As humans, are we becoming Genetically weaker?

FOOD FOR THOUGHT
Woke up this morning which is one of those things that I seem to not have much control over. Anyway. As I said, I woke up and immediately started churning over that particular nights dreaming. And trying to prioritize those seemingly random thoughts that choke my mind up, like:' im getting the Apple iPhone' or 'what strength coffee do I have this morning' or 'im feeling particular horrid today' or 'need to add some direction to my Bipolar Blog' or 'yada yada yada ad infinitum'.

 

Anywho, complex and 'reality based' as is usual for my dreams, never anything too 'unreal' or improbable.

As I mulled over these dreams a thought hit me. Some Psychology News article somewhere, or some insane number of Science Blogs or Philosophy based discussion group must of already hammered this thought out...

So, trying to cut what was a potentially short story into a shorter story after making it a long story, the idea or thought was thus:

As a human race, intelligent beings, hell bent on survival...

Are we becoming 'genetically or biologically' weaker over time?

First things first. I am no science expert, genetics and such like, although interest me, goes over my head. This is just a layperson's naivé view on a vastly complicated subject.The further we progress in science, genetics etc, in ensuring our own survival, trying to beat the course of Nature, eradicating virus after virus, disease after disease? Are we unintentionally weakening our own biological defence as nature had intended, by allowing ourselves to become dependent on science and genetically modified pills and medicines.

Once you start you can't really stop. But it get's harder every time.

Much like the mad scientist, when faced with some energy weapon who harnesses the attack by the humans for his own proposes, are we looking at the short term picture when we allow ourselves to be caught up in this seemingly never ending battle against nature.

Using Depression as a subject I know about through personal experience, we are advised that medication is only part of the treatment, that relying on medication, although a useful short term plan, does not ensure a long successful cure. You need to work at it from all angles, emotionally, physically, psychologically and biologically.

A degree of emotional strength however is required, there is no easy path.

I am just wondering if like anti-depressants, we are taking the 'short-term' plan and not the 'long-term' plan. We all want to live healthy lives, hopefully to a nice age, but I feel we, in this day and age, are just too absorbed by the 'here and now', not looking at the 'much bigger' picture. This is one area where to be 'zen', 'buddist', yogi or just 'where ever you go there you are', 'think about the now, not the past or future because now is what is happening' is not appropriate unless we can honestly and sincerely say...

'yes, the improvements in medicine are beneficial in the long term biological evolvement of the human species and will not adversely affect in any way our 'natural' growth over the centuries."

After all, that's what we are up against and we are also up against a nature that has been given the task of defeating our own futile attempts to beat the latest strain of super virus. The Virus seems to me to be the smart one here, adapting to our defences, either over a short period or long period, depends on what your class short and long, well I mean relative to our own life span.

I personally think we are bringing about the end of human kind in a naive and short term attempt to lengthen our own lives. in our own lifetime. Sure, we are living longer, we get more out of our lives. But that is just us, a relative speck on the general history of human beings. nature it seems intended us to not live so long as what we do now and are constantly striving to lengthen. Of course there are other issues like population explosions, space etc.

Are we becoming to dependent on science to create cures, vaccines and medications? Bit like being wrapped up in cotton wool for your whole life, then being shoved out into the harsh cold reality of life. We are continuing to wrap up ourselves in genetic 'cotton wool' that can only go on for so long, surely?

I think we are 'de-evolving' not evolving.

As a race we are competitive and hell bent on surviving 'selfish', same as the virus. Just seems the virus always comes out the winner. Uses our previous attempts to create itself a tolerance that becomes harder to break. Seems a war that at someone point will become impossible to win either because nature outwits the scientific minds of the time or we just become, over generations, medication dependent. Weak. Then what?

In time, when science has evolved to a point where there are cures and quick fixes for every conceivable ailment, our bodies will become so dependent on medications and supplements and unused to fighting infection that we will be a very fragile shell of a human being.

Fix with a cure, but ignore the cause. Short term over long term. Selfish over selfless. Survival of the fittest over survival over the human race. Short sightedness over... Well, I think that's me done.

Comments

[Anna Kavanagh]

So, in other words, if we hadn't intervened in certain illnesses, our bodies may have naturally evolved in such a way as to produce its own defence which would be a permanent defence to a paricular illness rather than a temporary "sticking plaster" in the form of an artificial remedy.

Take for example Type 1 diabetes in which the body's own white blood cells have, for some unknown reason, attacked the insulin producing cells of the pancreas whilst fighting off some virus. The white blood cells become confused and attack their own body cells mistaking them for a foreign cell to be eradicated. They eradicate these cells to extinction thus making it impossible for the body to produce its own insulin ever again.

Suppose we hadn't intervened with insulin injections? Would the body's immune system eventually work out what it was doing wrong?

Even if this took the body hundreds or thousands of years to work out a remedy through natural evolution, would this be better in the long term for human survival? At present, we are intervening because we cannot bear to die young or, worse, watch the people we love so dearly die young. We have found a temporary solution so we, quite understandably, use it to better our lives NOW, in this century, rather than letting nature take its course.

My son has Type 1 diabetes; there is no way on earth that I would be in favour of nature taking its course and watch him die. I inject him 2-3 times a day to prevent his early death.

But, as Graham says, we are administering these kinds of unnatural solutions possibly at the cost of the long-term benefit of the human race, creating a situation where the body will never evolve its own way of dealing with this malfunction.

But, we are intelligent, inventive, determined, compassionate animals bent on protecting ourselves and those we love from death. I personally, am more concerned about the immediate survival of my family and those other people I love to be selfless and allow for nature to find its own solution.

Time will tell........But Graham has a very good point worth a good deal of thought.