Yes, I agree, but my point was more that I doubt that those who suggest a value of, say, 29.4 for stone age humans, have gone through any these calculations.
They don't just make the numbers up. They have a reason for them. Either historical records, dated human remains, or by comparison to similar populations from other eras/locations where those exist.
I very much doubt that we have that kind of information available about prehistoric (say, Neantherthal) humans, except perhaps in very sparse and unreliable form.
