Slashdot Mirror


The Coevolution of Lice & Their Hosts

eldavojohn writes "It might be an uncomfortable subject but parasites are an interesting subject when it comes to evolution. Ever wonder if pocket gophers have lice? Well, they do. And most interesting of all is the evolution of these lice mirroring the evolution of gophers. To study the genes of lice may shed just as much light on evolutionary trees as studying the genes of the actual host the lice has evolved to. The most unsettling result from these studies is that human head lice and human pubic lice (crabs) vary so greatly that they are in two separate genera. There were similarities between our pubic lice and the lice found on gorillas. Scientists came to the conclusion, which they published today in BMC Biology, is just as striking as their earlier one about head lice. But it is hardly the same. We did not get pubic lice from other hominids. We got them from the ancestors of gorillas."

179 comments

  1. Gorilla / Human lovin'? by Whiney+Mac+Fanboy · · Score: 2, Informative
    We did not get pubic lice from other hominids. We got them from the ancestors of gorillas.

    Did anyone else read that line and think that this was article could have some link to the Monkey's Uncle (proto chimp/proto human interbreeding) story from a while ago on slashdot?

    Afraid not, TFA states:

    Is this evidence of a Pliocene love that dare not speak its name? Not according to Reed. He and his colleagues suggest that hominids might have gotten crabs by eating gorilla flesh, perhaps scavenging a carcass. Or they might have slept at nesting sites that gorillas contaminated with their lice. This study just so happens to have come out a few months after another team of scientists showed that chimpanzees not only gave humans HIV but also gave gorillas a related strain of the virus. If chimpanzees can give gorillas a blood-borne virus, it's not too surprising that gorillas could give hominids some lice.
    Anyway, best article linked from /. in ages. Great, thought provoking read.

    I'm going to wonder whether there were savanna gorillas or deep Forest hominids all night now :-)
    --
    There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
    1. Re:Gorilla / Human lovin'? by Alien54 · · Score: 1

      and the creationist crowd says:

      Not only do they say we descended from apes, but we also got their crabs.

      I can see them freaking out on this

      --
      "It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
    2. Re:Gorilla / Human lovin'? by ralphdaugherty · · Score: 1

      FTFA: He and his colleagues suggest that hominids might have gotten crabs by eating gorilla flesh, perhaps scavenging a carcass.

            This speculation makes more sense than a hominid might have laid down and slept where a gorilla slept?

            For an internal assimilation such as AIDS I understand, but what's so hard to figure out about this?

        rd

    3. Re:Gorilla / Human lovin'? by tansey · · Score: 2, Funny

      Pretty women out walking with gorillas down my street
      From my window I'm staring while my coffee grows cold
      Look over there! (Where?)
      There's a lady that I used to know
      She's married now, or engaged, or something, so I am told

      Is she really going out with him?
      Is she really gonna take him home tonight?
      Is she really going out with him?
      'Cause if my eyes don't deceive me,
      There's something going wrong around here


      It's amazing how accurate Joe Jackson can be.

    4. Re:Gorilla / Human lovin'? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Take that monkey man!

    5. Re:Gorilla / Human lovin'? by Walt+Dismal · · Score: 3, Funny

      Ohh. You said 'pubic lice'. I misread the post. I thought you'd said "RIAA". Never mind.

    6. Re:Gorilla / Human lovin'? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it was Human-Gorilla love, then the question is: Was it our Daddy^n or our Momma^n that did the dirty?

    7. Re:Gorilla / Human lovin'? by evilgiu · · Score: 1

      It seems pretty clear that somewhere along our evolutionary track, someone got a nice blowjob from a gorilla.

      [use your own imaginations here] :P

      --
      It's not easy being green.
    8. Re:Gorilla / Human lovin'? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you mean to say, God intended us to have sex with Gorilla?

      He is a dirty dirty man! Watching all this from above...

    9. Re:Gorilla / Human lovin'? by radtea · · Score: 3, Informative

      Anyway, best article linked from /. in ages. Great, thought provoking read.

      It's an excellent article, but the summary makes no sense, which at least encouraged me to read the article to figure out what the hell they were talking about. For example, from the summary:

      The most unsettling result from these studies is that human head lice and human pubic lice (crabs) vary so greatly that they are in two separate genera.

      1) What is "unsettling" about this? Anyone? No prior deeply held beliefs have been overturned. No profound conceptual schemes have been shaken to their very foundations. Parasites are known to be highly specialized. This fact has been published repeatedly for decades, always with great emphasis on how apparently hard it is to believe. After a couple of decades of being routinely reminded that individual species of ticks and fleas and lice are hyper-specialized, do you think we might ask that people stop presenting this fact as something astonishingly new?

      2) The statement is contradicted by the article. What the article says is that head lice and pubic lice in humans are so different morphologically that "early taxonimists" assigned them to different genera. The article implies but does not say explicitly that this early assignment was not in fact justified.

      In any case, this is an absolutely fascinating, albeit tentative and partial, reconstruction of the hominid evolutionary tree from parasite DNA, and I'm sure that as more data from different parasites becomes available we will be in for some real surprises. Internal parasites that are less likely to be passed between species should provide a record that is clearer than the lice record, where despite the relative paucity of inter-species transfers the record has clearly been muddied several times.

      --
      Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
    10. Re:Gorilla / Human lovin'? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Paleontologists know that the human species has gone through stages in which there were "gracile" and "robustus" branches. The graciles were smarter and are our ancestors, while the robustus groups were big jocks who possibly could have tackled gorillas. And passed the lice on to the graciles, of course.

    11. Re:Gorilla / Human lovin'? by Jamil+Karim · · Score: 1

      Don't fret -- you aren't far off. There is another study that says we got the RIAA from gorillas, too.

    12. Re:Gorilla / Human lovin'? by T.E.D. · · Score: 1

      The most unsettling result from these studies is that human head lice and human pubic lice (crabs) vary so greatly that they are in two separate genera.


      1) What is "unsettling" about this? Anyone? No prior deeply held beliefs have been overturned.


      There was a point where our human/chimp ancestors were covered with hair like modern chimps. On humans, the hair more or less receded to just our heads and nether regions. At this point, the existing hair-parasites should have started their independent evolutionary tracks.

      Instead, we apparently got the public lice straight from the hair lice in gorillas long after this split. Given how humans typically get such lice today, yes, I do find that unsettling. Call me a prude if you like.

      They were nice enough to present theories that the lice were acquired by sleeping on recently killed gorilla skins or something.
    13. Re:Gorilla / Human lovin'? by Drooling+Iguana · · Score: 1

      It's times like this that I'm really glad that TV and videogames have killed my imagination.

      --
      ... I'm addicted to placebos
    14. Re:Gorilla / Human lovin'? by RayHs · · Score: 1

      We did not get pubic lice from other hominids. We got them from the ancestors of gorillas. Did these gorillas ancestors have pubic lice and head lice? and if so which one did hominid pubic lice come from? and if from gorilla ancestor head lice, how?
  2. hmmmmm by User+956 · · Score: 4, Funny

    There were similarities between our pubic lice and the lice found on gorillas.

    Look, I don't know what these scientists have been doing with the gorillas in this study, but this seems like evidence of *something*.

    --
    The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
    1. Re:hmmmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get your stinking paws off me, you damned dirty ape.

    2. Re:hmmmmm by mrbluze · · Score: 1

      Perhaps the evolutionary advantage of having lice is that it.. hmmm *scratches head*... it helps you think!

      --
      Do it yourself, because no one else will do it yourself. [beta blockade 10-17 Feb]
    3. Re:hmmmmm by inviolet · · Score: 1

      Perhaps the evolutionary advantage of having lice is that it.. hmmm *scratches head*... it helps you think!

      You laugh, but lice do provide a benefit: their irritation encourages mutual grooming, which is a primary source of the social bonding that every tribe needs.

      --
      FATMOUSE + YOU = FATMOUSE
    4. Re:hmmmmm by Ed_Pinkley · · Score: 1

      Punchline without a joke:

      "Ok, I'll do it... but it will take me a while to get the 500 dollars."

      Tip your waitstaff!

      --
      "Long time listener, first time caller."
  3. Not humans... a human. by gbulmash · · Score: 3, Funny

    It's not that humans got crabs from gorillas. One human did. Skeezy McTarzan.

    1. Re:Not humans... a human. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OI, I have never slept with no Gorilla, A few dogs maybe ...

  4. Dude... by Starburnt · · Score: 2, Funny

    We did not get pubic lice from other hominids. We got them from the ancestors of gorillas." Just.... Dude.

  5. hair shape by mastershake_phd · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I heard somewhere and I believe it to be true that African Americans hair has a oval shape instead of round. For this reason the lice cant grab on, and they don't have lice problems.

    1. Re:hair shape by thePsychologist · · Score: 1

      That's not true: read this article. It's rare but not impossible, and more common in other countries.

      --
      "What lies behind us, and what lies before us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us." Ralph Waldo Emerson
    2. Re:hair shape by mastershake_phd · · Score: 1

      Its true, from the article you listed: studies have found that up to 25% of white children have had head lice, compared to less than 1% of African American children

      African American hair is more elliptical than white children's hair and head lice find it difficult to hold onto elliptical hair

    3. Re:hair shape by maxume · · Score: 1

      It depends on the values of "don't" and "true" that you use:

      "In Africa, where the percentage of children with head lice is higher, lice have adapted their claws to better grasp elliptical hair"

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    4. Re:hair shape by mastershake_phd · · Score: 4, Funny

      "In Africa, where the percentage of children with head lice is higher, lice have adapted their claws to better grasp elliptical hair"

      It looks like its an arms race then.

    5. Re:hair shape by Xonstantine · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It looks like its an arms race then.

      That's exactly what parasite-host relationships are. Evolution isn't so much a march in a straight line, but a vicious cycle of decimation-immunization-regression to naivete-back to decimation, ie, the Red Queen hypothesis. The really interesting thing is the degree to which parasites have affected evolution. A lot of secondary sex characteristics, because of their biological expense, are really good indicators of parasite resistance.

    6. Re:hair shape by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1

      "arms" -> "claws"

      It was a pun...

    7. Re:hair shape by istartedi · · Score: 1

      It sounds like these kids get a break for being a minority in this case. In the US where African ancestry puts you in the minority, there might not be a big enough survival advantage for the necessary mutation to dominate the louse population. Even though there are pockets of the US where African ancestry is in the majority, the mutation may not have taken hold yet. If true, this might indicate that it takes a while for lice to evolve this feature. To really answer that question though, we should do a comparison in school districts where African ancestry is in the majority, and has been for quite some time.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    8. Re:hair shape by rez_rat · · Score: 2, Funny

      JUST LIKE a Slashdot'ian to look down at the wierd things in his bush... and try to EXPLAIN them!!

      I can't help it: "Just imagine a Beowolf cluster of these!!!"

      haha

      S-

    9. Re:hair shape by rez_rat · · Score: 1

      Now that I think about it...

      I guess that they ARE a Beowulf cluster!!!

    10. Re:hair shape by Arker · · Score: 3, Informative

      It all goes back to the very tight coupling between parasite and host. Even tiny differences between different populations in a host species are mirrored in parasite populations. So lice populations found among hosts of European ancestry have a difficult time with African hair forms. African lice populations, however, do not. Apparently lice populations in North America are mostly of European derivation, but that is far from true in other areas.

      --
      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
      Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
    11. Re:hair shape by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a racist comment. Any further consideration of this subject is barred.

      Stop thinking immediately.

      Present yourself to your local thought control office so that your brain can be re-aligned.

    12. Re:hair shape by maxume · · Score: 1

      It seems somewhat more likely that the lice in America, for one reason or another, over the periods of history, became less grippy(perhaps they pinch skin less and create less removal incentive?).

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    13. Re:hair shape by inviolet · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It sounds like these kids get a break for being a minority in this case. In the US where African ancestry puts you in the minority, there might not be a big enough survival advantage for the necessary mutation to dominate the louse population. Even though there are pockets of the US where African ancestry is in the majority, the mutation may not have taken hold yet. If true, this might indicate that it takes a while for lice to evolve this feature. To really answer that question though, we should do a comparison in school districts where African ancestry is in the majority, and has been for quite some time.

      One confounding factor in this issue is the fact that WASPs can also have elliptical hair. That's what "naturally curly" hair is. African hair is curly for the same reason, albeit more so.

      --
      FATMOUSE + YOU = FATMOUSE
    14. Re:hair shape by istartedi · · Score: 1

      Good point. A non-biased way would involve, perhaps, taking hair samples from all the students. You have to snip a lock too, not just a single hair. I remember how we measured the width of a hair in one of our high school science classes. It turns out that on a lot of people, there is a lot of variation in width, and perhaps there is variation in shape too but we didn't attempt to measure that.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    15. Re:hair shape by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lazy American lice!!

    16. Re:hair shape by SmittyTheBold · · Score: 1

      Not specifically "African" hair but curly hair in general. If it's curly, the cross-section is more oval than circular.

      --
      ± 29 dB
    17. Re:hair shape by Derf+the · · Score: 1

      Now imagine them with lasers on there heads.

      --
      No. You can't look at my Sig; it's mine, and I'm not showing you.
  6. Dating the first clothing by lawpoop · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I remember something from my days of getting an anthropology degree where some scientists was trying to guess the approximate date when humans first started wearing clothing. Tools made from bone and rock last a long time, so you can easily get a good idea of when people started making new types of tools. But stuff like clothing, rope, or weaving rots away pretty quickly, so finding them in archaeological digs is pretty rare.

    IIRC, there are two types of lice or fleas. One kind lived on human skin and hair, and the other preferred clothing and blankets and lived only in artificial fabrics. The scientists were trying to see when the fabric-preferring bugs diverged from a common ancestor by examining the genetics. Really clever!

    --
    Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
    -- Pablo Picasso
    1. Re:Dating the first clothing by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      "One kind lived on human skin and hair, and the other preferred clothing and blankets and lived only in artificial fabrics. "

      That's why you should never buy that tacky polyester K-Mart sh*t. Get natural fabrics.

    2. Re:Dating the first clothing by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      All fabrics are artificial.. I don't think I've ever seen a blanket or a shirt tree.

      Kinda reminds me of people who complain about fruit having "chemicals" in them.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    3. Re:Dating the first clothing by zappepcs · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This is really interesting. There are other things where we know what the change was, and when it happened that might affect evolution in some species. I wonder if anyone is studying them.

      My thoughts: The widespread use of DDT is a known event that had wide ranging affects on the environment. Are there evident evolutionary effects on insects?
      Does anyone study what the common cold looks like after many attempts to inoculate us against it?

      I wonder if there are defined evolutionary differences in any species after the plagues?

      Interestingly, we apparently don't even know if the food we eat today has the same nutritional value of the food that humans were eating 100 years ago.

      Very interesting.

    4. Re:Dating the first clothing by tomhudson · · Score: 2, Funny

      "All fabrics are artificial.. I don't think I've ever seen a blanket or a shirt tree."

      You're confusing the thing with what its made of. While there aren't "blanket trees," there certainly ARE cotton plants, and wool occurs naturally as well - ask any sheep. So you can make blankets and clothing out of cotton, or wool, or any other naturally-occuring fibre - but you won't find any naturally-occuring polyester. And don't get me started on how many naugas you have to kill to get even one decent naugahide.

    5. Re:Dating the first clothing by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1

      The question then becomes what the OP meant by "artificial fabric"...

    6. Re:Dating the first clothing by rez_rat · · Score: 2, Interesting

      So why do all those cavemen (cavewomen?) women wear bras, and men don't?

      Seriously... in the study of ancient clothing... was it really that important for a woman to cover up her upper parts?? On the other hand (hehe), was this just something we devised later on? :-P

      Sounds stupid, but, ... I'm curious.

      S-

    7. Re:Dating the first clothing by rez_rat · · Score: 1

      Really.

      To follow this. What IS the purpose of clothing? I can see the purpose of loincloths. They protect against gettin' hit by lots of things! haha But, "pants" "trousers" and "blouses" (or whatever all you Europeans call them)...

      Why?

      In my culture. We shed our clothing when we participate in our traditional rituals; including ceremonies where we sit together in groups and sing songs, take sweat baths (super hot saunas), and make protection prayers upon one another.

      I for one... ( and this is not one of those "I for one" jokes)
      I for one... would like to know how some of these anthropolegic (sp?) theories came to be. Please. If anyone cares to comment.. Please be willing to take a 140+ degree Navajo sweat bath.

      S-

    8. Re:Dating the first clothing by HeadlessNotAHorseman · · Score: 1

      Maybe the lice are related to when we first wore clothing. Head lice can easily jump off your head onto other surfaces or people, but when one is wearing clothing, pubic lice cannot. So maybe once we started wearing clothing, the head lice could no longer do their little jumping trick anymore unless they were on your head, so they stopped living in the nether regions. That left no competition for pubic lice, who were happy to spread through sexual contact (perverts!)

      --
      I like my coffee the way I like my women - roasted and ground up into little tiny pieces.
    9. Re:Dating the first clothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In my part of the world (central Europe), the primary purpose of clothes is to keep you warm, since it can get quite cold in winter, and even in summer it is not really warm enough to do without. Also, as Caucasians our skin is more sensitive to sunlight than those of folks who live closer to the equator, and the sun can be quite intense here if you expose yourself to the sun directly.

    10. Re:Dating the first clothing by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      Does anyone study what the common cold looks like after many attempts to inoculate us against it?

      IANAS, but I would hazard the answer to this is "yes," but that the results are inconclusive. The whole problem with the common cold, what makes it so difficult to inoculate against, is that it routinely "looks like" so many different things that we can't come up with a vaccine that will "recognize" them all.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    11. Re:Dating the first clothing by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      Gorilla skins are probably the best "off the rack" fit nature provides, let's face it - Chimpas are too small and the sleaves on an Oragutang are way too long.

      Seriously though, INA-Anthorpologist but I would have thought that prototype clothing was made from animal skins? Early Europeans are known to have used whale skins to make portable huts and what little is left of tribal cultures today still wear animal skins or plated leaves.

      TFA - Another thing to take into consideration is that tribal people have a strong tendancy to look at other tribes as an inferior race of humans. The point here is that tribes who come into regular contact with great apes refer to them as an inferior tribe.

      Disclaimer: I don't subscribe to racisim but I acknowledge I live inside the MonkeySphere.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    12. Re:Dating the first clothing by Lars+Arvestad · · Score: 1
      The clothing dating you are referring to was actually also featured on Slashdot under the Best /. Headline Ever: Pants Were Optional, 100,000 Years Ago.

      That paper, with its abstract available from PubMed, was from Mark Stoneking's group and I believe they said in interviews that they intended to pursue studying the difference between head lice and pubic lice to figure out when we lost our fur. So maybe this result tells us why there was no follow-up paper: The data could not be used to address that issue.

      Well, maybe I should the paper. After I am done posting at /. of course!

      --
      Reality or nothing.
    13. Re:Dating the first clothing by hazem · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ever try cooking bacon naked? THAT's why we have clothes.

    14. Re:Dating the first clothing by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      IIRC, there are two types of lice or fleas. One kind lived on human skin and hair, and the other preferred clothing

      RTFA. There are three types: Head, pubic, clothing.

    15. Re:Dating the first clothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TFA is wrong, they missed off special flied.

    16. Re:Dating the first clothing by hamburger+lady · · Score: 1

      jesus, do you have a camera hidden in my kitchen or something?

      --

      ---
      Is this the MPAA? Is this the RIAA? Is this the DMCA? I thought it was the USA!
    17. Re:Dating the first clothing by lawpoop · · Score: 1

      I was using artificial to mean 'man-made'. I guess the phrase 'artificial fabrics' is kind of redundant in this context.

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    18. Re:Dating the first clothing by lawpoop · · Score: 1

      I was indicating that I didn't remember if the research was centered around fleas or lice.

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    19. Re:Dating the first clothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here in northern europe (Ireland), I assure you the primary purpose of clothing has always seemd to be to avoid death by exposure. You can die of hypothermia/exposure in hours even in little old rainy, mild Ireland (actually, you might even die slightly faster than in some colder countries, because when you're soaked through you lose heat faster...). Even in summer (though more usually in winter, granted).

      People always think "oh, the desert, that's a harsh environment. Dead in no-time. Be careful". They don't always appreciate that after few days of wandering lost in damp and foggy marshes on the mountains in a t-shirt and shorts, your flesh can be rotting from your bones even as you are still stumbling around.

    20. Re:Dating the first clothing by 1u3hr · · Score: 1

      Or in other words, you didn't RTFA.

    21. Re:Dating the first clothing by jahudabudy · · Score: 1

      IANA anthropologist, but I am pretty confident the first human clothing was made out of natural fibers like animal hides. Any idea what sort of divergence helped the lice/fleas thrive on a blanket made out of a deer skin as opposed to a deer skin currently occupied by a deer?

      --
      ...sometimes, in order to hurt someone very badly, you have to tell that person terrible lies. - PA
    22. Re:Dating the first clothing by lawpoop · · Score: 1

      I was referring to another article about other research. RTFC.

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    23. Re:Dating the first clothing by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      I was referring to another article about other research. RTFC.

      These other researchers must have been pretty clueless then. Or you didn't actually read that either.

    24. Re:Dating the first clothing by argStyopa · · Score: 1

      The keys being:
      - head lice and body lice have entirely different grasping systems. Non-interchangeable.
      - lice can't survive IIRC more than a few hours away from a host. So their lifespan is intimately connected with their host(s)
      - lice are species specific

      Human body lice therefore are unlikely to have evolved their grasping mechanism (useless with body hair or wearing animal skins/furs) until shortly after textiles would have become common clothing for humans. So it doesn't give us precisely when humans STARTED wearing textiles. It does strongly suggest a start point of shortly after (the lice would have had time to evolve) textiles and humans became commonly associated.

      - All taken as best I can recall from an outstanding book on the subject: Before the Dawn: Recovering The Lost History of Our Ancestors
      http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnIn quiry.asp?z=y&EAN=9781594200793&itm=1

      --
      -Styopa
    25. Re:Dating the first clothing by DRAGONWEEZEL · · Score: 1

      You get a +2 funny for saying that & having the handle HAMBURGER LADY!

      --
      How much is your data worth? Back it up now.
    26. Re:Dating the first clothing by eheldreth · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I wonder if there are defined evolutionary differences in any species after the plagues?
      Actually, I read an interesting article a while back that descendants of the black plague have a mutation that gives them some immunity to HIV.
      Here is a random article from Google
      --
      The perversity of the Universe tends towards a maximum. - O'Toole's Corollary
    27. Re:Dating the first clothing by RobertB-DC · · Score: 1

      Actually, there's a Slashdot article on this very subject. I know, because I submitted it!

      Pants Were Optional, 100,000 Years Ago
      Posted by timothy on Tue Aug 19, '03 08:48 PM
      from the lousy-research-methods dept.
      RobertB-DC writes
      "German scientists have used differences in the DNA of lice to determine when humans started wearing clothes. It seems lice are highly specialized -- head lice lay their eggs only on hair, while body lice hide theirs in the folds of clothing. Using the differences in the two species' DNA and a "standard" mutation rate, the scientists determined when clothing-specific lice (and by extention, clothes) came into existence. No comment, though, from Calvin Klein."

      Unfortunately, the primary link (to a Washington Post story) is dead. However, the link I included for Calvin Klein is still live. I shudder to think what that says about how our society will look to future cyber-archaeologists.

      I think it's fair to say that I cheated a bit by using CmdrTaco's tagline in the article title. :)

      --
      Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
    28. Re:Dating the first clothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      after few days of wandering lost in damp and foggy marshes on the mountains


      Mountains? In Ireland??

      Corrán Tuathail is 1041m and is the highest point in the Irish islands.

      Only two other peaks are above 1000m (Beenkeragh and Caher both also in Na Cruacha Dubha), and there are less than 500 peaks over 500m in all of Ireland.

      Na Cruacha Dubha are very pretty and can look impressive if photographed just so but they really don't deserve the name "mountains" per se. The hills also aren't really home to damp and foggy marshes, and aren't really near any (except in the case of Sliabh Bladhma).

      Here in northern europe (Ireland)


      Western Europe. Ireland is the Westernmost country in Europe, pace Iceland and not counting Greenland as part of metropolitan Denmark.

  7. Incoming... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    /.'ers are going to have a field day with this story.

  8. That was the origin of that phrase by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    Long before it was used in terms of addictions, "I've got a monkey on my back" used to refer to having sex with a gorilla.

  9. hmmmmm-I'll scratch your back, if you scratch... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's called a job perk.

  10. Kinda speculative by Lawn+Jocke · · Score: 1

    Hate to be the naysayer of the group, but this seems pretty speculative to me. The connection between the gorilla strain of lice and the human head lice is an interesting observation, but that doesn't necessarily mean all that was claimed. I'm not dismissing the theory, but there is not enough evidence to sell me on this one. Does the premise sound good? Yes, but that is hardly enough to justify the evolutionary links between lice and the various branches of primates.

    --
    Maybe if this sig is witty or clever enough, someone will love me...
  11. "Ever wonder if pocket gophers have lice?" by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 5, Funny

    To be perfectly honest ... um, let me think about this ... no.

    --
    The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    1. Re:"Ever wonder if pocket gophers have lice?" by dnc253 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Are you kidding me?! This question has been plaguing me for weeks! Thank goodness I now know the answer so I can finally get some sleep!

    2. Re:"Ever wonder if pocket gophers have lice?" by Frogbert · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Further to that...

      What the fuck is a pocket gopher?

    3. Re:"Ever wonder if pocket gophers have lice?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    4. Re:"Ever wonder if pocket gophers have lice?" by Seumas · · Score: 1

      What the fuck is a pocket gopher?

      Sounds like something Richard Gere would buy and carry around in his coat pocket.

    5. Re:"Ever wonder if pocket gophers have lice?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know -my- pocket gopher doesn't have lice, but if someone's pocket gopher did happen to have lice, wouldn't they by definition be pubic lice? Sigh, you kids and your euphemisms.

    6. Re:"Ever wonder if pocket gophers have lice?" by modecx · · Score: 4, Funny

      My pocket gopher had lice once. It was very irritated.

      --
      Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
    7. Re:"Ever wonder if pocket gophers have lice?" by ocelotbob · · Score: 1

      No, that would be a pocket gerbil. Get your urban mythology straight.

      --

      Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

    8. Re:"Ever wonder if pocket gophers have lice?" by Unique2 · · Score: 1

      Not half as irritating as having an angry gopher in your pocket.

      --
      No trees were harmed in the posting of this message. However, a great number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
    9. Re:"Ever wonder if pocket gophers have lice?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oblig. Is that a gopher in your pocket or are you just glad to see me?

  12. Pocket gophers. by RightSaidFred99 · · Score: 1

    Huh huh. You said.. "pocket gopher".

    1. Re:Pocket gophers. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My... uh... "pocket gopher" got lice once from a skanky chick I met on a pub crawl in Austin TX, but my doctor gave me a spray can of stuff that got rid of them right away.

    2. Re:Pocket gophers. by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      I hate to admit it, but that was the first thought I had, too.

      "Is that a gopher in your pocket or are you just glad to see me?"

  13. Fucking crabs... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    So, about ten or twelve years ago I hook up with this skank from Montreal. She was a hottie, great in the sack, and loved it up the ass. A couple of weeks after I met her, I experienced major ball itch. I'm like scratching down there all the time. One time, alone in bed reading, I scratch like mad and find what looks like an insect leg in my fingernail.

    Fuck, I've got the fucking crabs.

    I thought I had jock itch and had been spraying my junk with Cruex, but that only made the crabs mad. I could see them climbing through my white-powdered pubes.

    The only resort was to shave myself from nose to toes. I looked like a fucking toddler, but the itching stopped.

    And yes, I had to replace my futon, get new sheets, and boil my underwear and jeans. Hell of a price to pay for some Montreal trim.

    Could have been worse, though.

    Regards,
    Crabman

  14. I don't see the link ! by ntboz · · Score: 1

    Where is the link to Lawyers ?? I would have thought that all parasites were geneticaly related?

  15. Evidence of Intelligent Design by Mostly+a+lurker · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    The all powerful one is known to be against that nasty bahaviour known as "s*x" (except when used to go forth and multiply of course). He produced pubic lice as a punishment for those engaging in this disgusting activity.

    1. Re:Evidence of Intelligent Design by Tablizer · · Score: 2, Funny

      The all powerful one is known to be against that nasty bahaviour known as "s*x" (except when used to go forth and multiply of course). He produced pubic lice as a punishment for those engaging in this disgusting activity.

      We can test this. Have gay sex with a dirty ape while gambling, drinking, and cussing and see if you get struck by lighting and hurricanes more often then those having Brady-Bunch-Mormon-style relationships.

    2. Re:Evidence of Intelligent Design by Mostly+a+lurker · · Score: 1

      We can test this. Have gay sex with a dirty ape while gambling, drinking, and cussing and see if you get struck by lighting and hurricanes more often then those having Brady-Bunch-Mormon-style relationships.
      Wouldn't the sample size be too small to deliver a significant result? (I am referring to the Brady-Bunch-Mormon sample, of course.)
    3. Re:Evidence of Intelligent Design by montyzooooma · · Score: 1

      I prefer to think of it as God giving us little friends so we'll never be lonely.

  16. So many responses, so little time... by jpellino · · Score: 5, Funny

    "We did not get pubic lice from other hominids. We got them from the ancestors of gorillas."

    #10. Speak for yourself, professor.

    #9. "coyote-ugly", move over...

    #8. Shhh... Hear that? I think Dave Attell's head just exploded.

    #7. Why is the waiting room empty? All I said was we...

    #6. "Scratch-a while you can, monkey-boy!"

    #5. Next on Springer...

    #4. Time to bring the crab-infested brass monkeys in off the back porch, Radar.

    #3. Yes, you heard me right, I need to get into those crabs' genes.

    #2. Let's say we ask Jocelyn Elders to weigh in on this one.

    and #1... Well I'll be a monkey's uncle, and a mighty itchy one at that.

    (N.B., I know gorillas are apes not monkeys, so save the posting effort, it's just a freaking joke...)

    --
    "Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
    1. Re:So many responses, so little time... by catbutt · · Score: 1

      (N.B., I know gorillas are apes not monkeys, so save the posting effort, it's just a freaking joke...) Well, since that part doesn't appear to be a joke, I'll address it. Apes are really monkeys, if monkeys are to be considered a monophyletic group. Apes are within the old world monkey clade. And yes, we ARE evolved from monkeys, despite what many well meaning people defending Darwinism will tell you.
    2. Re:So many responses, so little time... by Zenaku · · Score: 1

      I like phylogenetic (or cladistic) taxonomy as much as the next guy, but if you're going to make a statement like this you should at least acknowledge that you are using a different (and much newer) system of classification than the person you are "correcting."

      Personally, I think phylogenetic taxonomy makes a hell of a lot more sense -- but we all learned alpha taxonomy in school, and that's very clearly what all those well meaning people are using.

      Spouting off about how everybody has it all wrong without pointing out which taxonomy you are using doesn't make you look smarter than everyone -- it makes you look like a dimwit who doesn't grasp context.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cladistics

      --
      If fate makes you a motorcycle, you become a motorcycle.
    3. Re:So many responses, so little time... by catbutt · · Score: 1

      There are direct ancestors of humans that, by any taxonomic classification system, were monkeys. Just a species of monkey that isn't alive today, but a monkey nonetheless.

  17. Uhh. by Disharmony2012 · · Score: 1

    Ever wonder if pocket gophers have lice? Have you?!
  18. Timing when we lost our hair by doubletruncation · · Score: 4, Insightful

    From the article: "And then there is the matter of where the lice live. Today, lice live on little islands of hair on an ocean of hairless human skin. They are clearly adapted to our relatively hairless bodies. The authors suggest that their results may mean that hominids were already losing hair 3.3 million years ago. The gorilla lice needed an empty ecological niche--pubic hair--that they could occupy in order to survive. If hominids had full-body hair, the lice that already lived on it might have been able to outcompete an invader."

    In my opinion this is one of the most interesting aspects of this research - being able to date when we started becoming hairless. It's always been a puzzle why we are relatively hairless compared to the other great apes, and I would guess that being able to put some time constraints on it is a step toward understanding how this happened.

    1. Re:Timing when we lost our hair by catbutt · · Score: 1

      Well I don't see that it is THAT much of a puzzle as to why. I assume it is related to the invention of clothing. Clothes have a lot of advantages over fur, such as the ability to toss em in the fire when they get full of lice, to dry them when wet, to take them off when its hot, and put more on when cold. So once we had that, fur became a liability.

    2. Re:Timing when we lost our hair by gobbo · · Score: 1

      In my opinion this is one of the most interesting aspects of this research - being able to date when we started becoming hairless. It's always been a puzzle why we are relatively hairless compared to the other great apes, and I would guess that being able to put some time constraints on it is a step toward understanding how this happened.

      And how about that head-hair, eh? In most straight-haired people, it grows to indeterminate length, until it gets cut or strangles its bearer. Where's the evolutionary advantage of that? What a weird design. I wonder if it's a product of culture working through evolution: the the need for hair grooming is part of the social pact, keeps us in the troupe. A deep syntax of the body?

      Maybe head lice elicited the long, straight round hair in our genome. They certainly are specialized, can't survive anywhere else, and they're damn good at it. We coevolved somehow? Ever since I've read Lynn Margulis and learned about creepy crawlies like Toxoplasmosis, I don't put it past parasites to work changes on our genes, as part of a tendency by successful parasites towards symbiosis.

    3. Re:Timing when we lost our hair by doubletruncation · · Score: 1

      Perhaps, in that case they must have started wearing clothes at least three million years ago, whereas other lice evidence suggests that humans began wearing clothes 70000 years ago (e.g. http://www.headlice.org/news/2003/louseorigins.htm ).

      I've also seen the suggestion that the loss of hair was generally a by-product of selection for neoteny (baby chimps are relatively hairless), which itself was selected for because it meant humans would keep learning into adulthood.

    4. Re:Timing when we lost our hair by dzimmerm · · Score: 2, Interesting

      My understanding was that sweating for cooling as we do is more efficient with less hair. Humans are designed to run long distances at a fairly high rate of speed. Many animals are faster in the short haul but humans can out run any creature on earth in the long haul. That running required better heat dissipation and so we lost our hair and sweated more.

      Clothing and hair loss are not really related. Clothing and moving to to temperate and arctic climates are probably much more related.

      dzimmerm

      --
      Jumping to correct solutions slowly is better than jumping to incorrect solutions quickly.
    5. Re:Timing when we lost our hair by dzimmerm · · Score: 1

      Hair lasts between 2 to 6 years. Hair grows at about 1/4 inch to 1/2 inch a month. This does result in a terminal hair length. Hair is not forever.

      dzimmerm

      --
      Jumping to correct solutions slowly is better than jumping to incorrect solutions quickly.
    6. Re:Timing when we lost our hair by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ever seen a pig wearing jeans?
      There must at least be some other possible explanations.

    7. Re:Timing when we lost our hair by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Many animals are faster in the short haul but humans can out run any creature on earth in the long haul.

      I think horses can usually outrun humans even for long distances. See also: Man versus Horse Marathon

    8. Re:Timing when we lost our hair by rcolquhoun · · Score: 1


      In my opinion this is one of the most interesting aspects of this research - being able to date when we started becoming hairless. It's always been a puzzle why we are relatively hairless compared to the other great apes, and I would guess that being able to put some time constraints on it is a step toward understanding how this happened.

      The current theory is that humans lost their hair in order to be more resistant to parasites. You can still see this today in the large number of men(like 90%) shaving. And women regularly removing as much body hair as possible. When looking for sexual partners humans especially men regularly preferentially choose the least body hair possible.

      For women this is especially important that they must show to males that they are parasite free and able to carry a baby to full term. The hair on the head is an exception, it takes quite a bit of effort to grow, usually 12 months of healthiness for shoulder length which seems most attractive in females ie about the same time as it would take to have a baby.

      Competing theories about better tolerence of heat and for greater ability to swim have fallen in popularity to the above.

    9. Re:Timing when we lost our hair by rcolquhoun · · Score: 1


      And how about that head-hair, eh? In most straight-haired people, it grows to indeterminate length, until it gets cut or strangles its bearer. Where's the evolutionary advantage of that? What a weird design. I wonder if it's a product of culture working through evolution: the the need for hair grooming is part of the social pact, keeps us in the troupe. A deep syntax of the body?

      It's there to show we have been healthy for a reasonable amount of time, sortof like long fingernails. If you are female and your hair is too short it implies to potential mates that you have been ill/starving/parasite infected recently and are thus seen as less attractive.

      To counteract the parasite threat, have to develop strategies to keep hair clean. Look at any modern female how many hours a week + money is spent in looking after their hair.

      Many men lose their hair in adulthood, the brain also is a sensitive organ a bit of insulation from direct sunight and in cold weather would have also had its advantages.

    10. Re:Timing when we lost our hair by resonte · · Score: 1
      I believe I read somewhere, that human hair was useful for babies/small children to grab onto.

      Think of a woman with long hair. When she is wadding through a river trying to catch fish, she has her hands free while the baby is hanging onto her hair. Instead of leaving the baby by the riverside where it could get eaten.

      Also imagine what happens when a predator starts chasing the female, the child/baby can not run and thus has to hang onto her hair. She has her hands free to keep her balance.

      This theory may also explain why male hair is shorter/courser.

      --
      \(^o^)/
    11. Re:Timing when we lost our hair by Bloke+down+the+pub · · Score: 1

      The current theory is that humans lost their hair in order to be more resistant to parasites. You can still see this today in the large number of men(like 90%) shaving.
      If the first sentence is true, surely men would have become naturally beardless and the second would be false?
      --
      It's true I tell you, feller at work's next door neighbour read it in the paper.
    12. Re:Timing when we lost our hair by jafiwam · · Score: 1

      Hair and hair growth is a secondary sexual characteristic that is used by the opposite sex to determine breeding fitness.

      Chicks with nice hair (listen to them talk amongst themselves sometime you might learn something) have proven they can be healthy enough for the 3 year marathon of having a kid. So the hair makes men want to screw them, and makes other women aware men want to screw the nice hair ones.

      Why do you think the butch dykes cut their hair like Rosie ODonell? To remove the "I am a good breeder" social broadcasting.

      Same applies to men to some extent, though cultural norms seem to have an easier time overcoming the hair measurement of fitness.

    13. Re:Timing when we lost our hair by MonkeySpank · · Score: 1

      Ever seen a pig wearing jeans?
      Only on American Idol.
    14. Re:Timing when we lost our hair by TheLink · · Score: 1

      "Where's the evolutionary advantage of that?"

      How about: coz enough people thought it looked nice AND the minuses aren't significant enough to select against it.

      Evolution isn't about optimums - it's all about good enough. As long as it reproduces it doesn't matter how silly it looks or behaves or whatever.

      You see tons of ridiculous creatures teetering at the edge of survival all the time, especially in places where energy and other resources are abundant.

      And even in places where resources are not as abundant like Antartica, you still have ridiculous creatures like penguins. Put a few breeding pairs of polar bears in the south pole, and I bet more than a few penguin species would go extinct within a few decades.

      Anyway, head hair is good for preventing sun burn on our heads. The lack of hair elsewhere allows us to sweat and keep cool when moving at a brisk pace.

      And maybe it makes us look weird to other creatures - seems like quite a fair number of large land predators aren't as keen on eating us as compared to other targets.

      --
    15. Re:Timing when we lost our hair by TheLink · · Score: 1

      Yeah. Maybe that hair is for protection, like a lion's mane? Say you sport one those "wild men" look - while you can be more easily grabbed by the hair, it's a bit harder to claw or strangle you in the head area.

      Seems tigers get a bit put off by the mane when fighting lions - can't see the neck. That said, lions tend to do lots more cat vs cat fighting than tigers.

      --
    16. Re:Timing when we lost our hair by davper · · Score: 1

      Tell that to the guy who just got run down by a leapard 10 seconds after he started running.

    17. Re:Timing when we lost our hair by gobbo · · Score: 1

      It's there to show we have been healthy for a reasonable amount of time... To counteract the parasite threat, have to develop strategies to keep hair clean...a bit of insulation...

      Thanks for the theories, with undoubtedly some truth to some of them. Still, I don't see why hair grows so long, and suspect it's more than just the sexual signals it sends, and caused by more than runaway sexual selection.

    18. Re:Timing when we lost our hair by gobbo · · Score: 1

      Hair lasts between 2 to 6 years. Hair grows at about 1/4 inch to 1/2 inch a month. This does result in a terminal hair length. Hair is not forever.

      Granted, I was exaggerating. Only a few people manage hair longer than their body. Many millions, however, have hair past their butt. Terminal hair length is potentially very long.

      It still seems even more absurd to me than extreme sexual signalling like the tail feathers of Birds of Paradise.

    19. Re:Timing when we lost our hair by gobbo · · Score: 1

      Think of a woman with long hair. When she is wadding through a river trying to catch fish, she has her hands free while the baby is hanging onto her hair. Instead of leaving the baby by the riverside where it could get eaten.

      So, you're suggesting that [citation lost but we trust you] once we lost our somatic hair, the hair on our head grew to compensate so the babies can cling to it.

      Maybe, but I have children of my own. Unless head-hair pain thresholds have changed considerably, the concept of a woman letting an infant swing from her hair while she works is, well, worthy of Monty Python, and I had a good LOL at your theory. Tell me your address, I'll come over and demonstrate why it's unlikely!

      On a more serious note, the question of when innovations like baby slings came into use is an interesting one, in relation to our development of our current hair patterns. I'll bet they were as early an invention as, say, the water gourd.

      PS: course=route; coarse=rough

    20. Re:Timing when we lost our hair by gobbo · · Score: 1

      Chicks with nice hair (listen to them talk amongst themselves sometime you might learn something)

      Ah, you presumptuous, arrogant, snide little whippersnapper! Since it's humourous flamebait, I'll let it slide this time.

      You're paraphrasing the dominant theories. I'm not unaware of them, and I don't disagree with them, but I don't trust them entirely either. The runaway sexual selection this idea relies on doesn't adress all ethnicities (e.g. the !Kung keep short hair, and it's wiry enough that they can just break it off), and there's the possibility that it signifies youth in an exaggerated manner (neoteny, IIRC). I also think you're grossly oversimplifying lesbian fashion, probably from unfamiliarity (maybe you should hang out with them more--oops, did I say that?). As with most things organic, and even more so, cultural, it's complicated and likely overdetermined by various causes.

      In this case, I think there's detail in the relationship between hair parasites and hair growth that will also prove to be an evolutionary influence, in ways we haven't even guessed at yet.

    21. Re:Timing when we lost our hair by gobbo · · Score: 1

      ...head hair is good for preventing sun burn on our heads.

      I'm bald, you insensitive clod!

      Sorry, couldn't resist. Anyway, my question about evolutionary advantage was mostly rhetorical. I was trying to make the point that our natural selection is directed by culture and technology (another one is the shape of our jaw: cooking has made it weak and smaller), and I wonder if in fact the lice themselves haven't had more evolutionary effect than we suspect on the kind of hair we grow on our heads (i.e. less elliptical, longer).

    22. Re:Timing when we lost our hair by VWJedi · · Score: 1

      In my opinion this is one of the most interesting aspects of this research - being able to date when we started becoming hairless.

      I think it was about ten years ago for me. I remember it pretty well, so I don't need to do much research.

    23. Re:Timing when we lost our hair by Monkey · · Score: 1

      There is a theory that humans were once more aquatic in nature. The loss of body hair, vestigial webbing on the fingers and toes, and a layer of subcutaneous fat all are human body attributes that lend themselves to supporting this idea. To extend your concept a bit further, it is theorized that head hair remained to accommodate babies clinging to it as we swam through the water.

      As gobbo points out, having an infant clinging to your head while you went about your business would be a cumbersome arrangement to say the least. However, this would not necessarily be the case in an aquatic environment where buoyancy would reduce the weight.

    24. Re:Timing when we lost our hair by rcolquhoun · · Score: 1

      The current theory is that humans lost their hair in order to be more resistant to parasites. You can still see this today in the large number of men(like 90%) shaving.

      If the first sentence is true, surely men would have become naturally beardless and the second would be false?


      It's work in progress, asian men for instance often cannot grow a full beard.

      Given the ability to remove hair then it is quicker to evolve an alternative solution. The thought pattern "hairless people are more attractive, must remove body hair" which provides almost equivalent parasite protection and selection advantage as actually having no hair.
    25. Re:Timing when we lost our hair by cbciv · · Score: 1

      Many animals are faster in the short haul but humans can out run any creature on earth in the long haul.


      Except some canids. Wolves, for example, are phenomenal distance runners. See wikipedia as a starting point.

  19. lice story after brain game controller... by benow · · Score: 2, Funny

    think twice about who you share your brain bucket with.

    1. Re:lice story after brain game controller... by Matthias+Lange · · Score: 1

      At first I thought you meant the lice's brains could end up controlling the game... ;)

  20. Kinda vague. by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1
    I can't tell what you're refuting. Are you refuting...

    • ...that humans evolved from gorillas? (Not claimed in TFA.)
    • ...that humans had sexual relations with gorillas? (not claimed in TFA.)
    • ...that humans contracted lice from consuming gorilla corpses? (as suggested by TFA.)
  21. We can see it right here on /. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The coevolution of parasites and their hosts is admirably exemplified by the hordes of clueness do-nothing know-nothings who rush to offer hilariously foolish comments on slashdot.

    1. Re:We can see it right here on /. by wikdwarlock · · Score: 1

      Oooh, sooo close! Almost a(nother) scathing "look at all the idiots who say dumb stuff on Slashdot post. And then, you're own "clueness"-ness kicked it. It's truly tragic when a potentially good joke falls short at the last moment.

      --

      "I must not fear. Fear is the mind killer." -Bene Gesserit Litany Against Fear
  22. Tip from your friendly neighborhood Spider Man by winningham.2 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    What to do if you suddenly have a craving for bloody hair:

    Symptom(s):
    You wake up covered in a cool looking black spandex-like suit with the symbol of lice. You have superhuman itching powers. You have what looks to be snow drifts in your hair. You love bloody hair (both above and below the border).
    Cause:
    You are infected with the evolved Alien Symbiote version not mentioned in the article. It is believed this form came from outer-space however no wiki article or blog has yet to confirm this.
    Treatment:
    Climb the nearest bell tower and ring bell while you stand directly under it. Then remove weakened suit of black lice eggs and burn it. Next, take a shower and wash your nasty hair with gasoline. Finally, use some Axe body spray to hid the gas smell and to bring the ladies back.
    Props to Stan Lee and Peter Parker!

    1. Re:Tip from your friendly neighborhood Spider Man by winningham.2 · · Score: 1

      Update:
      If your suit happens to have a gorilla or crab logo instead of normal lice, then please burn yourself immediately. If not, it will burn you.

  23. The REAL Question of the Day!!... by rez_rat · · Score: 0

    How does a Gorilla get crabs from YOU!!???

    1. Re:The REAL Question of the Day!!... by rez_rat · · Score: 2, Funny

      Oh,... and this is NOT a "In Soviet Russia" joke. :-P

  24. Wait a sec... by freeze128 · · Score: 1

    We did not get pubic lice from other hominids. We got them from the ancestors of gorillas.
    Well, isn't that what evolution is? Maybe humans and gorillas share a common ancestor. (Well, DUH!)

    I can imagine one of two scenarios:

    1. Humans evolved from the same primates as gorillas, and the lice just stuck with us the whole time.

    2. Some human had sex with a gorilla.

    I just want to know why the christians want to believe number 2 over number 1.
    1. Re:Wait a sec... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I can imagine one of two scenarios:

      1. Humans evolved from the same primates as gorillas, and the lice just stuck with us the whole time.

      2. Some human had sex with a gorilla. ..... Can't it be both?
    2. Re:Wait a sec... by chawly · · Score: 0

      To my mind, you missed the third possibility - that some gorilla had sex with a human. I know some folks who'd like to include the film in their porn collection. In fact, both films

      --
      How many beans make five, anyhow ? ... Charles Walmsley
    3. Re:Wait a sec... by ryanov · · Score: 1

      They look for the missing link
      There ain't no missing link
      They're never, ever going to find the missing link
      There's no missing link
      We're not something you can figure out with an equation
      We are the genetic mutation

      Aliens came and fucked the monkey
      They fucked the monkey
      Aliens came and fucked the monkey
      They fucked the monkey

      Darwin tried explaining it
      Darwin did the best he could
      Evolution-- pretty theory
      But how could Darwin know, that

      Aliens came and fucked the monkey
      They fucked the monkey
      Aliens came and fucked the monkey
      They fucked the monkey

      How else explain fax machines?
      How else explain computer enhancement?
      How else explain digital remastering?
      How else explain Mozart?

  25. Rather than read a second-hand account... by GrumpySimon · · Score: 4, Informative
    Rather than read a second-hand account (although Carl Zimmer is very good), the original article is open access and is available here: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7007/5/7/abstrac t

    Conclusion:

    Reconciliation analysis determines that there are two alternative explanations that account for the current distribution of anthropoid primate lice. The more parsimonious of the two solutions suggests that a Pthirus species switched from gorillas to humans. This analysis assumes that the divergence between Pediculus and Pthirus was contemporaneous with the split (i.e., a node of cospeciation) between gorillas and the lineage leading to chimpanzees and humans. Divergence date estimates, however, show that the nodes in the host and parasite trees are not contemporaneous. Rather, the shared coevolutionary history of the anthropoid primates and their lice contains a mixture of evolutionary events including cospeciation, parasite duplication, parasite extinction, and host switching. Based on these data, the coevolutionary history of primates and their lice has been anything but parsimonious.
  26. RE: Lice by rez_rat · · Score: 1

    I'll let you guys know tomorrow. When I'm RID of it!!

    haha

    S-

  27. Re:another incorect assumption by mr_3ntropy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sigh. Another sheep argument with Irreducible Complexity. None of the candidates for this kind of "Gap" theology have stood up to scientific analysis. Other sheep have argued in a similar manner about the eye, the flagella, etc.

    I wish Richard Dawkins was made required reading for all the misguided lambs every Saturday night before churchday.

    Hand in there my friend, there is still hope. You can be saved.

  28. Douglas Adams had it wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The experiments are run by Lice.

  29. Artifact by FormOfActionBanana · · Score: 0

    an artifact is something made by human hands. So all fabric before the industrial revolution is "artificial".

    --
    Take off every 'sig' !!
    1. Re:Artifact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A pedant is an idiot. So you are an idiot.

    2. Re:Artifact by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      "an artifact is something made by human hands."

      And human hands never "made" cotton or wool - these occur naturally, and existed before there were humans. Polyester, on the other hand, is artificial.

      Reread my original post - you're confusing the material with the things made of the material. Its quite clear that I'm talking about the material or substance from which clothing is made. Fabrics can be made from cotton or wool or other naturally-occuring objects, or from polyester, which didn't exist until we made it.

      Also, an artifact isn't necessarily something made with human hands, and also, you're confabulating artifact and article.

    3. Re:Artifact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Polyester is made of elements. Unless they are using trans-Uranic elements, then they are naturally occurring elements.

      Shut up now.

    4. Re:Artifact by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      While the elements are naturally occuring, the order of the molecules isn't natural at all - polyester doesn't just "occur in nature" without human intervention (there are no polyester analogues to the silkworm, for example), whereas cotton, hemp, and wool all occur naturally. BTW, lame attempt at confabulation of atoms with molecular structure ...

    5. Re:Artifact by FormOfActionBanana · · Score: 1
      Tom. I'm being pedantic, I understand (as AC points out), but you're ignoring lawpoop's context of freaking archaeology... where obviously there is no polyester or nylon to be considered.

      In the context of archaeic anthropology, I think "artificial" pretty much would mean "artifact-y". I could probably look it up, and so could you. I think I'm making a pretty sound inference of the word in its context, however.

      So. If you're making a joke about polyester shirts, that's cool with me. But if you were trying to call out lawpoop for saying something dumb, I just have to differ with you. Even though the word "artificial" was probably uneccessary.

      On another point entirely... I had to look up "confabulate" to discover the second meaning I didn't know about. Thanks for prompting that! I could use that word all the time now... :-)

      --
      Take off every 'sig' !!
    6. Re:Artifact by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      Hey, its all good :-) Its just that when I say you're confusing the substance (cotton or wool) with the things being made from it, its the same situation we run into all the time in programming, where people mistake the name of the thing (for example, the name of a variable) for the thing itself (or worse, a reference as being the thing).

      People who confuse the two have a really hard time when you start assigning functions to variables.

      Back on-topic - coding is like having lice - you really get an itch to scratch ...

  30. It was that Jane Goodall tramp! by Dahamma · · Score: 1

    Just conducting a little more "research"...

    http://www.lessonsforhope.org/images/cartoon_larso n.gif

  31. oh noes, help Jodie by freaker_TuC · · Score: 1


    Help Jodie Foster get RID of them!

    --
    --- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..
  32. At least now..... by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 1

    When my SO wonders where the crabs came from, I can mumble, "Ah, fucking gorillas."

    --
    Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
  33. Re:another incorect assumption by truckaxle · · Score: 3, Funny

    Uhhhh I think not.

    That was the only thing you said that made sense ;)
  34. how were our ancestors to know that by alizard · · Score: 1

    "going forth and multiplying" only works when one tries to multiply with one's own species?

    1. Re:how were our ancestors to know that by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1
      "going forth and multiplying" only works when one tries to multiply with one's own species?

      Umm, you do realize that that's the bog-standard definition of a species, don't you?

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  35. I wish... by Cairnarvon · · Score: 1

    I wish people would stop confusing "hominid" with "human". Gorillas are hominids as well.

  36. As my old parasitology lecturer said... by jonny_boy27 · · Score: 1

    ...in his pathetic attempts to use powerpoint as a subliminal messaging system: "PARASITES RULE THE WORLD" but seriously, the co-evolution of parasitic invertebrates and higher species (coupled with the much higher reproduction rate of the parasites) in some cases can be a greater natural selection pressure than the classic predator/prey relationship that people always seem to think of first.

    1. Re:As my old parasitology lecturer said... by Bloke+down+the+pub · · Score: 1

      I'd have said host/parasite is a special case of the prey/predator one. Main difference being it only eats you slowly.

      --
      It's true I tell you, feller at work's next door neighbour read it in the paper.
  37. Re:We have more by zakeria · · Score: 0

    Humans have the most hair of all Primates! its just are hair is very fine and short but we have 3 - 5 times more hair than a chimp for example!

  38. We have more by zakeria · · Score: 0

    people have the most hair out of all primates! its just are hair is so fine you would think we had less.

  39. Trip to the Zoo by rodney+dill · · Score: 1

    There were similarities between our pubic lice and the lice found on gorillas. Sorry, that incident at the zoo was reduced to 'Just following too close.'

    --

    Use your head, can't you, use your head,
    You're on earth, there's no cure for that
    - S. Beckett
  40. Great, just great by smooth+wombat · · Score: 1

    Not only am I a monkey's uncle, I got his crabs too!

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
  41. A blasphemy! by csoto · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Everybody knows lice and humans are only 6000 years old, and there were two lice on the Ark with Noah and his (incestuous) family...

    --
    There exists no way of exchanging information without making judgments. --Bene Gesserit Axiom
  42. In the immortal words of Heston... by Applekid · · Score: 1

    Get your lice off me, you damn dirty ape!

    --
    More Twoson than Cupertino
  43. I got the worms out by mike262 · · Score: 1

    I didn't think it was possible, but after doing this progrm http://www.coloncleanse-blog.com/ what a shock! The worms were coming out within weeks.. You can't belive it untill you see it!

  44. WHAT??? by Dekortage · · Score: 1

    We did not get pubic lice from other hominids. We got them from the ancestors of gorillas.

    Hey, mister, speak for yourself!!!

    --
    $nice = $webHosting + $domainNames + $sslCerts
  45. Not sure about that by spineboy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Indigenous American Indians used to catch horses by outrunning them, until the horse was too tired to run anymore. If one trains a horse to run long distances, then I don't know, but a typical wild horse is not much of a match against a determined, trained human in terms of distance.
    So I guess both the parent and grandparent messages are correct.

    --
    ..........FULL STOP.
  46. Flied lice by metamatic · · Score: 2, Funny

    There were similarities between our pubic lice and the lice found on gorillas.

    What do you mean "our pubic lice"?

    This is Slashdot, most of us haven't had the opportunity to get public lice, you insensitive clod!

    --
    GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
  47. Except it's probably wrong by wonkavader · · Score: 1

    "The gorilla lice needed an empty ecological niche--pubic hair--that they could occupy in order to survive. If hominids had full-body hair, the lice that already lived on it might have been able to outcompete an invader."

    Someone jump in and tell me how this could possibly happen. We lost our body hair, but not our crotch, underarm or head hair. So the lice we were carrying before losing that hair...

          A. Hated our pubic reagions and head.
          B. were unable to adapt to those different hairs, as we lost our hair.
          C. Were shocked and died the day every darn human dropped 90% of their hair, leaving only the pubic and head places available for colonization.

    No. We had lice before we lost that hair, and we had lice after. There's a mistake here. This louse must have out-competed or bred together with the one we had.

  48. naugas you have to kill to get even one by DRAGONWEEZEL · · Score: 1

    O.K. if you take the WoW perspective on that it takes 300 Nagas to get 1 Naga Claw. When you get thirty claws, you take them to the elder in Sha laka ah, and he gives you a quest to get 10 Naga Hides. The drop rate for Naga hides is about 1 in 1000, but they come quick if you drop a skill and trade up skinning!

    --
    How much is your data worth? Back it up now.
    1. Re:naugas you have to kill to get even one by FormOfActionBanana · · Score: 1

      I just bought mine on Ebay.

      --
      Take off every 'sig' !!
  49. Lice and Hair Shape by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    The article makes it clear that the Americas had distinct head lice species before Europeans arrived. Both North and South American human populations travelled from Asia first. From the article:

    human head lice have a peculiar evolutionary history. According to one study, head lice form two genetically distinct populations that share a common ancestor over a million years ago. One of those groups is most common in Native Americans and other New World groups.
  50. Of course it is. by alizard · · Score: 1

    actually, we don't have to go back that far in history to discover people in our family tree who didn't get that.

    Remember the examples from Greek mythology that involved inter-species breeding? There was a time when people thought the stories literal truth.

    However, I was merely trying to make a crude joke about our ancestors and bestiality. Looks like the joke wasn't crude enough.

  51. I got a question by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

    "We did not get pubic lice from other hominids. We got them from the ancestors of gorillas."

    Where does Paris Hilton get hers?

    Based on some of her sex vids, I gotta say maybe from the same source, since many of her boyfriends appear to be gorillas - or at least dumber than gorillas.

    Maybe even dumber than her, since they're screwing her.

    --
    Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!