Is Race a Scientifically Useful Concept in Medical Research?

[nuenke]

You write this as if those northeast Asians were aware of the evolutionary significance of their actions, and had a conscious (eugenic?) purpose wrt conceiving and raising children. Do you really mean it like that?

Which northeast Asian population(s) are you referring to? What time period are you referring to? Given that all human populations show evidence of migration, mixing, etc, what is the ancestry of these northeast Asians? Is there anything from their culture to suggest that they had an even vaguely (OOM) accurate awareness of roots?

I am talking about human migration patterns from two million to 500 years ago essentially. That is when the great migrations started and it is the date Cavalli-Sforza uses to look at different races. That is, he looks for isolated villages, towns, any part of a nation or race where ancestors have not been mongrelized for the last 500 years.

Before that, there was slow random mixing, especially further out. That is, sub-Saharan Africa, Western Europe, Eastern Asia, Australia, etc. What they are saying is the occasional migrant wondered into the gene pool, brought some new genetic material, but the ecological and social pressures remained and maintained certain phenotypes that were advantageous. For East Asians, high intelligence was essential in the harsh environment, as glaciations were occurring. There was no conscious effort at selective breeding, it was natural selection.

On the other hand, there is no reason why culture cannot have an impact on breeding patterns equal to or more than the environment. We are probably seeing the results of thousands of years of breeding for tribalism in the Middle East. That is, these people seem to be extremely xenophobic due to frequent warfare in this densely populated region of the world. We can only speculate what caused the differences in racial intelligence and behavioral tendencies from extrapolations from known differences and then working out the most likely history.

 

[Nereid]

I am talking about human migration patterns from two million to 500 years ago essentially. That is when the great migrations started and it is the date Cavalli-Sforza uses to look at different races. That is, he looks for isolated villages, towns, any part of a nation or race where ancestors have not been mongrelized for the last 500 years.

Before that, there was slow random mixing, especially further out. That is, sub-Saharan Africa, Western Europe, Eastern Asia, Australia, etc. What they are saying is the occasional migrant wondered into the gene pool, brought some new genetic material, but the ecological and social pressures remained and maintained certain phenotypes that were advantageous. For East Asians, high intelligence was essential in the harsh environment, as glaciations were occurring. There was no conscious effort at selective breeding, it was natural selection.

On the other hand, there is no reason why culture cannot have an impact on breeding patterns equal to or more than the environment. We are probably seeing the results of thousands of years of breeding for tribalism in the Middle East. That is, these people seem to be extremely xenophobic due to frequent warfare in this densely populated region of the world. We can only speculate what caused the differences in racial intelligence and behavioral tendencies from extrapolations from known differences and then working out the most likely history.

You first mentioned 'north eastern Asia', then 'East Asians'; you also talked about 'narrow eyes for protection from the sun' and 'high intelligence was essential in the harsh environment, as glaciations were occurring'. When was the last glaciation, in east Asia? Who determined that 'high intelligence was essential in the harsh environment, as glaciations were occurring'? How did they come to this conclusion?

 

[Nereid]

for marcus (enjoy!)

I came across this recently "Joseph Chang, a statistician at Yale University, has recently shown that all of the people living in various regions of the world more than about 800 years ago can be divided into two categories. Each individual was either the direct ancestor of everyone in that part of the world alive today (about 80% of people fall into this category), or the lineage represented by a person went extinct, making that person an ancestor of no one today.

[...]

Now factor in the consequences of human migrations. [...] Similarly, all Africans today descend from Chinese traders who visited Africa, and undoubtedly fathered children, early in the 1400s.

[...]

So if 800 years ago our ancestors included even a single European, African, or Asian, then 1,600 years ago our ancestors included most of the adult population of all three continents.[/color]"

Source: pp46, 47; "Mapping Human History, Discovering the Past Through Our Genes", Steve Olson, 2002

 

[BlackVision]

When was the last glaciation, in east Asia?

For the 100,000 years that human races have been separate, most of that period was under an Ice Age.

Who determined that 'high intelligence was essential in the harsh environment, as glaciations were occurring'? How did they come to this conclusion?

There seem to be well accepted theories of colder regions requiring more intelligence. Food was more scarce in Europe and Asia. It is suspected that more thought and planning was involved in order to obtain food. Also due to the smaller food supply, smaller body sizes would also be an advantage as less food intake would be required in order to maintain survival. Both Whites and Asians have developed lower testosterone level and body sizes. Meanwhile they developed higher cranial sizes. Perhaps in compensation for the lowered testosterone level and body sizes.

In any case, the different environments that is Africa and Eurasia, shaped evolution in a different way.

 

[Moonbear]

There seem to be well accepted theories of colder regions requiring more intelligence. Food was more scarce in Europe and Asia. It is suspected that more thought and planning was involved in order to obtain food. Also due to the smaller food supply, smaller body sizes would also be an advantage as less food intake would be required in order to maintain survival.

That would be in contrast to Bergmann's Rule, which states that a larger body size results in a lower surface area to volume ratio, thus reducing heat loss. There's a basic tutorial at this site for those unfamiliar with Bergmann's and Allen's rules in ecology. Bergmann's Rule and Allen's Rule have been repeatedly validated in both human and animal populations.

The exception seems to be Oceanic populations. This has been explained as due to the selection for those best able to conserve energy during the voyages to the islands and in the early days of forming those settlements.
Bindon JR, Baker PT. Bergmann's rule and the thrifty genotype. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1997 Oct;104(2):201-10.

 

[hitssquad]

Thermodynamic advantage of low surface to volume ratio in human populations

due to the smaller food supply, smaller body sizes would also be an advantage as less food intake would be required in order to maintain survival.

That would be in contrast to Bergmann's Rule, which states that a larger body size results in a lower surface area to volume ratio, thus reducing heat loss.

The thermodynamic advantage of low surface to volume ratio has been cited to explain the characteristically relatively high body-fat ratios and the characteristically relatively short and pudgy physiques of northeastern mongoloid populations. This is partly mentioned by Rushton on page 40 of the http://www.charlesdarwinresearch.org/reb.html of his Race, Evolution, and Behavior:

• East Asia was even colder than North Europe, but with less cloud cover and more sunlight. There a thicker layer of fat helped to insulate against the cold. This gives many Orientals a so-called “yellow” complexion because it reduces the visibility of red blood vessels close to the skin.

If I recall correctly, in the unabridged print editions of his book Rushton goes into more detail about the distinctively pudgy bodies of northeastern mongoloid populations and how this might be explained from an evolutionary perspective.

 

[Dagenais]

Somewhere else in Social Sciences (or was it Politics & World Affairs?), someone posted a link which said this of the Tiger

I was the one that wrote the post about Tiger and provided the link. Geez, can't anyone remember Dagenais!?

They see he is black

If you've seen him enough times, you can tell he's mixed.

Now that he's married a girl from Sweden, I wonder what his child will look like...

Love it! here we have a great paradigm for the "raceless" category!

He's Caublasian.