Human evolution on the upswing

31st December 2007

Human evolution on the upswing

posted in Science, Society by themaiden |

I found this article rather fascinating mostly because I’ve long thought that “our technological and medical advances have removed most of the selection pressures acting upon us”. That such is not the case makes for interesting possibilities.

Human evolution is speeding up. Around 40,000 years ago our genes began to evolve much faster. By 5000 years ago they were evolving 30 to 40 times faster than ever before and it seems highly likely that we continue to evolve at this super speed today.

Our population explosion and rapidly changing lifestyles seem to be the drivers of this acceleration, the discovery of which contradicts the widely held notion that our technological and medical advances have removed most of the selection pressures acting upon us.

Modern times causing human evolution to accelerate - being-human - 14 December 2007 - New Scientist

Popularity: 4%

Love the post? Hate it? Please let me know. Leave a comment and spread the word: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.

This entry was posted on Monday, December 31st, 2007 at 10:52 am and is filed under Science, Society. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

1 On December 31st, 2007, the chaplain said:

That is an interesting finding. Perhaps it won’t be long before we’re able to track evolution as it happens instead of reconstructing it after the fact.

2 On December 31st, 2007, Friendly Neighborhood DJ said:

You foolish fool–evolution isn’t on the upswing, god is just intelligently designing better babies! Yes, even the Perfect Almighty needs some practice generations before he gets his formula down.

OK, seriously, that is interesting stuff, and I can’t help but wonder what this ever-speedier evolution is going to mean for future generations.

3 On December 31st, 2007, themaiden said:

Oh… right, DJ. I forgot about that. Must be ID on the upswing.

4 On December 31st, 2007, ohwilleke said:

“Our population explosion and rapidly changing lifestyles seem to be the drivers of this acceleration, the discovery of which contradicts the widely held notion that our technological and medical advances have removed most of the selection pressures acting upon us.”

When the United States was founded a mere 232 years ago, the life expectency of an American was about 40 years, that of the most direly afflicted third world countries today. Disease was a major factor catastrophically influencing Native American populations in the early days of colonization, and the advent of modern medicine wasn’t a major impact until the late 1800s, about five generations ago.

Much of the world has seen the impact of modern technology and medical advances much later than the U.S. and Europe, or hasn’t seen them at all in an evolutionarily significant way.

Of course, you can still have gene pool changes without actually requiring anyone to “not survive”. Indeed, having kids earlier is as powerful a force as having more kids from a population genetics perspective.

5 On January 3rd, 2008, DeeJay said:

maybe that’s why as we get older time seems to pass quicker lol

6 On January 4th, 2008, Ben Abbott said:

Total BS to me.

“Human evolution” is a contradiction in itself.

If a gene pool is expanding, that doesn’t mean its evolving, but rather than all variations are surviving.

7 On January 4th, 2008, themaiden said:

Ben,

I honestly have no idea why you think that human evolution is a contradiction. It is no more contradictory than any other kind of evolution.

Second, why do you say “if a gene pool is expanding…”? What I quoted quite clearly says “speeding up” and “evolve much faster”.

Third, evolution is a the change in the frequencies of various variations in a population. If all variations survive, it is still evolution.

8 On January 8th, 2008, Ben Abbott said:

Maiden,

The term “human” refers to *one* population genetically compatible organisms. Evolution produces a diversity of genetically incompatible populations of organisms.

Thus, I don’t see how “human” + “evolution” is an appropriate combination.

When our genetic pool actually diverges into another, it won’t be correct to qualify both pools as “human”.

Hence, my qualification of “oxymoron”, a subtle point, but I think a valid one.

Regarding the “speeding up” part. I’m certain the process isn’t speeding up. Rather the product of that linear process is expanding at an increasing rate. This is my biggest beef with the article. It will infer in many minds that we, as a species, are accelerating toward some end or destiny