Evolution by natural selection is a deeply fascinating subject. According to the philosopher Daniel Dennett, it is also 'the most important idea anybody ever had.'
This very simple process fashioned almost every aspect of the living world; from human consciousness to the mould that grows on your bread.
Yet few adults, and fewer politicians, recognize how important evolution is. The number of wonderful books on evolution at your local bookstore may be growing, but it is easily outstripped by dubious or even harmful self-help manuals, dating advice, astrology, diet books and management babble.
Throughout the history of medicine, most progress came from improved understanding of how we get infections, diseases and other mental and physical afflictions. But medicine can become even better when we understand why we get sick, and why our bodies, including our minds, respond to infections and stress in the ways that they do. The new field of Darwinian Medicine illuminates the origins of diseases like cancer and Alzheimer's disease and the causes of obesity, depression and schizophrenia.
Important evolutionary insights go well beyond medicine. Evolution is useful anywhere living organisms are involved, such as agriculture, fisheries, biotechnology, conservation, and carbon accounting. Most of all, evolution can teach us much about what it means to be alive, and why people do what they do. Another new field, evolutionary psychology, could be the most important development in understanding human behavior since Herr Professor Freud cracked open his note book and asked for the first time 'So, tell me about your childhood.'
In my new book Sex, Genes & Rock 'n' Roll: How Evolution has Shaped the Modern World (University of New Hampshire Press), I aim to provide an entertaining glimpse of the world through the eyes of an evolutionary biologist. I research animal and human evolution in order to understand both human history and the lives people lead today.
The following slides provide a few highlights from the book, tidbits showing how an evolutionary perspective can give useful and interesting insights into familiar issues and problems.
Food
1 of 13
FIRST SLIDE
PREVIOUS SLIDE
NEXT SLIDESHOW
Our ancestors evolved a strong need to meet our bodies' protein needs: for every calorie of protein we miss out on, we have to eat 53 calories of carbohydrates to compensate. This causes people whose diet comprises less than 15% protein to overeat.
But modern food production, storage and distribution methods make protein-rich foods much more expensive at the grocery store than carbohydrate-rich, and especially sugary foods.
This explains why, in wealthy industrialised countries, poor and disadvantaged people are far more likely than wealthy people to be obese. They can afford to eat, but not to eat healthy lean protein and vegetables, and so their high-carb diets predispose them to obesity, diabetes and the metabolic syndrome.
Our ancestors evolved a strong need to meet our bodies' protein needs: for every calorie of protein we miss out on, we have to eat 53 calories of carbohydrates to compensate. This causes people whose diet comprises less than 15% protein to overeat.
But modern food production, storage and distribution methods make protein-rich foods much more expensive at the grocery store than carbohydrate-rich, and especially sugary foods.
This explains why, in wealthy industrialised countries, poor and disadvantaged people are far more likely than wealthy people to be obese. They can afford to eat, but not to eat healthy lean protein and vegetables, and so their high-carb diets predispose them to obesity, diabetes and the metabolic syndrome.
Our ancestors evolved a strong need to meet our bodies' protein needs: for every calorie of protein we miss out on, we have to eat 53 calories of carbohydrates to compensate. This causes people whose diet comprises less than 15% protein to overeat.
But modern food production, storage and distribution methods make protein-rich foods much more expensive at the grocery store than carbohydrate-rich, and especially sugary foods.
This explains why, in wealthy industrialised countries, poor and disadvantaged people are far more likely than wealthy people to be obese. They can afford to eat, but not to eat healthy lean protein and vegetables, and so their high-carb diets predispose them to obesity, diabetes and the metabolic syndrome.
Evolution by natural selection is a deeply fascinating subject. According to the philosopher Daniel Dennett, it is also 'the most important idea anybody ever had.'
This very simple process fashioned ...
Evolution by natural selection is a deeply fascinating subject. According to the philosopher Daniel Dennett, it is also 'the most important idea anybody ever had.'
This very simple process fashioned ...
Paleoanthropological evidence indicates the increase in brain size that marks the difference between humans and apes occurred about 2 million years ago with the emergence of Homo erectus. Prior to that time there was a climate shift such that the rain forests became grasslands and the number of grazing mammals increased. Before then, apes and pre-humans ate a primarily plant-based diet, and following the climate shift, obtaining sufficient nutrition from plants became energetically too costly for many pre-humans and constituted a selective force. Fossil evidence suggests that beginning about 2 million years ago, pre-humans were beginning to butcher animals. Many anthropologists believe that a high-energy and high-protein diet fueled brain evolution over a relatively short evolutionary time of 10,000 to 100,000 years. During the time that modern humans emerged, there were no doubt periods of both feast and famine. The ability to evolve rapidly that enabled modern humans to emerge from evolution also doomed the species to diseases such as obesity and type 2 diabetes resulting from the evolutionary conservation of genes that would be selected during the times of famine.
Good studies, and they stimulate related thoughts.
Concerning food: Your note about 1 calorie of skipped protein, and the body requiring 53 calories of carbohydrates to make up for it. That resonates with me, and I understand the issue better. I already had some understanding of the problem of "over-carbing" as well as the dangers presented by too many simple carbs.; and simple vs. complex carbs.; and mixing certain carbs. (beans and rice) to form protein.
The food issue becomes more complicated now with the matter of GMOs and their related dangers (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/12/monsantos-gmo-corn-linked_n_420365.html?page=3&show_comment_id=37988389). The IJBS (your fellow biologists) finding organ damage in testing 3 varieties of GM Corn. So, it's not just the matter of balancing protein with simple and complex carbohydrates; in our post World War II agriculture, it's the actual amount of nutrients (or lack thereof) which will affect our evolutionary skills.
HenryDavid: Good studies, and they stimulate related thoughts. Concerning food: Your
Interesting. I was wondering if they did a study where they took a budget of lower income people and substituted the chips, pop, cookies , micowavable pasta and cheese with apples carrots and raisin bran cereals and lean meats. In this case they take the weekly family grocery budget and buy 2 types of diets. One healthier and one less healthy for the 2 study groups. The family who ate the fruits, veggies still got their 2000 calories each day. The family who ate healthier just ate less,but got their calories and nutrients. They just would not snack on cookies, chips and icecream. I wonder for the budget allowed if this is even possible?
Cautiously_optimistic: Interesting. I was wondering if they did a study where
If your below the poverty line not really. Having been there, I was glad I worked at a resturant that gave me a free meal every shift. I ate fruit and veggies like crazy.
hopper250: If your below the poverty line not really. Having been
Well, it's only one step up from "evolutionary psychology", but at least it is one step up. I don't believe there is any "new field of Darwinian Medicine", just actual medicine used by certain hucksters to try to profit off Social Darwinism. Have a nice day.
tmaxPA: Well, it's only one step up from "evolutionary psychology", but
I really wanted to like this article,I'm an anthropologist, but every on of these examples has a fatal flaw. For instance, the lap dance study he cites as proof is taught as how not to do a study. It relies on the self reporting of 12 dancers who only actually reported about 1/3 as often as they were suppose to then basically guesses when they were ovulating to get the results the researcher wanted. A reasearcher who never went to the clubs or actually talked to the girls.
E_Goldman: I really wanted to like this article,I'm an anthropologist, but
I enjoy the concept, but the slides make me cringe. It seems to only focus on Evolutionary psychology, which is, to put it nicely, painfully disconnected from reality, if not a mostly evidence-free "soft science" there is.
Abnormal_Wrench: I enjoy the concept, but the slides make me cringe.
Its the worst science there is in my opinion. The author's bio reads that he is an internationally recognized expert on evolutionary biology. I think that is very akin to saying I am an expert on the lifestyles of the Olympian Gods-whatever I proclaim about them is correct, because you have no way to disprove or question it.
Likewise, from the very start of his so called insights into human behavior is so suspect I couldn't bother to view any more of the slides. Who says protein is more expensive than carbohydrates? I am pretty sure Big Macs and KFC and Taco Bell burritos contain plenty of protein, and I guess of box of Fruit Loops costs about the same as a box of Chex. And there isn't a lot of protein in an apple, but a can of Campbells bean with bacon soup has plenty. And you don't think poor people drink a lot of milk?
Scientists view electron microscopes in laboratories, evolutionary biologists sit on leather sofas and think of fairy tales.
phoo-doo: Its the worst science there is in my opinion. The
"Love...over millions of years, people who were good at loving and being loved were the ones who succeeded in difficult business of reproduction..."
What is wrong with this statement? Two things. According to the theory, we have been the 'human animal' for two hundred thousand years...not millions. The second thing that is wrong is calling reproduction "difficult business". Difficult? The huge amount of increase of single mothers since the 1960's will attest that reproduction is not difficult. Maybe giving a living to people not working for a living has interferred with 'evolution' by replacing the father with the government. Destroying faith that we came from something and replaced it with the cosmic accident belief has destroyed the successful civilization that a free, moral society brings. We have suicide, depression, murder, teen pregnacy, crime that has gone thru the roof since the cosmic accident teaching started being taught to our kids in the 1960's. It appears that evolution, that teaching of it, is evolving into chaos.
flipacoin: "Love...over millions of years, people who were good at loving
"Natural selection" is hardly the whole story. Look no further than the DNA coding/programming, which is a product of intelligence, not of a couple chemicals bumping into each other and creating the code and programming that controls the entire "natural selection" process. "Natural selection" couldn't even have begun until the first living organism/cell was already in existence.
Chris1962: "Natural selection" is hardly the whole story. Look no further
One of my favourite sayings is that "nothing we do makes sense outside of evolutionary theory"
The sooner we accept this, the sooner we can make actual progress in understanding and altering behaviors we currently dislike (i.e., child abuse) toward more socially acceptable one...that will stick.
DNAtsol: One of my favourite sayings is that "nothing we do
I really liked this article and I will get the book. This is a very useful system of insight. What are the reasons for Darwinian Mental Illness and Darwinian Mass Suicide which has been the trend in my entire lifetime since the invention of nuclear weapons in WWII. Why are we playing Russian Roulette generation after generation? Why do people accept this? Why?
Hamlet - your post is disturbing and the link even more so. I am not sure what you are getting at, but it appears that you are conflicted and miserable.
There is a beautiful world out there. I hope you will take the time to do something enjoyable for yourself today.
new_beginning: Hamlet - your post is disturbing and the link even
"There is a beautiful world out there."
Unless, of course, you're poor or a woman living in drought-stricken East Africa, especially gang-run Somalia...or Afghanistan...or...well, you get the idea. Just because YOU live in a beautiful world (and that's fine), don't forget that much of the human species does not, even to this day...and that such suffering is actually unnecessary, if we but had the will to make things different.
zenju2: "There is a beautiful world out there." Unless, of course,
Interesting question I’ve asked myself. It seems that having a strong leader, any leader regardless of morals, ethics or whatever, is mostly more effective than anarchy and/or democracy.
DeepThought24: Interesting question I’ve asked myself. It seems that having a
From an evolutionary perspective, and thoughtful research, high carb diets do not cause metabolic syndome/diabetes & obesity. There are plenty of HG and less industrialized populations that eat a high carb diet and are lean, without metabolic syndrome. (Kuna, Pima in Mexico, Kitavan, etc). The problem has more to do with chronic stress (cortisol) and introduction of nutrient poor industrialized foods. India is also developing a diabetes epidemic and they are lean as well (epigeneitcs & low quality diet despite macronutrient ratios).
UrbanAntonio: From an evolutionary perspective, and thoughtful research, high carb diets
Okay from an evolutionary perspective, did our pre-agricultural ancestors eat a high carb diet? The answer from the scientific community is a resounding no (Jared Diamond, "The Worst Mistake in the History of the Human Race"). The introduction of a high carb diet, when we adopted agriculture, resulted in lower life expectancy and a host of health problems and got worst when we started eating highly processed carbs. In fact the Pima are a text book example of the disaster to switching to high carb diets (Gary Taubes, "Good Calories, Bad Calories"), where they went from predominantly lean to predominantly obese in a generation (as the result of being moved to a reservation and away from their traditional lifestyle). For a concise, rigorous, and well written summary of the latest science on high carb diets please read Gary Taubes' "Why We Get Fat".
haggisattack: Okay from an evolutionary perspective, did our pre-agricultural ancestors eat
except you didnt understand my examples or read my post. try again.
try this http://huntgatherlove.com/ instead of GCBC which I read front to back the week it was released. But since GT is incorrect on his carb-insulin idea, and has been disproven (see carbsane's blog or google 'protein insulin') I progressed further than that book...if you want to learn more, try an actual scientist or some of the leaders of the 'paleo' movement who eat carbs.
Paleoanthropological evidence indicates the increase in brain size that marks the difference between humans and apes occurred about 2 million years ago with the emergence of Homo erectus. Prior to that time there was a climate shift such that the rain forests became grasslands and the number of grazing mammals increased. Before then, apes and pre-humans ate a primarily plant-based diet, and following the climate shift, obtaining sufficient nutrition from plants became energetically too costly for many pre-humans and constituted a selective force. Fossil evidence suggests that beginning about 2 million years ago, pre-humans were beginning to butcher animals. Many anthropologists believe that a high-energy and high-protein diet fueled brain evolution over a relatively short evolutionary time of 10,000 to 100,000 years. During the time that modern humans emerged, there were no doubt periods of both feast and famine. The ability to evolve rapidly that enabled modern humans to emerge from evolution also doomed the species to diseases such as obesity and type 2 diabetes resulting from the evolutionary conservation of genes that would be selected during the times of famine.
Ted Simon
http://tedsimon.authorsxpress.com/
Concerning food: Your note about 1 calorie of skipped protein, and the body requiring 53 calories of carbohydrates to make up for it. That resonates with me, and I understand the issue better. I already had some understanding of the problem of "over-carbing" as well as the dangers presented by too many simple carbs.; and simple vs. complex carbs.; and mixing certain carbs. (beans and rice) to form protein.
The food issue becomes more complicated now with the matter of GMOs and their related dangers (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/12/monsantos-gmo-corn-linked_n_420365.html?page=3&show_comment_id=37988389). The IJBS (your fellow biologists) finding organ damage in testing 3 varieties of GM Corn. So, it's not just the matter of balancing protein with simple and complex carbohydrates; in our post World War II agriculture, it's the actual amount of nutrients (or lack thereof) which will affect our evolutionary skills.
Likewise, from the very start of his so called insights into human behavior is so suspect I couldn't bother to view any more of the slides. Who says protein is more expensive than carbohydrates? I am pretty sure Big Macs and KFC and Taco Bell burritos contain plenty of protein, and I guess of box of Fruit Loops costs about the same as a box of Chex. And there isn't a lot of protein in an apple, but a can of Campbells bean with bacon soup has plenty. And you don't think poor people drink a lot of milk?
Scientists view electron microscopes in laboratories, evolutionary biologists sit on leather sofas and think of fairy tales.
What is wrong with this statement? Two things. According to the theory, we have been the 'human animal' for two hundred thousand years...not millions. The second thing that is wrong is calling reproduction "difficult business". Difficult? The huge amount of increase of single mothers since the 1960's will attest that reproduction is not difficult. Maybe giving a living to people not working for a living has interferred with 'evolution' by replacing the father with the government. Destroying faith that we came from something and replaced it with the cosmic accident belief has destroyed the successful civilization that a free, moral society brings. We have suicide, depression, murder, teen pregnacy, crime that has gone thru the roof since the cosmic accident teaching started being taught to our kids in the 1960's. It appears that evolution, that teaching of it, is evolving into chaos.
The sooner we accept this, the sooner we can make actual progress in understanding and altering behaviors we currently dislike (i.e., child abuse) toward more socially acceptable one...that will stick.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jn0yH6i-9ys
Why do we live under this continuous threat in monstrous social systems led by madmen and sociopaths? Why?
There is a beautiful world out there. I hope you will take the time to do something enjoyable for yourself today.
Unless, of course, you're poor or a woman living in drought-stricken East Africa, especially gang-run Somalia...or Afghanistan...or...well, you get the idea. Just because YOU live in a beautiful world (and that's fine), don't forget that much of the human species does not, even to this day...and that such suffering is actually unnecessary, if we but had the will to make things different.
try this http://huntgatherlove.com/ instead of GCBC which I read front to back the week it was released. But since GT is incorrect on his carb-insulin idea, and has been disproven (see carbsane's blog or google 'protein insulin') I progressed further than that book...if you want to learn more, try an actual scientist or some of the leaders of the 'paleo' movement who eat carbs.
http://www.pnas.org/content/107/44/18815
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0023768