Another factor is the weakening of natural selection. “In ancient times half our children would have died by the age of 20. Now, in the Western world, 98 per cent of them are surviving to 21.”
Leading geneticist Steve Jones says human evolution is over
Human evolution is grinding to a halt because of a shortage of older fathers in the West, according to a leading genetics expert.
Fathers over the age of 35 are more likely to pass on mutations, according to Professor Steve Jones, of University College London.
Speaking today at a UCL lecture entitled “Human evolution is over” Professor Jones will argue that there were three components to evolution – natural selection, mutation and random change. “Quite unexpectedly, we have dropped the human mutation rate because of a change in reproductive patterns,” Professor Jones told The Times.
“Human social change often changes our genetic future,” he said, citing marriage patterns and contraception as examples. Although chemicals and radioactive pollution could alter genetics, one of the most important mutation triggers is advanced age in men.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Newsvine
Furl
Google
Yahoo
This guy is retarded.
This guy is retarded. Natural selection occurs at least two ways. Dying, AND not passing on genes. In the West, older parents are more common now, not less. Not to mention that people actually studying this see evolution/natural selection increasing:
http://johnhawks.net/weblog/topics/evolution/selection/acceleration/accel_story_2007.html
I don't know what gets into
I don't know what gets into folks to say silly things like this. I just like finding them and laughing at it.
Prof Jones is wrong
Steve Jones is indeed wrongheaded - You'd really think he'd know better. Steven Pinker said something similar recently in EDGE - it really is strange.
It is very obvious that it is not survivability that drives evolution it is who has the babies. It really does not matter if 98 of people born reach 21 if only 2 of them have children.
The numbers are not that bad of course, I'm overstating it for effect. However I live in Hong Kong with the lowest birth rate on the planet 0.9 children per woman - and it is heading further south.
My wife has 10 or so close female friends in their 30's and none of them are married let alone have children. I have 8 or so close male friends who are married, and only one couple want to have children.
However this state of affairs will only last a couple of generations as that proportion of women who want to have children also have children with a similar attitude. Slowly the population will evolve into a 'want to have children' genotype that is very different from the one we have now. As we tame population growth in the next 50 years or so - we'll have a breather... and then the population will begin to grow and be unstoppable.
There is another driver - in China there is a disproportionate number of men to women and thus there is very strong selective pressure going on by those women with more of a choice in who they marry and procreate with. Many millions of men may as well have never been born, or died young, as they will never have the chance to procreate. That's an strong evolutionary pressure.
The main concern issue concerns FEMALE CHOICE to have babies, how many and with whom. It's always been thus and it won't change - so evolution will continue and Prof Jones needs to think again.