View Single Post
daniel6874
#10
Apr30-10, 08:54 AM
P: 64
Quote Quote by Shalashaska View Post
Lets say that Borek is 100% right, for the sake of argument. If the catastrophe D H wisely mentions were to occur, I suspect that adaptations related to child-bearing would not be the issue. Remember that most of the world doesn't enjoy such medical luxuries so freely. Our "weak" and "strong" stock, if you like to think of it that way, are all increasing, and in a disaster it would rapidly decrease. If such a disadvantageous change occurred, I believe that it would be eliminated rapidly. After all, as you posit a block to healthy reproduction, those people would be dwarfed by those who could bear children. I doubt that something so critical in the history of our evolution could be wiped away by surgical procedures.

In the end, this is a bit of "if I cut a notch in the mother or father's ear, does the child inherit it?" Besides, quality and access to medicine is generally improving. Why would you assume the future holds diminishing technology?
You are not reading carefully. (1) I pointedly said that many of the problems addressed by surgery were not heritable, and not part of the issue I raised. Precisely the "notched ear" issue. (2) I did not suggest that this problem would be universal, and I already noted that medical care is substandard in many places. You repeat this. (3) I made no assumptions about the future. If our history as a species goes back more than 400,000 years, then most of our history has taken place in the absence of surgery. A better question would be, why would anyone assume it's here to stay?