Modern medicine now saves the lives of many people who would have died before coming to child-bearing age. Therefore, people who throughout history would not have procreated are doing so now. Does this weaken (or even spell the end of) the ability of humans to evolve?
2007-11-19 04:04:01 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics ➔ Biology
Not really. I've heard this argument before, but the point that is missed is that humans have evolved to use culture to adapt to their environment.
For example, instead of evolving bigger teeth, chambered stomacks to accomadate eating grains, we use mills and fire (cooking) to process food we would not have otherwise been able to eat, instead of evolving fur and blubber, we make clothes, etc.
So no, this is part of human evolution.
wl
2007-11-19 05:42:24 · answer #1 · answered by WolverLini 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Still assuming no "WWE" advantage: Terry Funk. As I said before, if he couldn't out-wrestle you he'd out-fight you. If he couldn't out-fight you, he'd out-"crazy" you. Bret Hart. Hate to see Dynamite leave so soon, but the Hitman would just out-wrestle him and make him tap to the Sharpshooter. Sting. A little better wrestler than Savage, I think. Sting would win by submission to the Scorpion Deathlock. Chris Benoit. Damn...what a match-up! Chris' strength advantage would be the difference here. Dean would eventually tap to the Crippler Crossface. Kurt Angle. As great as Owen was, so is Kurt. Kurt's meaner and more ferocious. No submission here, Kurt would just have to wear Owen out and pin him. Hulk Hogan. Hogan CAN wrestle. He's bigger and stronger than Austin, too. The Undertaker. Shawn's good, real good. I just think the Undertaker can beat him. Ric Flair. Flair had no trouble out-wrestling the big guys. The Rock would be no different.
2016-05-24 04:54:09 · answer #2 · answered by renetta 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
NO.
The ability is still there. However the need to adapt is not.
Modern medicine is good for the individual but bad for the race as a whole. Genetic diseases that use to kill people before they were old enough to have kids now are dealt with in a non-Darwinian fashion. Those individuals now survive and pass their genetic issue onto their kids. As a result, we see more and more people with some sort of genetic problem that requires modern medicine to care for. It is a wonderful arrangement for doctors as it ensures a constant supply of patients dependent upon them both now and in the future.
However, the solution is not to dump modern medicine but to continue with it in all of its forms. Genetic engineering is coming in the future and with that, we can wipe out all the genetic diseases. We may also be able to tweak man genetically so he can tolerate more C02 in the air and much higher temperatures. That way global warming will not wipe us all out.
2007-11-19 04:25:41 · answer #3 · answered by forgivebutdonotforget911 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I actually think that our medical ability is part of our evolution. Human beings don't rule to the world because we are the strongest or the biggest. We rule because we are the smartest. Using our brains to develop cures do common disease is a great example of an organism adapting to its environment.
Since we aren't necessarily 100 percent products of our genes and are greatly effected by our environments...the more humans that survive the better. Who is to say that a person who "wouldn't have been around" isn't the next einstein?
2007-11-19 04:12:51 · answer #4 · answered by Franklin 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No, as medicines cure what is wrong. If people die of disease, then there still woudn't be any evolution, because they haven't survived to pass on their supposedly "immune by evolution" gene.
Hope u understand
2007-11-19 04:11:52 · answer #5 · answered by Rostrum 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋