Big question from this topic can arise: Are we evolving to creative, destructive, med./greed/luxury related modern introductions & to their constant exposures? Are these not like environmental changes to us? I feel, directly or indirectly, these may also be related to our changed need, survival & maintainance so should pass to our offspring.?
Biological Energy Redistribution?
- Thread starter KUMAR5
- Start date
Hi Kumar. The title of the thread does not seem to have anything to do with your opening post. However, to the question in your OP:
Our environment, including the one we create ourselves, may given enough time influence our genetic development. This provides that it somehow influences our reproduction ability. Actually, we see that modern people often have reduced fertility, so whatever the reasons are for this, it might eventually affect us genetically.
This is not something we will see anytime soom, however. It takes hundreds of generations for such things to manifest.
Hans
Hello MR Hans. Yes evolution can be slow manifestation. But there seem to be some other inherited predisposition which may pass onto next generation. I am not sure, getting type2 diabetic is evolutionary change or phenotype manifestation or other type of inheritance. I think, reproduction capability is not the only inherited change but other type of phenotype changes, influenced by environment, should also be happening. I am trying to check, whether changes in our environment & lifestyle(natural or unnatural) can redistribute body energy esp from physical to mental leading to weakening of physical level and strengthening the mental level. Probably, it may be a reason to getting more consciousnesses, intelligence, manipulations etc. leading to progressively increasing creative & destructive modern introductions.
Type 2 diabetes certainly has a genetic component. Some populations are far more likely to get it than others, and it runs in families. However, it is unlikely to have any evolutionary impact sice it mostly happens after repoduction age. A disease that will reduce your life expectancy to, say 25 years of age will impact your reproduction chances, but one that reduces your life expectancy to 50 will not.
Phenotype traits are not inherited.
Makes no sense, I'm afraid.
Hans
We are trying to check here, how our environment can cause energy redistribution esp from physical to mental. Whether such redistribution is evolved in many generations or inherited in one or two generation or acquired in current life time is different issue. Suppose we do not do normal physical activites but take normal or even more diet, how it can affect our mental level, is to be checked.
exchemist
Valued Senior Member
Not in the least.
Greetings. We may need to recheck it, if decreasing physical efforts lead to increase of mental efforts.
exchemist
Valued Senior Member
N
By the way this link you cite is a feeble one. All it shows is that "thinkers" take less physical exercise during the week than non-thinkers. But at weekends the differences vanish. Why? Well it seems obvious that the "thinkers" have found themselves jobs, or ways of doing their jobs, requiring less physical effort than the others. Whereas at the weekend they do the same things everyone does.
No. You persist in failing to understand how evolution works. I think I know why: I think you want to promote some pseudoscience to bolster some fad diet or other, so it would be convenient for you to find "scientific" support for the notion that certain foods "redirect" "energy" around the body. But there is no such evidence and the idea is silly.
By the way this link you cite is a feeble one. All it shows is that "thinkers" take less physical exercise during the week than non-thinkers. But at weekends the differences vanish. Why? Well it seems obvious that the "thinkers" have found themselves jobs, or ways of doing their jobs, requiring less physical effort than the others. Whereas at the weekend they do the same things everyone does.
Energy redistribution? Physical energy is real, mental energy is, at best hypothetical. It is certainly something different.
Hans
I am simply looking acquisition by any mean due to changed environment or preferences. May it be as evolution by constant exposures in many generations or just inherited due to exposures in past 1 or two generations or just acquired due to prolonged exposures in one life time. I think, changes may also be apparent in these circumstances.
Yes but we have to look energy redistribution from physical o mental. About 20% energy is consumed be brain activities. This matter is very important to understand, how we are diverting to physical work to mental works and most modern creative & destructive technologies & introductions( but still abnormal) may be due o this reason. I think, our children are also becoming lesser physically active but more mental active even from early age which should had no apprent previously. We have also need to look & compare behavior of those people who are still involved actively in physical work and of hose who are now involved in more mental work than normal physical work. [Probably, one example may be constant forum posers.
]
exchemist
Valued Senior Member
You fail to appreciate the basic point that evolution requires the passage of many generations to take effect. Any effect that takes place within one lifetime is NOT due to evolution.
Yes but what it will be called if effect takes place within one or two generations or within one lifetime?
There is something called epigenetics, which are changes in the genome due to environmental circumstances that get passed on to offspring. But these changes don't constitute Lamarkian evolution, to which you seem to be eluding. The changes are limited. But humans haven't stopped evolving just because we live in a modern society. We are indeed adapting to new technology. For instance, it has been observed that babies are being born larger now with larger heads, due to the prevalence of c-section surgery for births. In the past those children would have died, and perhaps the mother too.
Thanks. Does it mean we are slowly and progressively getting evolved to modern technology or modern environment? If so, I think, it will also be a shifting to mental from physical.
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
That's simply called personal lifestyle. You choices affect you and you alone. If you teach your children similar habits, that's simply sociology in action.
Why can't all our exposures, behaviour and lifestyle be the initial steps of getting us evolved to these? Obiously if these remain constant for prolonged time in many generations. Even if we do not evolve, we can still inherit few traits due to few mutations. Eg. Cooking came in our lifestyle later and we got evolved to it. Also to lactose in milk. Whatever creative and destructive technology we are introducing now that can also come under our further evolution because these can also be means for our survival and fitness due to which we can be naturally selected with these.
exchemist
Valued Senior Member
Because, as I have tried to explain to you before, evolution operates when a trait gives greater reproductive success. The trait is then handed on to more offspring and over many generations comes to be present throughout the population.
If a trait does NOT lead to greater reproductive success over many generations, it will not lead to any evolution. So you need to think whether the trait you have in mind will lead to the people involved having more babies than those that do not have it. If it won't, then it will not be preferred in the population, and no evolution will result.
To some degree. But technology isn't universal among all nations, and it might not last.