Is modern medicine interfering with evolution?

blahblah99

Platinum Member
Oct 10, 2000
2,689
0
0
A few hundred years ago, technology and modern medicine didn't exist to provide aid for genetic mutations that would have otherwise killed humans prematurely. Genetic disorders that are treatable by technology and medicine are allowing those treated to live long enough to pass on their DNA to their young, thereby interfering with the natural process of evolution.

 

chambersc

Diamond Member
Feb 11, 2005
6,247
0
0
Originally posted by: blahblah99
A few hundred years ago, technology and modern medicine didn't exist to provide aid for genetic mutations that would have otherwise killed humans prematurely. Genetic disorders that are treatable by technology and medicine are allowing those treated to live long enough to pass on their DNA to their young, thereby interfering with the natural process of evolution.

a counter argument would be that medicine is the natural evolutinoary process that will eventually lead to longer lives and a more pleasant well-being.
 

jagec

Lifer
Apr 30, 2004
24,442
6
81
So? What makes evolution so great? Modern technology allows us to exceed the limits of evolution.

If you wanted to give up modern medicine in order to preserve evolution, you'd be killing Stephen Hawking. Think about it.
 

Mrvile

Lifer
Oct 16, 2004
14,066
1
0
Well medicine is the result of the human mind, and with smarter humans = better gene pool? I dunno, trying to come up with a counter.
 

BUrassler

Senior member
Mar 21, 2005
811
0
0
Originally posted by: Mrvile
Well medicine is the result of the human mind, and with smarter humans = better gene pool? I dunno, trying to come up with a counter.

That is along the line I was thinking. The development of the human mind is a part of evolution. Throughout time there have been changes brought on my new inventions (from an evolved mind) that changed man. The wheel, fire, plumbing, clean drinking water, penicillin. They all changed mankind. The process of our natural evolution and the effects it brings are intertwinded in my opinion.
 

TraumaRN

Diamond Member
Jun 5, 2005
6,893
63
91
Originally posted by: blahblah99
A few hundred years ago, technology and modern medicine didn't exist to provide aid for genetic mutations that would have otherwise killed humans prematurely. Genetic disorders that are treatable by technology and medicine are allowing those treated to live long enough to pass on their DNA to their young, thereby interfering with the natural process of evolution.

Problem is if we let those people(as in those with disabilities, chronic diseases/disorders) die again people would say we are no better than Stalin or Hitler.
 

ShOcKwAvE827

Senior member
Jul 28, 2001
950
0
0
This is more interfering with natural selection, but my human biology teacher brought up an interesting point a few years ago in undergrad. Since so many women nowadays are having C-sections when those same women would have died 100 years ago, we are often times selecting for the trait of smaller and smaller birth canals. He said after a few hundred years this could lead to a significant amount of women not being able to have vaginal births.
 
Apr 17, 2005
13,465
3
81
a lot of genetic mutations are non-lethal or get activated after the individual has reproduced...so it doesnt really matter.
 

Amplifier

Banned
Dec 25, 2004
3,143
0
0
Originally posted by: ShOcKwAvE827
This is more interfering with natural selection, but my human biology teacher brought up an interesting point a few years ago in undergrad. Since so many women nowadays are having C-sections when those same women would have died 100 years ago, we are often times selecting for the trait of smaller and smaller birth canals. He said after a few hundred years this could lead to a significant amount of women not being able to have vaginal births.

Is it like how aliens (the real ones) don't have mouths?
 

Kelemvor

Lifer
May 23, 2002
16,928
8
81
Originally posted by: Amplifier
So how can we begin purifing our genepool?

That' what the Darwin awards are for. Most people end up weeding themselves out of the gene pool...
 
Nov 3, 2004
10,491
22
81
Originally posted by: ShOcKwAvE827
This is more interfering with natural selection, but my human biology teacher brought up an interesting point a few years ago in undergrad. Since so many women nowadays are having C-sections when those same women would have died 100 years ago, we are often times selecting for the trait of smaller and smaller birth canals. He said after a few hundred years this could lead to a significant amount of women not being able to have vaginal births.

I disagree, since when do I marry someone for the size of their birth canal?
 

Amplifier

Banned
Dec 25, 2004
3,143
0
0
Originally posted by: IAteYourMother
Originally posted by: ShOcKwAvE827
This is more interfering with natural selection, but my human biology teacher brought up an interesting point a few years ago in undergrad. Since so many women nowadays are having C-sections when those same women would have died 100 years ago, we are often times selecting for the trait of smaller and smaller birth canals. He said after a few hundred years this could lead to a significant amount of women not being able to have vaginal births.

I disagree, since when do I marry someone for the size of their birth canal?

Missing the point but w/e
 

her209

No Lifer
Oct 11, 2000
56,336
11
0
Originally posted by: ShOcKwAvE827
This is more interfering with natural selection, but my human biology teacher brought up an interesting point a few years ago in undergrad. Since so many women nowadays are having C-sections when those same women would have died 100 years ago, we are often times selecting for the trait of smaller and smaller birth canals. He said after a few hundred years this could lead to a significant amount of women not being able to have vaginal births.
I heard to the contrary that C-sections are more risky than vaginal birth. This was on World News Tonight with Elizabeth Vargas a few weeks back.
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
The brain is a part of the evolutionary process, problems we can solve through intelligence ARE being addressed through evolution, just not in the way people normally think of it. Evolution gave us these great brains, are you telling me that using them to prolong our lives is somehow NOT a part of the natural process? A hundred years ago, we had a huge problem with polio, thanks to modern medicine, it is no longer a problem. How is this any less a result of evolution than if we had waited a few hundred thousand years and become immune to polio "naturally"? Both methods involved a species defending itself against a threat to its genetic survival, the only difference is that our way was much faster.

Which is kind of the point. Evolution is, by and large, a method for a species to develop beneficial traits that help it survive. And quite frankly, evolving to the point where we HAVE modern medicine is a lot more effective of an evolutionary path than evolving our immune systems to the point where we don't NEED modern medicine. There are no "unnatural" traits, our intelligence is more valuable than having a strong immune system in the evolutionary scheme of things. We have evolted past the need for that sort of thing, just like being the biggest, strongest human around no longer has the survival value it once had.
 

Forsythe

Platinum Member
May 2, 2004
2,825
0
0
Originally posted by: blahblah99
A few hundred years ago, technology and modern medicine didn't exist to provide aid for genetic mutations that would have otherwise killed humans prematurely. Genetic disorders that are treatable by technology and medicine are allowing those treated to live long enough to pass on their DNA to their young, thereby interfering with the natural process of evolution.

No ******. We passed natural evolution a long time ago (non-intelligent evolution). This is old news. The world is in the hand of human evolution.
 

chambersc

Diamond Member
Feb 11, 2005
6,247
0
0
Originally posted by: jagec
So? What makes evolution so great? Modern technology allows us to exceed the limits of evolution.

If you wanted to give up modern medicine in order to preserve evolution, you'd be killing Stephen Hawking. Think about it.

The two aren't mutually exclusive. Modern medicine is a part of evolution. Evolution is so many things and one of them is modern medicine.
 

Forsythe

Platinum Member
May 2, 2004
2,825
0
0
Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
Originally posted by: Amplifier
So how can we begin purifing our genepool?

I vote for airborne ebola virus.

Ebola is selective, but it'd select only people that have resistances towards ebola, and such would make no sense other than just killing loads of people. I suggest we just kill everyone with an iq of under 120.


(Written for the fun of it, don't take it seriously.)
 

Forsythe

Platinum Member
May 2, 2004
2,825
0
0
Originally posted by: chambersc
Originally posted by: jagec
So? What makes evolution so great? Modern technology allows us to exceed the limits of evolution.

If you wanted to give up modern medicine in order to preserve evolution, you'd be killing Stephen Hawking. Think about it.

The two aren't mutually exclusive. Modern medicine is a part of evolution. Evolution is so many things and one of them is modern medicine.

Not really, those are human evolution. The fact is, that we will not evolve anymore, as our genes will spread out and we will slowly but steadily, remain the same.
The only choice of evolution man has today is technological evolution. Transhumanists rejoice. *rejoicing*
 

The Batt?sai

Diamond Member
Jan 18, 2005
5,170
1
0
Originally posted by: BUrassler
Originally posted by: Mrvile
Well medicine is the result of the human mind, and with smarter humans = better gene pool? I dunno, trying to come up with a counter.

That is along the line I was thinking. The development of the human mind is a part of evolution. Throughout time there have been changes brought on my new inventions (from an evolved mind) that changed man. The wheel, fire, plumbing, clean drinking water, penicillin. They all changed mankind. The process of our natural evolution and the effects it brings are intertwinded in my opinion.

feeling like i read this same thread before but :confused:

good thoughts here
 

everman

Lifer
Nov 5, 2002
11,288
1
0
Once genetic engineering, nanotech, etc are into full swing we won't have to worry about any of this. Everything will go far beyond biology.
Think 100+years from now, but probably not much more than that. We'll be creating ourselves however we want.
 

Amplifier

Banned
Dec 25, 2004
3,143
0
0
Originally posted by: Forsythe
I suggest we just kill everyone with an iq of under 120.


(Written seriously.)

Because IQ is a relative scale when you kill the people who have low IQ's the whole population has their IQ lowered as a result. So the people who used to be 120's would be lowered to 100 and thus have to be killed.

It's an infinite loop that only Steven Hawkings would survive.