Slashdot Mirror
Cesarean Births Could Be Affecting Human Evolution, Study Says (bbc.com)
CanadianRealist writes: Larger babies delivered by cesarean section may be affecting human evolution. Researchers estimate cases where the baby cannot fit down the birth canal have increased from 30 in 1,000 in the 1960s to 36 in 1,000 births today, [according to estimates from researchers at the University of Vienna in Austria.] Science Alert reports: "In the past, larger babies and mothers with narrow pelvis sizes might both have died in labour. Thanks to C-sections, that's now a lot less likely, but it also means that those 'at risk' genes from mothers with narrow pelvises are being carried into future generations. More detailed studies would be required to actually confirm the link between C-sections and evolution, as all we have now is a hypothesis based on the birth data." Agreed, more studies required part. Cesareans may simply be becoming more common with "too large" defined as cesarean seems like a better idea. It's reasonable to pose the question based simply on an understanding of evolution. Like it's reasonable to conjecture that length of human pregnancy is a compromise between further development in utero, and chance of mother and baby surviving the delivery.
Yes. A study done at the University of Dublin concluded that if your parents didn't have any children you probably won't either.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Why? Are you scared of becoming a big baby?
There has only been one documented, (Poorly...), instance in History that Humanity physicality changed in a relatively short period of time- the 14th century. Starting in China, maybe, it spread throughout India, and then the Caucasus, into the Middle East and then north deep into the Scandinavian Countries. In two or three generations, half of the population of Europe died off due just to the Black Deaths. We don't know much about the other Civilizations.
One curious outcome can be seen in the clothing of the period. Europeans somehow got significantly taller over the following Century, after being stuck at Roman heights for over a thousand years. (Check out Suits Of Armor for a striking example.) Whether due to better nutrition; famines were common before the Plagues due to overpopulation and poor Farming practices, or whether there was some recessive Genetics going on due to past uncounted and unrecorded Plagues, is not now known. It's probably both; certainly poor nutrition can stunt inherited growth tendencies. And note that even without the Plagues, Infant Mortality bounced around 50%... Also note that this time was also the start of the "Little Ice Age", so Environment can't be ignored.
The European Countries in general, and the US in particular, have plateaued; 18 year old Males whose statistics have been gathered for centuries by those who like to play with War, have been tending to an average height of ~70 inches. In 1914, the average height of the Fresh Crop was ~67 inches.
But the growth in height is startling in some newly developing countries. In South Korea, it is now ~69 inches for Males. But in 1914, it was ~63 inches. Six inches is a pretty good jump, but South Korean women have jumped further- A gain of ~8 inches.
People have been growing bigger, but not at the same rates or at the same time. Generally, skeletal dimensions scale; taller women have wider pelvises. (Some populations in hellholes are actually getting shorter.):
http://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2016/07/27/487391773/americans-are-shrinking-while-chinese-and-koreans-sprout-up
Cesarean births are still rare, and to draw any conclusion about general Evolution from their _recent_ trends is foolish. This is a damn stupid study; I suspect that there is an Agenda at work here. BTW, over the last few decades, the average US or Canadian baby has gotten slightly smaller:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704423204575017471267586344
Properly speaking, there is no such thing as de-evolution. Evolutionary pressure optimizes for survival in some particular environment, and nothing more. In this case, the particular environment is changing to one that includes medical science, so certain types of genetic specialization is no longer needed. People don't de-evolve more than bacteria de-evolve when they lose antibiotic resistance due to a lack of antibiotics :)
I hope Trump gets rid of vaccinations while he's in office. These diseases are here to help rid our gene pool of bad genes, yet we keep trying to save those less fit. It only hurts our species in the long run!
We need NATURAL selection.
Jenny McCarthy is right -- even if for the wrong reasons.
Good deal. At the next Ebola outbreak, hop on a jet over to that location and help bury the bodies, but you can't wear any protective gear. If you have 'superior' genes, you should be fine, right?
Jerkwad...
You're messin' with my Zen Thing, man.....
Caesars carry risks.
Especially if you're a Gaul, or believe in Rome remaining a republic.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch