Home   |   Contact   |   Help

Get Our Newsletter
Sign up for our free newsletter to get training tips and stay up to date on Catalyst Athletics, and get a FREE issue of the Performance Menu journal.

Go Back   Catalyst Athletics Forums > Training > Other

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-13-2006, 05:52 PM   #1
kevin mckay
Senior Member
 
kevin mckay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Berkeley
Posts: 353
Default Evolution question

Please forgive my ignorance, but I am stumped.

1) How do we evolve if a negative trait does not kill us before we reproduce? For example if I have some genes that are maladapted to refined carbs but have already popped out a kid before it has killed me how is natural selection taking place even over say 20 generations? I mean how often do people really die of refined carb related illness before they can squeeze out a kid?

2) If we have been around for 2.5 million and grains have been around for 10k how much adaptation has taken place?

3) I guess I am asking is natural selection the only way we evolve or are there smaller feedback loops on like a cellular level. I just donít get it.
kevin mckay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2006, 07:17 AM   #2
Ben Kaminski
New Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 15
Default

I think there are mechanisms of evolution operating that are different from natural selection, which is more short term as you say.

Pottenger's cats, infertility caused by hyperinsulinemia, lactose/gluten tolerance of Caucasians, and other evidence suggests that effects besides death before offspring contribute to genetic adaptation.
Ben Kaminski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2006, 09:39 AM   #3
Robb Wolf
Senior Member
 
Robb Wolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,444
Default

Kevin-
Something that is emerging in evolutionary biology is a shift towards looking at the distribution of a gene across a population as opposed to focusing on the "fitness" of one individual. From this perspective we have a potentially much larger sample size with a given gene (or set of characteristics) interacting with the environment. It is here that we see a population wide tendency to show favorable or unfavorable adaptations to a given environmental stressor.

In the situation you described you, me and our immediate ancestors have not been impacted to a degree that makes it impossible for us to reproduce. In general we do however have smaller brains, less robust frames and decreased fertility vs our HG ancestors. Certainly a slide away from a better pairing of our genes and the environment.

Now we (as a species) have passed through the: Agricultural, Industrial, and information revolutions. Each of these steps have decreased our activity level and refined our diets, and our health has suffered. We are now facing a time when our diet is SO refined and activity levels SO low that children are failing to enter puberty due to hormonal derangement. Things have gotten bad enough that some WILL be weeded from the gene pool before being able to reproduce. The folks who go on are better adapted to: refined foods, low activity and crushing boredom as a lifeway....unless things shift so dramatically that fertility as a whole drops to un-sustainable levels. That is unlikely to happen but it's not necessary to die early to be removed from the gene-pool.

In addition to natural selection there is epigenics which is the interaction of the organism with the environment. This can effect gene expression to a remarkable degree, although most geneticists do not think this changes heritable traits ala Lemarkism. Good follow up reading includes:
African Exodus
The Blind Watch Maker
__________________
"Survival will be neither to the strongest of the species, nor to the most intelligent, but to those most adaptable to change."
C. Darwin

Robb's Blog
Robb Wolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2006, 09:42 AM   #4
Scott Kustes
Senior Member
 
Scott Kustes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 1,048
Default

1. Right...we are seeing maladaptation and infertility occurring in obese kids. That is a form of natural selection. Beyond that, in a natural environment, which humans do not exist in any longer, natural selection doesn't necessarily have to kill you before you procreate, just before you outprocreate that with the beneficial traits. If you die after having 1 child, who dies after having 1 child, who dies after having 1 child, ad infinitum while Ben lives to have 3 kids, who live to have 3 kids, ad inifinitum, whatever beneficial trait Ben has passed on will eventually overcome and outcompete your underperforming genes.

Note: the above story is not intended to insult anyone's DNA. The author has not examined the named subjects DNA.

2. Little adaptation has occured. It seems that most people have some level of gluten intolerance, obviously some exhibit overt symptoms and are hypersensitive. I would think those people are in a better situation than those that are slightly sensitive and damage their bodies for their entire life because "it doesn't bother me."

3. I think this is splitting hairs. If it knocks one out of the breeding cycle, whether at the cellular level or because you have short legs and can't outrun the tiger, it is natural selection at work.

Edit: Robb replied while I was posting...sorry for any duplications/discrepancies.
__________________
Scott

Fitness Spotlight
Scott Kustes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2006, 02:02 PM   #5
Jeremy Jones
Senior Member
 
Jeremy Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 181
Default

This might be why we are attracted to 'healthy looking' people. People who are far out of shape, extremely overweight, extremely underweight, etc are less likely to find mates.


Health and strong reproductive traits are what our sex drives are based upon.



The problem is, many people these days are starting to develop skewed opinions because of society(unnaturally skinny woman as 'healthy', extremely ripped men as attractive, and on the opposite side of the spectrum - being obese is okay, etc).


Being skinning is not healthy.
Being 'totally ripped' is not a good thing.
Being obese is not okay.
__________________
-Jeremy Jones
www.diablocrossfit.com
Jeremy Jones is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:59 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Subscribe to our Newsletter


Receive emails with training tips, news updates, events info, sale notifications and more.
ASK GREG

Submit your question to be answered by Greg Everett in the Performance Menu or on the website

Submit Your Question
WEIGHTLIFTING TEAM

Catalyst Athletics is a USA Weightlifting team of competitive Olympic-style weightlifters with multiple national team medals.

Read More
Olympic Weightlifting Book
Catalyst Athletics
Contact Us
About
Help
Newsletter
Products & Services
Gym
Store
Seminars
Weightlifting Team
Performance Menu
Magazine Home
Subscriber Login
Issues
Articles
Workouts
About the Program
Workout Archives
Exercise Demos
Text Only
Instructional Content
Exercise Demos
Video Gallery
Free Articles
Free Recipes
Resources
Recommended Books & DVDs
Olympic Weightlifting Guide
Discussion Forum
Weight Conversion Calculator