Medical Science and Natural Selection, why Medical Science is bad.

**skelooth** · 05-31-2006, 03:46 PM

I will just take for granted that we all understand how the theory of natural selection works.... those who survive reproduce passing along genes and characteristics, while those who do not survive do not.

Medical science is:
Detatching extra limbs from babies
Enabling people with defective organs to continue living
Allowing psychotic people to find some sanity
--------------------
Creating a population with more birth defects
Creating a population prone to more defective organs
Creating a population prone to more psychiatric issues

As much as I love my family, my self, and 'my neighbor', I can not help but see just how detrimental medical science might ultimately be to the human race. We are slowly eliminating natural selection and allowing all but the most severe genetic mutations to thrive and reproduce.

Discuss.

Lift · 05-31-2006, 04:01 PM

Excellent thread! If natural selection is correct and we desire the advancement of the human race then it follows that we should not help those that fall sick or are born defected in some way instead we should let them die so that only the strongest may survive and reproduce.

We could even speed this up by killing the weak...

However.. humans have a great intellectual capacity and to judge humans 'success' in purley physical terms would i believe be a mistake. To show that intelligence and health are mutually exclusive I choose for my example: Stephen Hawking! Certainly he won't be squatting a grand this year, but he might have a shot a grand unification theory.

Why intelligence over health: no time to add my thoughts but I will later

**Sholiz** · 05-31-2006, 04:04 PM

very solid theory, although medical science does a LOT of good I have to agree with you skel

**skelooth** · 05-31-2006, 04:34 PM

Yes, intelligence over physical strength, but that's not the problem.

With our current economic set up (at least in the modernized western countries) intelligence for the most part DOES prevail. Intelligence = better schooling = better job = better money = women (LOL I just solved the mystery of the universe).

But what's the point of having a bunch of physically weak and disease prone egg heads with a low birth rate.... when on the other side we have a 'strain' of stronger dumber idiots. Face it, growing up in a poor ghetto means less medical coverage, intelligence does not play as big a part as who you know, and a survival of the fittest paradigm still exists for the most part. Not to mention the fact that ghettos and low income people's have VERY high birth rates.

We need class based society, all throughout human history and evolution there has been a pecking order that has evolved right along side of us. (from primary ape to president, from community of apes to community consisting of subclasses of people).

How long before ghetto dwellers and eggheads literally become seperate species? Is it possible? Will one obliterate the other true to darwinian theory?

edit: This is a discussion surrounding natural selection theory, not religion. Religious beliefs and divine intervention are not valid in this instance.

DJohnson · 05-31-2006, 05:36 PM

This was a very dominant issue back pre-WWII for the world's scientists and support from world-class scientists was a major cause to the rise of the Nazi party.

Theoretically, it makes sense, but all the research points to absolutely no change in genetic abnormalities. If the anomaly is genetic, why have the genetics of the parents lasted hundreds of thousands of years? Few problems are actually from faulty genetics as faulty use of those genetics. Genetics are are a lot like Lego Instructions, they're almost always right but that doesn't mean that's the way everything will be assembled by an individual.

It would take hundreds of thousands of years for the "ones who live who shouldn't" to make a difference to the gene pool. We will likely be able to manipulate DNA in a matter of centuries, if not decades. This will make natural selection among humans obsolete.

Keep in mind that living long means nothing in natural selection. If you are genetically predisposed to losing your liver at 18 years old, in nature a male could already have dozens of offspring if not more if he has a high social status. Same thing with a total psychopath. A lack of emotion could give a male a competitive advantage in impregnating females over other males who have moral values. There is no "morning after pill" for rape in nature.

All in my humble opinion of course.

**madman911** · 05-31-2006, 05:40 PM

In the grand scheme of things, the ability to prolong the lives of people with disease, or to fix deformities will not result in a deterioration of our physical health as a society. Disease results from one of three causes: genetics, environmental factors (carcinogens, viruses), and/or diet. Which one of these causes is responsible for the smallest percentage of human disease?

If you said "genetics"... you're right!!

The majority of cancers arise from spontaneous mutations resultant from inprecision in the DNA replication process or from exposure to carcinogens. Most heart disease is obesity related, as is diabetes, high blood pressure and a myriad other diseases. Smoking is linked to heart disease and high blood pressure, as well as cancer. Most liver disease requiring transplantation is caused by viral infections, such as Hepatitis C. Diabetes and high blood pressure are the most common causes of kidney failure. 60-70% of birth defects are of unknown cause. Genetic diseases cannot be purged from the population by letting those afflicted die. Most genetic disorders are recessive in nature, meaning both parents have to carry a copy of the disease gene to have a baby with the disease. If a particular recessive disease has a 1/10,000 frequency of occurrence, if you calculate the frequency of carriers for the mutation, the number is 1/50. Although the disease is rare, the number of carriers in the population is quite high... and carriers are completely unaware they are carriers unless they have the bad luck of randomly selecting another carrier to make babies with. Even then, if the mutation is embryonic lethal, it will not result in a diseased baby, but a higher chance of miscarriage. We all know those couples who have suffered multiple miscarriages in an attempt to have a baby... genetics is often the root cause. Disorders resulting from chromosomal abnormalities usually result in sterility in the affected individual and are usually not heritable, but more of an "accident" that occurs during cell division where the chromosomes don't segregate correctly into the new daughter cells.

DJohnson · 05-31-2006, 05:49 PM

^^ Good post!

The Booger · 05-31-2006, 05:54 PM

Natural selection doesn't seem to effect the human population like it once did. Those with terminal diseases are now living long enough to reproduce. The insane are reproducing, furthering their disease.

About the only "natural selection" going on is in third world countries and HIV/AIDS (to me at least). Medical science is a scary thing. Instead of us controlling it, it will eventually control us.

**skelooth** · 06-01-2006, 03:44 AM

btw madman, I'm not ignoring your pwn, I'm still trying to find a counter pwn that will pwnify your geek speak with more geek speak.

**Trick D** · 06-01-2006, 04:32 AM

I do believe there is a famous professor from Princeton that believes all handicapped and deformed should be killed due to natural selection. Kinda extreme.

**madman911** · 06-01-2006, 02:29 PM

In the past, our own society tried to purge itself of mental retardation by sterilizing everyone who was mentally handicapped; the practice is termed "eugenic sterilization". The theory behind the practice was completely flawed and could never work. The individuals with mental handicaps are not the major source for perpetuating the mutations, rather, the hundreds of thousands to millions of completely normal "carriers" serve as the actual reservoir.

It's also important to note that when a genetic mutation is discovered in a family, hospitals will provide genetic counseling to the family. Family members for generations to come can then be tested for the mutation and decide whether they want to risk having children and even ask their spouse/prospective spouse to be tested. Fetal testing for many disorders is now possible.

The fact is, virtually every one of us is carrying one or more recessive mutation that could result in a child with a genetic disorder if we "hook-up" with someone that has the same mutation... but the chances are low, depending on the disease it could be 1/5000, 1/10000, 1/100000. It all depends on the frequency of that particular mutation in the human population. That's why parents are typically shocked when they have a child with a genetic disorder, it seems to just come out of nowhere without ever having surfaced in their family history. But the mutation was always there, being passed uneventfully for many, many generations until it revealed itself through a chance, random mating with a partner harboring that same mutation. The mutations you have, you will pass on to your children, making them carriers as well. If you want to get rid of all genetic disorders... you'd better start killing off everyone.

**skelooth** · 06-01-2006, 07:06 PM

Where's my gun....

05-31-2006, 03:46 PM	#1
skelooth eh heh heh Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Behind you Posts: 7,203 Recipes: 0 Rep Power: 158	Medical Science and Natural Selection, why Medical Science is bad. I will just take for granted that we all understand how the theory of natural selection works.... those who survive reproduce passing along genes and characteristics, while those who do not survive do not. Medical science is: Detatching extra limbs from babies Enabling people with defective organs to continue living Allowing psychotic people to find some sanity -------------------- Creating a population with more birth defects Creating a population prone to more defective organs Creating a population prone to more psychiatric issues As much as I love my family, my self, and 'my neighbor', I can not help but see just how detrimental medical science might ultimately be to the human race. We are slowly eliminating natural selection and allowing all but the most severe genetic mutations to thrive and reproduce. Discuss. __________________ http://loseover100lbs.com/misc-f7.html

05-31-2006, 04:01 PM	#2
Lift I Love IronMass.Com Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 825 Recipes: 0 Rep Power: 11	Excellent thread! If natural selection is correct and we desire the advancement of the human race then it follows that we should not help those that fall sick or are born defected in some way instead we should let them die so that only the strongest may survive and reproduce. We could even speed this up by killing the weak... However.. humans have a great intellectual capacity and to judge humans 'success' in purley physical terms would i believe be a mistake. To show that intelligence and health are mutually exclusive I choose for my example: Stephen Hawking! Certainly he won't be squatting a grand this year, but he might have a shot a grand unification theory. Why intelligence over health: no time to add my thoughts but I will later __________________ MrLiftALot@hotmail.com "King Kong Ain't Got Sh*t On Me..."

05-31-2006, 04:04 PM	#3
Sholiz Soldier In Progress Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Michigan Posts: 3,431 Recipes: 3 Rep Power: 230	very solid theory, although medical science does a LOT of good I have to agree with you skel __________________ You hear me before you see me, I got King Kong in the trunk

05-31-2006, 04:34 PM	#4
skelooth eh heh heh Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Behind you Posts: 7,203 Recipes: 0 Rep Power: 158	Yes, intelligence over physical strength, but that's not the problem. With our current economic set up (at least in the modernized western countries) intelligence for the most part DOES prevail. Intelligence = better schooling = better job = better money = women (LOL I just solved the mystery of the universe). But what's the point of having a bunch of physically weak and disease prone egg heads with a low birth rate.... when on the other side we have a 'strain' of stronger dumber idiots. Face it, growing up in a poor ghetto means less medical coverage, intelligence does not play as big a part as who you know, and a survival of the fittest paradigm still exists for the most part. Not to mention the fact that ghettos and low income people's have VERY high birth rates. We need class based society, all throughout human history and evolution there has been a pecking order that has evolved right along side of us. (from primary ape to president, from community of apes to community consisting of subclasses of people). How long before ghetto dwellers and eggheads literally become seperate species? Is it possible? Will one obliterate the other true to darwinian theory? edit: This is a discussion surrounding natural selection theory, not religion. Religious beliefs and divine intervention are not valid in this instance. __________________ http://loseover100lbs.com/misc-f7.html

05-31-2006, 05:36 PM	#5
DJohnson IMPC Contestant Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Alberta, Canada Posts: 1,033 Recipes: 0 Rep Power: 50	This was a very dominant issue back pre-WWII for the world's scientists and support from world-class scientists was a major cause to the rise of the Nazi party. Theoretically, it makes sense, but all the research points to absolutely no change in genetic abnormalities. If the anomaly is genetic, why have the genetics of the parents lasted hundreds of thousands of years? Few problems are actually from faulty genetics as faulty use of those genetics. Genetics are are a lot like Lego Instructions, they're almost always right but that doesn't mean that's the way everything will be assembled by an individual. It would take hundreds of thousands of years for the "ones who live who shouldn't" to make a difference to the gene pool. We will likely be able to manipulate DNA in a matter of centuries, if not decades. This will make natural selection among humans obsolete. Keep in mind that living long means nothing in natural selection. If you are genetically predisposed to losing your liver at 18 years old, in nature a male could already have dozens of offspring if not more if he has a high social status. Same thing with a total psychopath. A lack of emotion could give a male a competitive advantage in impregnating females over other males who have moral values. There is no "morning after pill" for rape in nature. All in my humble opinion of course. __________________ Age: 21 Height: 5'10.5" Mar, 2001: 135lbs @ ~14% Nov, 2004: 245lbs @ ~40% Feb, 2006: 188lbs @ 20.1% - Hydrostatic Tested Dec, 2006: 168lbs @ 5.5% - 7 Point Caliper Tested BULKING FOR A LONG TIME NOW Long Term Goal: Over 200lbs @ 8%

05-31-2006, 05:40 PM	#6
madman911 Metamorphosizing Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Boston Area Posts: 1,532 Recipes: 0 Rep Power: 61	In the grand scheme of things, the ability to prolong the lives of people with disease, or to fix deformities will not result in a deterioration of our physical health as a society. Disease results from one of three causes: genetics, environmental factors (carcinogens, viruses), and/or diet. Which one of these causes is responsible for the smallest percentage of human disease? If you said "genetics"... you're right!! The majority of cancers arise from spontaneous mutations resultant from inprecision in the DNA replication process or from exposure to carcinogens. Most heart disease is obesity related, as is diabetes, high blood pressure and a myriad other diseases. Smoking is linked to heart disease and high blood pressure, as well as cancer. Most liver disease requiring transplantation is caused by viral infections, such as Hepatitis C. Diabetes and high blood pressure are the most common causes of kidney failure. 60-70% of birth defects are of unknown cause. Genetic diseases cannot be purged from the population by letting those afflicted die. Most genetic disorders are recessive in nature, meaning both parents have to carry a copy of the disease gene to have a baby with the disease. If a particular recessive disease has a 1/10,000 frequency of occurrence, if you calculate the frequency of carriers for the mutation, the number is 1/50. Although the disease is rare, the number of carriers in the population is quite high... and carriers are completely unaware they are carriers unless they have the bad luck of randomly selecting another carrier to make babies with. Even then, if the mutation is embryonic lethal, it will not result in a diseased baby, but a higher chance of miscarriage. We all know those couples who have suffered multiple miscarriages in an attempt to have a baby... genetics is often the root cause. Disorders resulting from chromosomal abnormalities usually result in sterility in the affected individual and are usually not heritable, but more of an "accident" that occurs during cell division where the chromosomes don't segregate correctly into the new daughter cells. __________________ Millennium Sport Technologies Sponsored Athlete http://www.millenniumsport.net IMPC 2006 Novice Division Champ IMPC 2007 Open Division Champ Never underestimate the power of the bandana.

05-31-2006, 05:49 PM	#7
DJohnson IMPC Contestant Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Alberta, Canada Posts: 1,033 Recipes: 0 Rep Power: 50	^^ Good post! __________________ Age: 21 Height: 5'10.5" Mar, 2001: 135lbs @ ~14% Nov, 2004: 245lbs @ ~40% Feb, 2006: 188lbs @ 20.1% - Hydrostatic Tested Dec, 2006: 168lbs @ 5.5% - 7 Point Caliper Tested BULKING FOR A LONG TIME NOW Long Term Goal: Over 200lbs @ 8%

05-31-2006, 05:54 PM	#8
The Booger Pro Stature Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Look left. Posts: 664 Recipes: 0 Rep Power: 11	Natural selection doesn't seem to effect the human population like it once did. Those with terminal diseases are now living long enough to reproduce. The insane are reproducing, furthering their disease. About the only "natural selection" going on is in third world countries and HIV/AIDS (to me at least). Medical science is a scary thing. Instead of us controlling it, it will eventually control us. __________________ thebooger@hush.ai

06-01-2006, 03:44 AM	#9
skelooth eh heh heh Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Behind you Posts: 7,203 Recipes: 0 Rep Power: 158	btw madman, I'm not ignoring your pwn, I'm still trying to find a counter pwn that will pwnify your geek speak with more geek speak. __________________ http://loseover100lbs.com/misc-f7.html

06-01-2006, 02:29 PM	#11
madman911 Metamorphosizing Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Boston Area Posts: 1,532 Recipes: 0 Rep Power: 61	In the past, our own society tried to purge itself of mental retardation by sterilizing everyone who was mentally handicapped; the practice is termed "eugenic sterilization". The theory behind the practice was completely flawed and could never work. The individuals with mental handicaps are not the major source for perpetuating the mutations, rather, the hundreds of thousands to millions of completely normal "carriers" serve as the actual reservoir. It's also important to note that when a genetic mutation is discovered in a family, hospitals will provide genetic counseling to the family. Family members for generations to come can then be tested for the mutation and decide whether they want to risk having children and even ask their spouse/prospective spouse to be tested. Fetal testing for many disorders is now possible. The fact is, virtually every one of us is carrying one or more recessive mutation that could result in a child with a genetic disorder if we "hook-up" with someone that has the same mutation... but the chances are low, depending on the disease it could be 1/5000, 1/10000, 1/100000. It all depends on the frequency of that particular mutation in the human population. That's why parents are typically shocked when they have a child with a genetic disorder, it seems to just come out of nowhere without ever having surfaced in their family history. But the mutation was always there, being passed uneventfully for many, many generations until it revealed itself through a chance, random mating with a partner harboring that same mutation. The mutations you have, you will pass on to your children, making them carriers as well. If you want to get rid of all genetic disorders... you'd better start killing off everyone. __________________ Millennium Sport Technologies Sponsored Athlete http://www.millenniumsport.net IMPC 2006 Novice Division Champ IMPC 2007 Open Division Champ Never underestimate the power of the bandana.

06-01-2006, 07:06 PM	#12
skelooth eh heh heh Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Behind you Posts: 7,203 Recipes: 0 Rep Power: 158	Where's my gun....

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode