Yes, I am an Archaeologist. I answered to another comment to my comment, so you can read what I have to say about the middle ages down there. Neither infant mortality nor hygiene are connected to the OP post, so what exactly do you want to tell me? Child mortality is bad, yes. Lack of hygiene is also bad, even though hygiene was way better in the middle ages then most people think.

You were seemingly dressing it up a bit in "not so bad" terms. I'm a medical doctor. I've seen skeletons from people who had no sewage, unsafe water, infant diseases, etc. I've seen live people with them, too. If ease of life is measured in how often you didn't see your feudal overlord, then, yeah, 1400 was great./s/

Which is still not the point of the original comment. A shítload of stuff was bad in the middle ages and I wouldn't recommend going back there if it was possible (well, maybe as a tourist, but still probably a bad idea lol), but that doesn't change the fact, that some things were done better in the middle ages, then today. You point out medical issues here that are a result of a lack of scientific knowledge, I am talking about how society worked. I will not stretch this further as such a comment section is absolutely not the place to discuss this and English isn't my native language, so communicating my thoughts correctly is quite the hassle and consumes way to much time of my day. Even academically well educated people reproduce false ideas about the middle ages that date back to the enlightenment and humanism. These half truths aren't a matter of life and death like in your profession, you had enough of that shït i the last few years, but you probably know why I want to talk about it

I'm willing to hear how you believe society worked better. From my understanding, admittedly limited, a very few were well-off, a great many were scraping by, and war ran over civilians. Sounds like today in those aspects. So, y'know, ugh. But if you could hit me a few sources at some point, doesn't matter what language. I'll translate it :-)

I'd give you a few sources, but I have a hard day of work behind me and don't want to search for english sources, sorry^^

Because I am an Archaeologist and though I am not an expert on the middle ages I would argue, that I am indeed not totally clueless. The middle ages are an extremely long period and Europe is a huge landmass with very different climates, cultures and topography. I am from Austria, so my expertise is centered around the northern and eastern alpine region as well as southern Germany. 1.&2. True, there was always some work to do, but there is a lot of seasonal stuff and historic sources suggest that there was hardly any work to be done in winter. As you point out at "3." there are many more people per house, so much of the work can be better distributed between all household members. It's also very difficult to actually use our concept of work to analyse labour in the middle ages. Most work you do, will be something tangible and necessary. You produce the food you eat, you built the furniture you use, you weave the clothes you wear. Then there is the matter of serf labour.

The despotic lord or the almighty church force you to build stuff! Well, the church wants you to built a church, which means you dont have to stand outside in the rain when there is the holy mass, you absolutely believe Christianity is true and want to do your part in doing god's work. It probably wasn't to difficult to find some volunteers for that. If your worldly lord needed your labour, it was mostly one of two things: building/expanding the castle or building roads (and other infrastructure). The castle would offer you protection in case someone decided to attack, roads and infrastructure are general live improvements. We now have better division of labour, so protection and infrastructure aren't our personal responsibility anymore, but are financed by taxes and implemented by more or less competent politicians. 3. That's what I'm getting at, housing was completely different back then. 7. You would, at least at some places. For example in alpine regions huge houses were common,

that could house dozens of people. Not exactly in the middle ages, but in the 16th century "Vierkanthöfe" became quite popular in the northern pre alpine region of today's Austria. These are large square houses, with an inner courtyard. They could house up to 200 people. So if you were a peasant your boss (low nobility) would indeed live in the same house. I get some of these things are neither common knowledge nor intuitive, but the middle ages are probably the least understood time period by most people.