Evolution stopped when medicine evolved to a point where it started curing people from genetic diseases-diseases that would have disappeared if the people died without the cure.
I hope my sarcasm meter is broked.
The kind of allergies that one would take that kind of pill for aren't going to kill the kid or make him unable to mate in the future, and therefore have little to do with natural selection. I'm all for being a little more comfortable if I'm having the sniffles, and am certainly all for making a kid with the sniffles more comfortable so he doesn't whine about it..
I can't say I completely disagree with the notion that we as humans are messing with the rules of natural selection so that they no longer apply to us in the same way that they do to other animals. Certainly our species as a whole seems to become less physically fit as individuals. But I doubt many that are making this argument can honestly say that if it was their child or loved one who had a debilitating problem that would have been naturally selected out ordinarily, they wouldn't do all that science is able to do to help that person lead their life. It's certainly not perfect- these kinds of actions have their consequences, which we've already begun to see (antibiotic resistant bacteria..etc). But it's part of the will to survive that drives all of us- it's just that today's will to survive leads us to take pills and have medial treatments rather than hunt or flee from predators.
Technology grows exponentially faster than natural selection. When humans live thousands of years long, do you think it will be because of natural selection? Hell no! It will be because we have figured out how to effectively maintain our bodies with technology.
man you are a moron....and probably childless
heres hoping you develop allegies as an adult or one of your kids has them...maybe even allergies to spiders hows that for karma!
i normally wouldnt wish harm on a kid but im sure with your incredible charming personality (im being sarcastic can you tell) you will surely find a mate with which to procreate (im still being sarcastic)
heres hoping you develop allegies as an adult or one of your kids has them...maybe even allergies to spiders hows that for karma!
i normally wouldnt wish harm on a kid but im sure with your incredible charming personality (im being sarcastic can you tell) you will surely find a mate with which to procreate (im still being sarcastic)
Originally posted by: Gibsons
We aren't defying it, we're simply changing the selective pressure. Evolution continues, no matter what we do.Originally posted by: Eli
You can't be serious....
The ability to defy natural selection is exactly what makes us different from other animals.
But now it is no longer genetic evolution. It is technological evolution.
That's a very good point.
The parental instinct is to protect and save the child at all cost, by any means necessary.
But to me hindering or supressing the body's natural defense mechanisms is mucking with natural selection.
Take the strong mate.....doesn't appear sick. Then take the sniffling, sneezing, coughing mate. What should the woman choose? These are visible signs of weakness and should be avoided to eliminate that from the pool. But yet here we are, mucking with mother nature.
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,415
- 14,305
- 136
More likely it is greater awareness more so than pollution. Go back less than 50 years ago and living with chronic sinusitis was considered normal and people just lived with it and doctors just blew it off because they couldn't do anything else. Now there are treatments.
Medicine still has not reached that point. Or would you care to name one of these particular diseases?
Evolution has not stopped and never will. In humans, it just took a turn thousands of years ago from the purely physical to the behavioral.
I wouldn't choose a mate based on whether or not they had allergies, though, and I can't think of anyone I know who would discount a person just because of that. Even if they weren't medicated.
I knew I would get flamed, and I deserve it because it is a very unpopular opinion. But I stand by my point.
But my main point is we shouldn't have to have these medications. Kids should be able to go out and play, be active and be human. Are kids becoming more allergic because of medication, sedentary behivor, lack of exposure to allergens, heredity, too clean of an enviroment? I don't know. But should we continue to supress the body's reaction?
Gibsons
Lifer
- Aug 14, 2001
- 12,530
- 35
- 91
That's an important point, often overlooked.
Medicine still has not reached that point. Or would you care to name one of these particular diseases?
[/quote]
Diabetes.. sort of.... You're right that it wouldn't have necessarily disappeared, but it would certainly be a more rare allele in the absence of insulin therapy.
Yep.
preslove
Lifer
- Sep 10, 2003
- 16,755
- 63
- 91
I agree!
Also, I think we should get back to our classical roots and leave our sickly kids on the side of the road to die of exposure, greek style.
And don't get me started on down syndrome. Mandatory abortions!
PROTECT THE GENES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!ONETWOTHREEFOUR!!!!!!!!!!!@#@#$!@W^^%#^!##~$#
MOVE THE HUMAN RACE FORWARD!
SIG HEIL!
Also, I think we should get back to our classical roots and leave our sickly kids on the side of the road to die of exposure, greek style.
And don't get me started on down syndrome. Mandatory abortions!
PROTECT THE GENES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!ONETWOTHREEFOUR!!!!!!!!!!!@#@#$!@W^^%#^!##~$#
MOVE THE HUMAN RACE FORWARD!
SIG HEIL!
I completely agree.
The best genes should be passed on.
People in wheelchairs are allowed to live in our society because we allow them to.
If they were in the wild and were expected to gather their own food etc, they would not survive.
Then again, you introduce the issue of genetic discrimination after a while.
Over population FTW, let everyone live!
The best genes should be passed on.
People in wheelchairs are allowed to live in our society because we allow them to.
If they were in the wild and were expected to gather their own food etc, they would not survive.
Then again, you introduce the issue of genetic discrimination after a while.
Over population FTW, let everyone live!
You point out that the theory of how allergies form is that allergies are a product of man, that these kids normally wouldn't have allergies. Maybe these kids have really strong immune systems, and that is why when there are no germs around they attack other non-pathogenic things like pollen. So when you say we shouldn't let these kids pass on their genes, you are implying they are less fit. However, you then go on to claim that they are less fit due to people interfering by keeping our environment clean. It could very well be that they are really more fit out in nature, and that our meddling with clean environments has made them less fit. So what are you saying? Should we interfere with natural selection? Should we interfere with the cleanliness of our environment?
Yeah, as long as some people are passing on their genes to offspring more than others the gene pool is dynamic and evolution is occurring.
To say that medicine crosses the line is a little silly. Medicine is simply a tool we utilize to better deal with our environment. A lot like clothing, fire, and the wheel.
Of course, you might not think that medicine is successful in helping us better deal with our environment. But I'm sure some would argue the same thing about clothing, fire, and the wheel.
To say that medicine crosses the line is a little silly. Medicine is simply a tool we utilize to better deal with our environment. A lot like clothing, fire, and the wheel.
Of course, you might not think that medicine is successful in helping us better deal with our environment. But I'm sure some would argue the same thing about clothing, fire, and the wheel.
Yet another idiotic young college kid who feels the need to draw Nazi references to everything he doesn't like, since he can't effectively express himself any other way.
This whole thread is stupid. It doesn't matter if we're "weakening" the human race (which we're not). Evolution doesn't happen unless there is an environmental need, such as a widespread disease to which 5% of the population is genetically resistant. By allowing more people to live, we're actually increasing the chance for the presence of positive genes. Besides that, evolution happens on such a huge scale that to make the claim that giving a child medicine is "screwing up Darwin" is ridiculous.
The fact of the matter is that genetics works in a purely logical manner, while people's thoughts often operate in a purely emotional manner.
Making crutches only weakens the gene pool. Take myself, for instance. I have horrible eyesight and need to wear glasses. If those glasses fall off, I'm as good as lost since I can't see anything. In the past, a person like me would've died because he couldn't escape danger, find food, etc. But now, I can function normally.
Once glasses were invented, people with such a disability were no longer viewed as disabled, and people that once were considered undesirable (who wants a dude who can't survive on his own?) were now considered able-bodied and were able to breed just like everyone else. As a result, many more people have bad vision nowadays since those genes have been carelessly passed down en masse.
This is basic genetics. I'm not example of a perfect human, I'm an example of a person inflicted with flaws that were only able to carry on due to human interference.
Making crutches only weakens the gene pool. Take myself, for instance. I have horrible eyesight and need to wear glasses. If those glasses fall off, I'm as good as lost since I can't see anything. In the past, a person like me would've died because he couldn't escape danger, find food, etc. But now, I can function normally.
Once glasses were invented, people with such a disability were no longer viewed as disabled, and people that once were considered undesirable (who wants a dude who can't survive on his own?) were now considered able-bodied and were able to breed just like everyone else. As a result, many more people have bad vision nowadays since those genes have been carelessly passed down en masse.
This is basic genetics. I'm not example of a perfect human, I'm an example of a person inflicted with flaws that were only able to carry on due to human interference.
I'm not disputing the fact that medicine allows people to live who otherwise wouldn't. What I am disputing is the idea that this makes the gene pool worse. It's actually better for our species to have a large number of individuals alive, since this creates a greater chance for species advancement, either through medicine or through positive mutation. If some sort of catastrophe ever wipes out our ability to produce glasses (unlikely), you can bet that everyone with poor eyesight (myself included) will die once their glasses break, but in the meantime someone with poor eyesight, diabetes, etc. might be the next person to significantly advance the human race.
Cerpin Taxt
Lifer
- Feb 23, 2005
- 11,943
- 541
- 126
Darwinism, Natural Selection, Evolutionary Theory... none of them tell us what should happen. They merely describe what does happen. By treating diseases with therapies, you are not in any way contravening evolution.
This is also an entirely separate issue from your remarks about the natural balance of bacteria and virii in the human body. I agree that a healthy immune system requires stimulation in order to function most effectively.
I should have been more specific. While the frequency of a specific trait within a species will change over time, until our environment changes in such a way that it makes it impossible for people carrying bad genes to survive, there's no reason for the species to adapt. If such a change occurs, we won't have to do anything, because the "weak" people will die on their own.
did you get all your vaccinations growing up?
will you refuse to have your children vaccinated?
only the strong should survive...right?
Another excellent point. Thanks guys for keeping the thread civalized.
These vaccinations give the body a "hey, we're gonna force your body to devlop some antibodies to fight that which threatens the species" IMHO, this is a good thing. This points back to preservation of the species as a whole.
But that is a really, really good point. From a darwin perspective it is very relative to the point I was trying to make.....where does the line between strength of the body/species battle the will to protect the child?
Thanks again guys for keeping the discussion civil.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 10K
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 8K
-
Facebook
Twitter