Evolutionary change is in the news. It caused me to do some reading, in which I learned some interesting points from a professor at WTAMU: "there is no 'should' in evolution. Evolution is not goal-oriented; it has no end purpose." Instead, "Evolution is just the observation that creatures change over time," and humans have the capacity to change. Evolution takes at least hundreds of years, and "Accurate scientific predictions about the evolution of humans are nearly impossible."
Some experts conclude that the likely human evolution will depend upon the occurrence of events or circumstances that impact the young. This, they contend, will cause death among youth, and perhaps begin to impact the frequency or repetitiveness of traits that are passed on through reproduction by survivors. Therefore, threats to the young are critical. Thus, "Whatever biological traits enable a person in the US to avoid fatal injuries, suicide, homicide, and cancer" will "likely be traits that are passed on."
We have just lived through an intriguing viral pandemic. I have noted repeatedly that the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic seemed to be avoidable by some among us. I know several people who did little to nothing to protect themselves and yet were never infected. As our post-pandemic progresses, research continues into various aspects of COVID-19 and how we survived it (at least thus far). A recent paper suggests that human evolution and the Black Death may have played a role.
In Evolution of immune genes is associated with the Black Death, 32 authors publish findings of their research. They conclude "Infectious diseases are among the strongest selective pressures driving human evolution." Their study is focused on "the Plague of Justinian in AD 541" and "the Black Death (1346–1350)." Note that the latter was about 700 years ago. These scientists conclude that "the high mortality rate suggests" people at that time lacked "protection against Y. pestis infection." Thereafter, various similar pandemic outbreaks were "often . . . associated with reduced mortality rates." The suggestion is that those who survived the Death pass on traits to offspring that enhance their chance of survival in later viral onslaughts.
The scientists concede that the sample size in their study was small. But, they extracted DNA from bodies both pre- and post-Black Death. From their research, they believe they have located specific genetic changes that impact our immune system and ability to fight infection. There is not, as yet, similar data regarding the genetic ability regarding outright resistance to infection. However, there is the suggestion that our evolution includes the reaction to environmental irritants and insults.
In the midst of reading and of pondering those changes, a page called tollfreeforwarding.com published an article that made my news feed, and that may be of interest (or it may be a marketing ploy for its "virtual phone number" business). This article is a somewhat scary exposition that leads with technology creating negative impacts "on our bodies." That company commissioned the construction of "Mindy," a representation of changes that might occur in humans as a reaction to the impacts of technology. Mindy is a 3D representation (technology purportedly foretelling the impact of technology).
The piece warns us that our love affair with technology may lead to intriguing changes in "3000 and beyond." Note that is about 1,000 years which is not so distinct from the 700 years mentioned above. We are warned here of our posture and monitor use resulting in arching of our neck and back. There is also a prediction that "consistently gripping your smartphone" may result in a hand deformity, or adaptation, that is referred to as "Text claw." The positioning of the arm to use such a device, they warn may lead to "90-degree elbow, . . . . Also known as “smartphone elbow.”
But, that is only the beginning. The authors contend that we may suffer impacts on our brains from technology. There could be impacts to our memory and cognition. The potential is expressed for children to experience more impact because their "lesser developed skulls are thinner." Thus, they hypothesize we might all evolve to thicker skulls and smaller brains. In keeping with the lead of this post, that would seem to depend upon those with existing thicker skulls being the survivors and procreators? Notably, the authors mention smaller brains, attributable to the simplification of our lives brought by technology, the so-called "idiocracy theory.”
I have mentioned that in the past. See Are you Inumerate (July 2018) and My Brain is Shrinking (July 2022). Essentially, this is a hypothesis that our brains may atrophy through decreased use. The tollfreeforwarding.com article seems instead focused on thicker skulls leaving less room for grey matter. While we might blame a lot of sources for shrinking grey matter, such as the Internet, social media, and smartphones, we have been warned for decades about the "idiot box." In fact, in 2021, scientists demonstrated that television does in fact decrease your grey matter. If television can make us less functional, can one argue about Facebook?
In addition to the hunched back, "Text claw," thickened skull, “smartphone elbow,” and diminished capacity, the good folks at tollfreeforwarding predict that we will develop a second eyelid to "limit the amount of harmful light our eyes are exposed to" from these various devices. And, all of these physical implications ignore the potential for impact on our mental health. The article cites "quickly mounting" evidence of challenges to our mental health. It contends research has shown "a link between Facebook use and a decline in your long-term well-being." That one, perhaps, required minimal research.
Are we evolving? Has it benefitted us on our path through the pandemic? Future research will illuminate that further. Will we become "Mindy" through our persistent use of technology? Or, will the fad of Facebook become tomorrow's MySpace? The tech giant is already fading some; where will that end? Will the stand-up desk, dictation software, and as-yet unimagined technology of tomorrow eliminate these threats before our DNA can react? Might the metaverse, headsets, and digital assistants render their predictions moot? Might the new tools simply suggest different challenges to our DNA?
It is a fascinating topic for consideration. In the end, from the standpoint of Daubert and science (See Daubert Better Explained, May 2016), I think I am willing to wait until someone other than a phone forwarding company performs some research. I am doubtful of Mindy, and for some reason Billy Joel's lyrics just keep running through my head as I think of her:
"It's just a fantasy, it's not the real thing" (Sometimes a Fantasy, A&R, 1980).
