway) but be particularly long-lived. Maybe 3 or more times longer than humans.

---

Do we even know what lies above the Hirathi Hinterlands, btw? I am not a GW1 veteran so I don’t know a lot about that era.

I don’t know with the amount of enemies the Char posses I don’t believe they can afford to have population control, surely their casualty rates are high enough where that can not be trifled with! They also appear to keep farms close to their larger population areas as well as their agricultural land. Their is both a fishery and a farm right outside the Black Citadel as well as a Devourer farm.

Transporting that food likely can be an issue, although the Charr seem to have found many…..interesting ways to cover land. Also unless the Charr are completely devastated by the war with the dragons it would be reasonable to assume that they would continue to expand their empire, they simply need too in order to meet the needs of their civilization and that said I doubt they are too disturbed by the thought of eating human.

On the Norn I believe they would have a high reproduction rate at least for a species so similar to humans. Mainly because the sheer danger that lives within their environment and the (probable) low survival rate of children in such an environment, so, I imagine they keep themselves busy.

Let’s be honest, the norn are jovial, energetic drunks. They probably reproduce on a mootly basis, to put it lightly. Norn sex probably makes the scene from 300 look like a disney movie.

Changing gears slightly, it wouldn’t surprise me in the least if asura had some sort of magical hydroponics system dating back to their subterranean days. Of course, they could be evolved from foragers and eat things like grubs. I have yet to hear any sort of reference to what the creepy little kittens eat. They do have pointy teeth though, so I’m betting they’re at least carnivorous if not omnivorous. Even if they are completely carnivorous and only eat (for example) grubs, they probably have a KFC style “farm” to attend to their needs as efficiently (and amorally) as possible. If you look at Ratta Sum in GW1 and compare it to what it is now, there’s very little doubt the asura have adapted to surface life spectacularly, so however they provide for their needs, it’s probably very high-magitek, and very efficient (and probably too disturbing to actually put in the game world).

GuzziHero.2467:

So from this I derive the question: What are the breeding rates per female of other species? Do we know the gestation periods and rough lifespans?

The query may not even have to stop at the controllable races. Will Skritt one day outpopulate all other species due to their birth rates?

Of the big five, charr could easily outpace the other races. No word on gestation or lifespan exactly, but charr give birth to litters. Contrast this to humans, norn and asura, the latter two of whom are implied to generally reproduce in the same manner as humans (and actually have comparable lifespans — to quote a dev, an average asuran lifespan is “10% longer than a human’s”, which I wasn’t initially expecting).

I’m not sure about sylvari. I think I may have missed some vital in-game info, because I can’t seem to recall how often sylvari awaken from the tree and in what sort of numbers etc.

Also, if I recall correctly, some of the NPC dialog in Skrittsburgh implied that skritt are similar to rats: rapid reproductive cycles, and giving birth to litters. They would easily be the most prolific breeders if we’re counting the sub-races.

I think the Skritt’s reproductive cycle combined with their bizarre quasi-hive mind is most of the reasoning behind the asura contemplating skritt genocide. I don’t have a source, but iirc, before beta, the asura were going to be much more genocidal toward skritt, but they backed off on that trope for numerous, obvious reasons.

I’m a little surprised to hear asura have that kind of lifespan too. For some reason I always thought of them as living much longer than humans.

I don’t know how often the pale tree sprouts more sylvari, but as of now we know that there was a large span of time that there were no new sylvari, then in late july sylvari started sprouting, then in late August there was a massive influx of sylvari that have kept a steady stream of soldiers headed to Orr ever since (reference to BWE and GW2). Honestly though we just know that at this point in time it’s a relatively steady rate of birth, but what the rate is is unknown. And since the oldest Sylvari are 25, it is unknown if they die of old age.

Klawlyt.6507:

Let’s be honest, the norn are jovial, energetic drunks. They probably reproduce on a mootly basis, to put it lightly. Norn sex probably makes the scene from 300 look like a disney movie.

Yes, they drink a lot. But, in 2 words – Brewer’s Droop.

However, I guess during those cold winters they have plenty of incentive to snuggle to keep warm! I remember the Clarkson programme when he is in Iceland and he asks what they do when it is too cold to go outside…

I am shocked and stunned to hear that Asura have shortish lifespans. I would think with all the ‘genius’ they possess, and their disdain of the very concept of learning from another, that they would need exceptional lifespans to build up their knowledge. Or maybe that is the paradox, they try to cram too much into their heads in too short a timespan and all their wacky failed experiments are the result?

I would be interested to know more about Asuran mating/breeding cycles as they do not seem predisposed to love for the most part. Test tube babies?

…In The Year 6565…

Final note – I would love to see the Skritt become a playable species at some stage but rather than being one character, you would control a small pack (maybe 4).

Well, the asura actually do fall in love, quite passionately. In my storyline, I lose and asura partner and I have to tell his wife about his passing. In the end, she curses me and the pact for killing her lover and runs off almost getting herself killed trying to get away.

The Asura seem to be a race with a very high metabolism, as indicated by their rapid movements and energetic animations. Their large brains and high intelligence also means that they probably consume a lot of calories per day. The downside to having a rapid metabolism is that you tend to have a short lifespan; your cells burn out and die a lot faster than larger, slower creatures. (This is why small creatures like rats, rabbits, cats, dogs etc. have much shorter lifespans than humans.)

As such, I expect that Asura probably have lifespans that are half (or less) the length of humans and larger races, although perhaps magic and medical technology can prolong their life to a comparative level.

I don’t remember it being stated anywhere that Charr have litters, but that would be logical, considering Charr females have six nipples. (It would be evolutionarily useless to evolve so many nipples if you didn’t birth multiple offspring at a time.)

Zaxares.5419:

I don’t remember it being stated anywhere that Charr have litters, but that would be logical, considering Charr females have six nipples. (It would be evolutionarily useless to evolve so many nipples if you didn’t birth multiple offspring at a time.)

It’s been stated a few times. For example, in the personal story, Dinky is described as being the “runt of his litter”.

Ah yes! I forgot about that. (Went with Reeva for my sparring partner, y’see.)

Asura are stated to live 5-10% longer than humans.

Metabolic rate is not the only determinant of rate of aging, there are many other factors that can affect a species’ lifespan. I don’t doubt asura have a higher basal metabolic rate than most other sapient species, but that does not necessarily mean they have shorter lifespans.

Plus yeah, it has already been stated that asura live slightly longer than humans.

Fun fact: Chihuahas live longer than great danes because the size of a dane is taxing on it’s heart. Maybe asura have relatively big, strong hearts.

There are too many factors that affect lifespan to say “this is the reason why they live this long” or “this is the reason why they die quickly”. In this case, healthy, fit humans are unlikely to suffer heart failure during their normal lifespan; so a stronger/less stressed heart is unlikely to be a factor for the asura’s slightly longer lifespan.

You’re missing the point. A greatdane can be strong and healthy and fit but it’s body size is more strenuous on it’s heart than a chihuahuas is. that doesn’t mean the greatdane is unhealthy or unfit. it just means the relative size of a chuhuahuas heart is a better fit for the body of a chihuahua than the size of a great danes is for the greatdane.

the greatdane has an overtaxed heart by the end of it’s normal lifespan. There isn’t too many factors to come to this conclusion becasue it’s part of the greatdanes normal lifespan and it’s only in comparison to a breed that has a more efficient heart. Taken alone, that greatdane has a full, healthy life.

So, in comparison, an old man lays in his bed in the winter of his years and peacefully dies in his sleep when his heart finally gives out at the end of his natural lifespan. he could have been healthy all his life but the lifelong exertion on his heart will only last so long. A bigger, stronger heart would have served him better. that doesn’t mean he was unnaturally unhealthy.

My point was that heart failure does not naturally occur in healthy humans, it is always pathological. A human who has zero cardiovascular disease risk is almost guaranteed not to develop heart failure in his/her lifetime. In other words, the human heart in general is not a limiting factor to human longevity.

On the flip side, a “stronger heart than you need” does not contribute to longevity: it may give you a survival advantage as your heart will be better equipped to deal with sudden increases in activity, for example when fleeing from a predator; but in civilised societies this kind of survival advantage is almost completely negated.

Since a “better than normal” heart does not increase your lifespan, the only way the heart could be a factor in the differences between the lifespan of two species is if one species has a “worse than normal” heart. Humans, however, have a heart that is perfectly capable of sustaining us till we die of some other cause; as long as you don’t have a congenital abnormality, make stupid lifestyle choices or get certain infections. Therefore the heart cannot be a factor (at least not in the sense of “heart failure being a natural progression of life”) in why asura live longer than humans.

That’s not true. When people die peacefully of “old age” comforably in their bed with no known pathalogical infermities their hearts simply stop working. They don’t need an unhealthy pre existing heart condition for this to happen.

Maloy.1249:

Charr, they actually breed at incredible rates, but because they have so many enemies the population is kept balanced. A civilization can not exist in a state of eternal war and civil war and have a normal birth rate.

Also look at GuildWars 1 unbelievable amounts of Charr are killed in Prophecies alone, but still in the last game they were beyond counting in their numbers.

Actually, charr breed and mature at the same rates as humans – or so we were told a long while back by a dev, I believe it was Jeff Grubb.

As for GW1 numbers – that’s more mechanical than lore. I mean, if we were to take the number of foes literal, in either game, then the Flame Legion is as large as the Iron, Ash, and Blood legions combined in GW2, and not only that, but the White Mantle during the War in Kryta content (or even The Battle for Lion’s Arch quest alone) had the vast majority of Kryta’s population as members. However, both are clearly false. These large numbers are done for the fact that players can easily overpower one or two NPCs, and as such said enemy NPCs are put in high number groups – whereas allied NPCs are lower because they’re of less focus.

@OP: Most of the major races reproduce in similar or slower rates to humans, many having equal or longer natural lifespans. Hylek and skritt, however, are extremely large breeders among the sentient races. Though they have an equally high mortality rate.

Zaxares.5419:

As such, I expect that Asura probably have lifespans that are half (or less) the length of humans and larger races, although perhaps magic and medical technology can prolong their life to a comparative level.

Your average asura will live 5-10% longer than your average human. This was told to us by a dev some time ago (same with charr having the same maturity and natural lifespan as humans).

Zaxares.5419:

I don’t remember it being stated anywhere that Charr have litters

Blog post from charr week proves they don’t – the female charr that was pregnant had one child.

Just to add to this topic somewhat:

The average Asura lives 5-10% longer than your average human, and a Charr’s natural lifespan is a little bit less than a human’s (I think it was mentioned as being 65 or something like that). Sylvari, nobody has any idea what their lifespans are, and Norn are the longest-lived, able to maintain their good health well into their 120’s, maybe longer.

Dustfinger.9510:

That’s not true. When people die peacefully of “old age” comforably in their bed with no known pathalogical infermities their hearts simply stop working. They don’t need an unhealthy pre existing heart condition for this to happen.

The reason their hearts stop working is because they died from another cause. The heart cannot simply “stop working” because as long as there is oxygen, cardiomyocytes will continue to contract: although if the pacemaker system is compromised it could cause them to contract erratically or even in a way that causes the heart overall to fail to pump; but that requires damage to the pacemaker system, which is part of the heart, which means the person does have a pre-existing heart condition/risk factors.

Heart failure (which is when the heart is unable to keep up with the body’s needs) only occurs if either the body’s needs increases (e.g. due to hypertension) or if the heart suffers an injury, for example from a myocardial infarct (a heart attack) or rheumatic heart disease (which is an infection).

People do not develop heart failure for no reason, there is always an underlying cause for it: but while advancing age is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease (mainly atherosclerosis, which can lead to myocardial infarction and eventually, heart failure) it does not in itself lead to heart failure.

You’re confusing the process with the reason. Disease covers a broad range of things that all mean ‘unhealthy’. So, the heart disease that you included as a reason for heart failure also includes the breakdown of heart tissue and functions brought on by natural aging and a lifetime of work. Hypertension is a great example. it makes the heart work harder and that increases the risk of heart failure. So what we are really looking at with hypertension is a rapid aging of the heart. becasue it’s doing more than a normal days worth of work in the span of a day. that wears on the heart quicker than normal but without hypertension your heart is still wearing out and will fail if nothing else kills you first.

Going back to the beginning example of the greatdanes body and how taxing it is on the dogs heart, we see that with age a human heart also becomes less able to propel large quantities of blood quickly through the body. Not becasue of germs. Not becasue of bad food and a lack of excercise. it’s becasue the dog/human body is breaking down. The heart and all it’s internal functions get worn down from a lifetime of work. a chihuahuas heart gets worn down slower than a greatdanes. A humans hearts gets worn down slower than a chihuahuas.

e.g.: a healthy man that eats right and excercises regularly in a bubble will still ultimatly suffer heart failure because the heart is not an immortal part of a human body. depending on the exact process of that breakdown and ultimale failure there will be diffrent reasons for it. hypertension is one. Cardiac dysrhythmia is another.

so, yes, the heart does not magically stop for “no reason” but neither does the greatdanes in the example that started this tangent. Age and a lifetime of work wears it down until it is too worn down to keep us alive. Which exact process wears down first determines the name of the reason for the heart failure. But ultimatly it comes down to the fact that the human bodies functions are taxing on the heart until it can’t work anymore.

The reason why Great Danes tend to die of heart disease is because their evolution is unnatural: they are artificially selected for by humans, which in their case led to a very high prevalence of congenital heart defects due to sheltering from the effects of natural selection.

Let me explain things a bit. When greater cardiac output is required from the heart, the heart compensates by contracting faster and harder. When the increase in output demand is chronic, for example due to hypertension; the heart will eventually compensate by undergoing hypertrophy: it becomes bigger to increase the force of its contraction. This is all normal and also occurs in regular exercise.

Heart failure only occurs if the demands from the heart exceeds the heart’s ability to compensate: i.e. eventually there is a point where the heart cannot hypertrophy any further, and if demand increases past this point the heart has “decompensated”: we call this heart failure. Hypertension does not cause the heart to “age”: as long as blood pressure is within limits and does not increase further the heart can continue working as normal.

What does get damaged by hypertension are the lining of the coronary arteries, and this damage plus other factors like dyslipidaemia and smoking can lead to atherosclerosis; a major risk factor for myocardial infarction: if an infarct occurs, that will cause necrosis of heart tissue and reduce the heart’s threshold for heart failure.

So no, the effects of hypertension are not an “accelerated aging of the heart”, the main way hypertension causes heart failure is by damaging the endothelium of blood vessels; which combined with other factors (poor cholesterol control, smoking, etc.) could lead to an infarction.

To summarise, what I’m trying to say is that the human heart is a very efficient organ and, if there are no genetic, environmental or lifestyle insults, has the capability to work well past the human lifespan. In other words, you will almost certainly die of some other cause (the ones that limit human lifespan to ~90/100 years) before you die of “natural” heart failure.

Embolism.8106:

The reason why Great Danes tend to die of heart disease is because their evolution is unnatural: they are artificially selected for by humans, which in their case led to a very high prevalence of congenital heart defects due to sheltering from the effects of natural selection.

Let me explain things a bit. When greater cardiac output is required from the heart, the heart compensates by contracting faster and harder. When the increase in output demand is chronic, for example due to hypertension; the heart will eventually compensate by undergoing hypertrophy: it becomes bigger to increase the force of its contraction. This is all normal and also occurs in regular exercise.

Heart failure only occurs if the demands from the heart exceeds the heart’s ability to compensate: i.e. eventually there is a point where the heart cannot hypertrophy any further, and if demand increases past this point the heart has “decompensated”: we call this heart failure. Hypertension does not cause the heart to “age”: as long as blood pressure is within limits and does not increase further the heart can continue working as normal.

What does get damaged by hypertension are the lining of the coronary arteries, and this damage plus other factors like dyslipidaemia and smoking can lead to atherosclerosis; a major risk factor for myocardial infarction: if an infarct occurs, that will cause necrosis of heart tissue and reduce the heart’s threshold for heart failure.

So no, the effects of hypertension are not an “accelerated aging of the heart”, the main way hypertension causes heart failure is by damaging the endothelium of blood vessels; which combined with other factors (poor cholesterol control, smoking, etc.) could lead to an infarction.

To summarise, what I’m trying to say is that the human heart is a very efficient organ and, if there are no genetic, environmental or lifestyle insults, has the capability to work well past the human lifespan. In other words, you will almost certainly die of some other cause (the ones that limit human lifespan to ~90/100 years) before you die of “natural” heart failure.

I bolded the relevant part. The heart weakens with age. Medical science knows this. The heart breaks down and gives out unexpectedly. Medical science knows this as well. Human beings also breed “unnaturally” (since we almost never choose mates based on how long their heart can carry them) and develope heart defects which means their heart can not break down as much as someoneone without born defects. but there is always breaking down no matter what. some without defects have thicker tissue while others will have thinner yet still perfectly healthy tissue. the one with the thicker tissue can take more wear and tear. That’s just common sense.

Some peoples hearts have the capacity to live 90/100/120 years. Just like some dogs hearts take carry them to 9 years while other dogs hearts carry them to 15 years. Both are canines. The diffrence? The genetic encoding that dictates how much were and tear the heart can take. All people do not have the same heart capacity. Reletivly healthy elder people in their 80’s have hearts that are incapable of taking them to 100 years old.

I don’t know what else you want. it’s a medical fact that people die of heart failure with no known factors beyond the normal wear and tear of old age. it happens. it’s not a myth. it’s not just some theory i came up with. Nor is it some untested philosophy of how i think the world works. it happens. it happens before people reach 100 years old. You’re arguing with reality.

Dustfinger.9510:

I bolded the relevant part. The heart weakens with age. Medical science knows this. The heart breaks down and gives out unexpectedly. Medical science knows this as well. Human beings also breed “unnaturally” (since we almost never choose mates based on how long their heart can carry them) and develope heart defects which means their heart can not break down as much as someoneone without born defects. but there is always breaking down no matter what. some without defects have thicker tissue while others will have thinner yet still perfectly healthy tissue. the one with the thicker tissue can take more wear and tear. That’s just common sense.

Some peoples hearts have the capacity to live 90/100/120 years. Just like some dogs hearts take carry them to 9 years while other dogs hearts carry them to 15 years. Both are canines. The diffrence? The genetic encoding that dictates how much were and tear the heart can take. All people do not have the same heart capacity. Reletivly healthy elder people in their 80’s have hearts that are incapable of taking them to 100 years old.

I don’t know what else you want. it’s a medical fact that people die of heart failure with no known factors beyond the normal wear and tear of old age. it happens. it’s not a myth. it’s not just some theory i came up with. Nor is it some untested philosophy of how i think the world works. it happens. it happens before people reach 100 years old. You’re arguing with reality.

That’s actually a typo, I meant to say when the demands from the body exceeds the heart’s ability to compensate. Anyways. Let me reiterate:

If people die of heart failure, they invariably have had a myocardial infarction prior or are suffering from a condition that increases the body’s demands, for example obesity. You do not develop heart failure with no past history or risk factors. You say this is a medical fact: I challenge you to find literature that backs up your claim. I’m fairly certain there is none.

I’d also like to draw your attention again to what I said about cardiac hypertrophy. While I’m sure people are born with variations in the amount of cardiac tissue they have, that is irrelevant as the heart is capable of increasing its mass if needed. Congenital factors that can lead to heart failure are things like septal defects (hole in heart), various structural abnormalities, a genetic susceptibility to things like type 2 diabetes, and so on.

Regarding the Great Dane thing and artificial selection: who you choose as your mate has nothing to do with this (do you think animals instinctively know if their mate has cardiovascular risk factors or not?). Artificial selection has a tendency to cause genetic abnormalities because 1. it often involves breeding of animals that that are closely related, a.k.a. inbreeding, and 2. they are not exposed to survival situations where specimens with unfavourable genes are less likely to pass on their genes to future generations.

While you could make a case of 2. being present in the last 5,000 years or so of human society, 1. (which is what forges these unfavourable genotypes in the first place) is not applicable.

EDIT: Sorry for derailing this topic, although it is still relevant as we’re discussing what factors could explain the differences between the lifespan of different species; which is evolutionarily linked to breeding rate.

Konig Des Todes.2086:

Blog post from charr week proves they don’t – the female charr that was pregnant had one child.

One example doesn’t prove anything: that may be atypical for charr.

Mechos.5640:

Just to add to this topic somewhat:

The average Asura lives 5-10% longer than your average human, and a Charr’s natural lifespan is a little bit less than a human’s (I think it was mentioned as being 65 or something like that). Sylvari, nobody has any idea what their lifespans are, and Norn are the longest-lived, able to maintain their good health well into their 120’s, maybe longer.

That all sounds right, although I expect norn (and also charr) generally won’t live to their full lifespans given their lifestyles.

Charr doesn’t need agriculture. Plenty of references to cow herds, and I imagine they also have sheep and other grazing animals. Animals can graze in a wasteland like Ascalon as even under the worst circumstances, some plants adapt and start growing there. This means the production is localized instead of distant.

Also, Charr are purely carnivorous. Animals like kittens (not censored) can survive several days without food. Overall food intake for carnivores is not necessarily lower but rather more in spikes. Since Charr are a warring species, I would expect them to eat their slain enemies and even be cannibals when needed.

marnick.4305:

Since Charr are a warring species, I would expect them to eat their slain enemies and even be cannibals when needed.

While I would not be particularly surprised if that were the case, I don’t see why you would expect it. Humanity has spawned numerous war-like/warrior cultures and very few of them practice cannibalism (yes, I know eating a sapient of another species is not technically cannibalism, but it carries the same moral ramifications).

Embolism.8106:

That’s actually a typo, I meant to say when the demands from the body exceeds the heart’s ability to compensate. Anyways. Let me reiterate:

If people die of heart failure, they invariably have had a myocardial infarction prior or are suffering from a condition that increases the body’s demands, for example obesity. You do not develop heart failure with no past history or risk factors. You say this is a medical fact: I challenge you to find literature that backs up your claim. I’m fairly certain there is none.

You have already listed age as a risk of heart failure, in your own post but here it is. http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/educational/hearttruth/lower-risk/risk-factors.htm

I’d also like to draw your attention again to what I said about cardiac hypertrophy. While I’m sure people are born with variations in the amount of cardiac tissue they have, that is irrelevant as the heart is capable of increasing its mass if needed. Congenital factors that can lead to heart failure are things like septal defects (hole in heart), various structural abnormalities, a genetic susceptibility to things like type 2 diabetes, and so on.

The amount of tissue was only one example. “With aging come a number of physiological and morphological changes that alters cardiovascular function and lead to subsequently increased risk of cardiovascular disease, even in healthy asymptomatic individuals” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_disease “Vascular aging: facts and factors”. Frontiers in Vascular Physiology 3 (325): 1-2. “Aging is also associated with changes in the mechanical and structural properties of the vascular wall, which leads to the loss of arterial elasticity and reduced arterial compliance and may subsequently lead to coronary artery disease” “Ageing and vascular ageing”. Postgrad Med J 82: 357–362. Dilated cardiomyopathy- (both greatdanes and humans can suffer from) The muscles of the left ventricle stretch and become thinner (dilate). Dilating causes the heart muscle to weaken, and over time, the condition can cause heart failure. Often, the cause of dilated cardiomyopathy can’t be determined. Such cases are called idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy. http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/dilated-cardiomyopathy/DS01029/DSECTION=causes

Regarding the Great Dane thing and artificial selection: who you choose as your mate has nothing to do with this (do you think animals instinctively know if their mate has cardiovascular risk factors or not?). Artificial selection has a tendency to cause genetic abnormalities because 1. it often involves breeding of animals that that are closely related, a.k.a. inbreeding, and 2. they are not exposed to survival situations where specimens with unfavourable genes are less likely to pass on their genes to future generations.

While you could make a case of 2. being present in the last 5,000 years or so of human society, 1. (which is what forges these unfavourable genotypes in the first place) is not applicable.

Humans produce similar results becasue we don’t base out descisions on late age heart functions. We are talking about the ability of the heart so in that reguard it is similar. Any other favorable aspect is irrelevant. And if you admit that a case can be made for 2, then what is your real point? You admit 2 is applicable.

marnick.4305:

Charr doesn’t need agriculture. Plenty of references to cow herds, and I imagine they also have sheep and other grazing animals. Animals can graze in a wasteland like Ascalon as even under the worst circumstances, some plants adapt and start growing there. This means the production is localized instead of distant.

But they can’t match the same food surplus as the one generated by agriculture. That’s the point. Agriculture is just much more efficient and can supply far more food. Finally, if they want to truly grow and advance, they will need agriculture to produce food for their cattle at industrial scale. The more urbanized and industrialized the Charr become, the more vulnerable they will be to starvation unless they change their current model. Herding is just not good enough. In fact, in the Real World, there was a real fear that the Industrial Revolution would create massive famines before artificial fertilizers and mechanized agriculture were invented.

Legion.4198:

marnick.4305:

Charr doesn’t need agriculture. Plenty of references to cow herds, and I imagine they also have sheep and other grazing animals. Animals can graze in a wasteland like Ascalon as even under the worst circumstances, some plants adapt and start growing there. This means the production is localized instead of distant.

But they can’t match the same food surplus as the one generated by agriculture. That’s the point. Agriculture is just much more efficient and can supply far more food. Finally, if they want to truly grow and advance, they will need agriculture to produce food for their cattle at industrial scale. The more urbanized and industrialized the Charr become, the more vulnerable they will be to starvation unless they change their current model. Herding is just not good enough. In fact, in the Real World, there was a real fear that the Industrial Revolution would create massive famines before artificial fertilizers and mechanized agriculture were invented.

That’s probably the biggest thing holding back the Charr; lack of a food surplus. Charr are obligate carnivores, although I expect that they can still eat small amounts of plant matter without gaining any benefit from it apart from taste. (They do seem to favour a lot of spices in their dishes, for one thing.) They may be able to store meat using magic to power refridgeration devices, although I’ve never seen any evidence of long-term food storage in any Charr areas. This means that all Charr cities must have a ready supply of fresh meat available nearby, which drastically hampers expansion.

From what I’ve seen, Charr secure their food primarily through ranching and fishing, and supplemented by hunting. They probably maintain agricultural zones in order to grow feed for their herds; although it might be cheaper to simply buy feed from other races, the Charr probably do not like being dependent on another race to maintain their food security.

Zaxares.5419:

Legion.4198:

marnick.4305:

Charr doesn’t need agriculture. Plenty of references to cow herds, and I imagine they also have sheep and other grazing animals. Animals can graze in a wasteland like Ascalon as even under the worst circumstances, some plants adapt and start growing there. This means the production is localized instead of distant.

But they can’t match the same food surplus as the one generated by agriculture. That’s the point. Agriculture is just much more efficient and can supply far more food. Finally, if they want to truly grow and advance, they will need agriculture to produce food for their cattle at industrial scale. The more urbanized and industrialized the Charr become, the more vulnerable they will be to starvation unless they change their current model. Herding is just not good enough. In fact, in the Real World, there was a real fear that the Industrial Revolution would create massive famines before artificial fertilizers and mechanized agriculture were invented.

That’s probably the biggest thing holding back the Charr; lack of a food surplus. Charr are obligate carnivores, although I expect that they can still eat small amounts of plant matter without gaining any benefit from it apart from taste. (They do seem to favour a lot of spices in their dishes, for one thing.) They may be able to store meat using magic to power refridgeration devices, although I’ve never seen any evidence of long-term food storage in any Charr areas. This means that all Charr cities must have a ready supply of fresh meat available nearby, which drastically hampers expansion.

From what I’ve seen, Charr secure their food primarily through ranching and fishing, and supplemented by hunting. They probably maintain agricultural zones in order to grow feed for their herds; although it might be cheaper to simply buy feed from other races, the Charr probably do not like being dependent on another race to maintain their food security.

I could see that coming up in future game updates. Maybe the Charr empire attempting to expand towards the ocean? That is probably one of the only reliable sources of meat they can use, unless they start eating flame legion.

Charr may have some factors that help.

The huns were reported to keep raw meat under their saddle as cushion. the friction would tenderize it and they would later eat it raw. Likewise, eskimos ate raw, rotten meat for thousands of years. On the same note lions and leoprads gladly eat rotten meat with no seemingly ill effect. This is both a benefit and a drawback. On one hand it means they can eat more available meat but it also means that it takes more meat to sustain such a strong immune system.

Then there are ways to preserve meat used by various human culturs that allow it to be stock piled. Salting, drying, or just eating it old, raw and rotten like the eskimos.

But, I did come across a ranch in game that boasted it’s very own cattle launcher. The charr are activly involved in a perpetual war with ghost wich requires alot of energy. and the flame legion is causing alot of trouble. So, there doesn’t seem to be any present danger of a food shortage wich may imply that there is plenty of grazing land and grazing cattle.

Or maybe the Charr just aren’t aware of what Mad-whatever-his-name-is is doing with cattle. Kinda reminds me of Pig-Killer from Max Max Beyond The Thunderdome.

I wonder if Charr could/would eat Harpy flesh? There seems to be no shortage of them. Their ‘matriarch’ must be a very busy lady…

Dustfinger.9510:

But, I did come across a ranch in game that boasted it’s very own cattle launcher. The charr are activly involved in a perpetual war with ghost wich requires alot of energy. and the flame legion is causing alot of trouble. So, there doesn’t seem to be any present danger of a food shortage wich may imply that there is plenty of grazing land and grazing cattle.

Well, there are Deer, Dolyaks, Moas, Barracuda etc. that magically appear every 30 seconds, providing an endless supply of red/poultry/fish meat.

That too. they need to start ranching the animals with red bars since they always come back :P

Dustfinger.9510:

You have already listed age as a risk of heart failure, in your own post but here it is. http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/educational/hearttruth/lower-risk/risk-factors.htm

The amount of tissue was only one example. “With aging come a number of physiological and morphological changes that alters cardiovascular function and lead to subsequently increased risk of cardiovascular disease, even in healthy asymptomatic individuals” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_disease “Vascular aging: facts and factors”. Frontiers in Vascular Physiology 3 (325): 1-2. “Aging is also associated with changes in the mechanical and structural properties of the vascular wall, which leads to the loss of arterial elasticity and reduced arterial compliance and may subsequently lead to coronary artery disease” “Ageing and vascular ageing”. Postgrad Med J 82: 357–362. Dilated cardiomyopathy- (both greatdanes and humans can suffer from) The muscles of the left ventricle stretch and become thinner (dilate). Dilating causes the heart muscle to weaken, and over time, the condition can cause heart failure. Often, the cause of dilated cardiomyopathy can’t be determined. Such cases are called idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy. http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/dilated-cardiomyopathy/DS01029/DSECTION=causes

Humans produce similar results becasue we don’t base out descisions on late age heart functions. We are talking about the ability of the heart so in that reguard it is similar. Any other favorable aspect is irrelevant. And if you admit that a case can be made for 2, then what is your real point? You admit 2 is applicable.

If you read what I wrote again: age is a risk factor for atherosclerosis, which can lead to infarction, which leads to necrosis and reduction of the heart’s ability to compensate. Age is not a risk factor in the sense “the heart is wearing down”. Plus, age is not the primary risk factor for atherosclerosis, lifestyle factors are far more prominent.

“Aging is associated with changes to the vascular wall”: you know that doesn’t mean the heart, right? It means blood vessels, in other words it’s exactly what I have said about aging and atherosclerosis. I’d also like to point out that “increased risk” doesn’t mean you’ll get it, quite often having just a single risk factor won’t significantly elevate your chances of developing the condition; it’s when multiple risk factors (e.g. age + diabetes + hypertension + dyslipidaemia) are present that you have to worry.

As for dilated cardiomyopathy, if you read further you’d notice that it is not a “natural aging” thing: it occurs most commonly in people aged 20 – 60, that’s not old (over 65 is considered to have increased risk of infarction). Read even further and you’ll notice it says it is caused by damage to the myocardial wall “most likely produced by a variety of toxic, metabolic or infectious agents”, may be due to “fibrous changes from a previous myocardial infarction”, or may be a “late sequelae of viral myocarditis”.

“Humans produce similar results because we don’t base out decisions on late age heart functions.” I’m not sure what you mean here, I’m quite sure animals don’t either (again I ask: do you think animals instinctively know if their mate has any cardiovascular risk factors?).

And while a case can be made for natural selection not being part of human evolution in recent years, that doesn’t equate human evolution to the artificial selection of domestic animals because it lacks the inbreeding aspect that produces most of the congenital abnormalities in the first place. It doesn’t matter if there’s no natural selection to weed out unfavourable mutations (especially not when the effect is so evolutionarily recent) when there’s little risk of them occurring.

GuzziHero.2467:

I wonder if Charr could/would eat Harpy flesh? There seems to be no shortage of them. Their ‘matriarch’ must be a very busy lady…

I’d like to know exactly how harpies reproduce: we don’t seem to see any male members of the species, unless their males are outwardly indistinguishable from females (which I guess is a distinct possibility).

GuzziHero.2467:

That leaves the Norn. I do not know much about nutrition, but I can hardly believe that their diet is completely carnivorous.

Norn hunt and farm. I remember some references to farming from the NPCs in Guild Wars Eye of the North. I can’t remember where, though. I remember it being surprising to me, since it’s so cold in the Shiverpeaks. And no, I’m not talking about the description of “Blood Washes Blood”— I mean an actual reference to a growing season and that sort of thing.

GuzziHero.2467:

I wonder if Charr could/would eat Harpy flesh? There seems to be no shortage of them. Their ‘matriarch’ must be a very busy lady…

Harpies may be sequential hermaphrodites, similar to clownfish. All harpies are born (hatched?) as female, but when they reach maturity, one or more of them change sex to male. Heck, maybe the “matriarch” is actually the sole male of a colony and breeds with all the remaining females.

I seem to recall a Charr NPC once saying that the worst thing she ever ate was roast harpy. “Like chicken coated in sewage”, I think her words were. It might have been at the Ashford Forum.

Embolism.8106:

If you read what I wrote again: age is a risk factor for atherosclerosis, which can lead to infarction, which leads to necrosis and reduction of the heart’s ability to compensate. Age is not a risk factor in the sense “the heart is wearing down”. Plus, age is not the primary risk factor for atherosclerosis, lifestyle factors are far more prominent.

“Aging is associated with changes to the vascular wall”: you know that doesn’t mean the heart, right? It means blood vessels, in other words it’s exactly what I have said about aging and atherosclerosis. I’d also like to point out that “increased risk” doesn’t mean you’ll get it, quite often having just a single risk factor won’t significantly elevate your chances of developing the condition; it’s when multiple risk factors (e.g. age + diabetes + hypertension + dyslipidaemia) are present that you have to worry.

As for dilated cardiomyopathy, if you read further you’d notice that it is not a “natural aging” thing: it occurs most commonly in people aged 20 – 60, that’s not old (over 65 is considered to have increased risk of infarction). Read even further and you’ll notice it says it is caused by damage to the myocardial wall “most likely produced by a variety of toxic, metabolic or infectious agents”, may be due to “fibrous changes from a previous myocardial infarction”, or may be a “late sequelae of viral myocarditis”.

“Humans produce similar results because we don’t base out decisions on late age heart functions.” I’m not sure what you mean here, I’m quite sure animals don’t either (again I ask: do you think animals instinctively know if their mate has any cardiovascular risk factors?).

And while a case can be made for natural selection not being part of human evolution in recent years, that doesn’t equate human evolution to the artificial selection of domestic animals because it lacks the inbreeding aspect that produces most of the congenital abnormalities in the first place. It doesn’t matter if there’s no natural selection to weed out unfavourable mutations (especially not when the effect is so evolutionarily recent) when there’s little risk of them occurring.

I’ve demonstrated that the heart can and does get worn down. That wearing it down increases the risk of heart failure and can lead to it. Your response is that it doesn’t mean it will definatlly happen. You keep changing the goal post. I’ve proved my position.

Dustfinger.9510:

I’ve demonstrated that the heart can and does get worn down. That wearing it down increases the risk of heart failure and can lead to it. Your response is that it doesn’t mean it will definatlly happen. You keep changing the goal post. I’ve proved my position.

All that you’ve really demonstrated is that you don’t quite understand the aetiology and pathophysiology of heart failure, or much of what I’m explaining to you; but in any case I think we’ve derailed this topic enough. >.<

Anyways, asura may well have “stronger” hearts than humans, who knows. That wouldn’t explain their slightly longer lifespan though, is what I’m saying.

Zaxares.5419:

GuzziHero.2467:

I wonder if Charr could/would eat Harpy flesh? There seems to be no shortage of them. Their ‘matriarch’ must be a very busy lady…

Harpies may be sequential hermaphrodites, similar to clownfish. All harpies are born (hatched?) as female, but when they reach maturity, one or more of them change sex to male. Heck, maybe the “matriarch” is actually the sole male of a colony and breeds with all the remaining females.

I seem to recall a Charr NPC once saying that the worst thing she ever ate was roast harpy. “Like chicken coated in sewage”, I think her words were. It might have been at the Ashford Forum.

The title “matriarch” doesn’t make much sense then, shouldn’t it be “patriarch” instead if it’s actually a male during that life stage? Still, I wouldn’t be surprised if that is the case.

Embolism.8106:

All that you’ve really demonstrated is that you don’t quite understand the aetiology and pathophysiology of heart failure, or much of what I’m explaining to you.

I can see you need this, but it’s not complicated.

Embolism.8106:

marnick.4305:

Since Charr are a warring species, I would expect them to eat their slain enemies and even be cannibals when needed.

While I would not be particularly surprised if that were the case, I don’t see why you would expect it. Humanity has spawned numerous war-like/warrior cultures and very few of them practice cannibalism (yes, I know eating a sapient of another species is not technically cannibalism, but it carries the same moral ramifications).

Cannibalism in humans isn’t practiced mostly because evolutionary we’re very much at risk for prion disease. Culture doesn’t have much to do with that, it’s just that cannibalistic tribes tend to go extinct.

There’s only 5 known prion infections and they all need one particular protein in the host. Species which don’t use this protein are immune to prion disease. In those species, selection against cannibalism doesn’t happen and likewise in a sentient species without this protein, cannibalism wouldn’t be the same problem.
If the Charr cranial matter is of a different kind of proteins, then prion disease isn’t nearly as much a problem. There’s plenty of carnivores practicing cannibalism in the world with Alligators being the most well known.

marnick.4305:

Cannibalism in humans isn’t practiced mostly because evolutionary we’re very much at risk for prion disease. Culture doesn’t have much to do with that, it’s just that cannibalistic tribes tend to go extinct.

There’s only 5 known prion infections and they all need one particular protein in the host. Species which don’t use this protein are immune to prion disease. In those species, selection against cannibalism doesn’t happen and likewise in a sentient species without this protein, cannibalism wouldn’t be the same problem.
If the Charr cranial matter is of a different kind of proteins, then prion disease isn’t nearly as much a problem. There’s plenty of carnivores practicing cannibalism in the world with Alligators being the most well known.

Personally, I’m of the opinion that they would probably have little problem eating intelligent beings becasue they refer to humans as “meat” in the last game. But animals practicing cannabalism doesn’t speak to the moral ramifications that was refered to. Even eating human meat in extreme survival situations has been a strong taboo in many cultures. The algonquins have the story of the wendigo to disuade themsleves from resorting to it, prefering to suicide or resigning to starvation.

marnick.4305:

Embolism.8106:

marnick.4305:

Since Charr are a warring species, I would expect them to eat their slain enemies and even be cannibals when needed.

While I would not be particularly surprised if that were the case, I don’t see why you would expect it. Humanity has spawned numerous war-like/warrior cultures and very few of them practice cannibalism (yes, I know eating a sapient of another species is not technically cannibalism, but it carries the same moral ramifications).

Cannibalism in humans isn’t practiced mostly because evolutionary we’re very much at risk for prion disease. Culture doesn’t have much to do with that, it’s just that cannibalistic tribes tend to go extinct.

There’s only 5 known prion infections and they all need one particular protein in the host. Species which don’t use this protein are immune to prion disease. In those species, selection against cannibalism doesn’t happen and likewise in a sentient species without this protein, cannibalism wouldn’t be the same problem.
If the Charr cranial matter is of a different kind of proteins, then prion disease isn’t nearly as much a problem. There’s plenty of carnivores practicing cannibalism in the world with Alligators being the most well known.

I wasn’t aware that human transmissible prion diseases are worldwide. Of course, you could argue that the reason for that is because cannibalism “died out” in the rest of the world.

In any case history records few cultures that regularly practice cannibalism, and the ones we do have mostly survived to recent times intact. It is possible that most of these cultures died out in prehistory, but I don’t know… the fact that there are cultures that have practiced cannibalism for thousands of years survived doesn’t really make the “prions killed off most of the cannibals” idea very plausible to me.

I’ve also read somewhere that many people in the South Pacific, where cannibalism and the associated prion disease kuru exists, are actually genetically resistant to kuru. Perhaps this is the reason why they survived while other cannibalistic cultures did not, but I find it slightly difficult to believe that similar mutations do not occur in cannibalistic cultures all over the world; if they existed.

Also, I’m speaking of cultures that regularly practice cannibalism. All cultures in the world practice cannibalism at some point, out of necessity or otherwise; but few practice it regularly.

I know there’s a religious group in India that practices cannabalism in ceremony. i forget their name but they wait for bodies to be sent down river in funeral rights and eat small portions. But I don’;\t think they eat the brain either. Only meat.