KeithHarwood

Yeah! Riiigghhtt!

Report on SBS news last night. Doctors have discovered a mutation which helps protect people against heart attack. The details were sketchy, but I gathered that it prevented the build-up of the fatty deposits that lead to artery blockages. The original mutant was identified and lived in Italy about 200 years ago. He was identified by surveying the inhabitants of a particular town, who had it and who didn't and who were they descended from. Interviews with the people suggested to me that the gene was recessive.

Take this with a shovel-ful of salt; I'm reporting it from memory.

Hyndis

There's also a mutation that provides immunity to AIDS.

Of course its a very rare thing, and the only way you know you'll have it is if your body is actually able to defeat the virus. So I wouldn't want to gamble on those odds with my health.

KeithHarwood

It's rare, but not very rare. It's more common in western Europe and north America because it also makes it easier to beat the Black Death. When the Black Death decimated the population of Europe in 1347-50 those carrying the gene were under-represented in the deaths. Consequently the frequency of that gene increased. Evolution in action.

The curious thing about this new gene is that it is carried by about forty people, all descended from the one man. The news report showed one of the investigators preparing a geneology chart. Presumably they will be able to identify every person who has inherited this mutation. A precise illustration of what the creationists say doesn't happen.

SEF

The thing which puzzled me about the news coverage is that it isn't even a new story. It's been around years and yet they were acting like it was a recent discovery and that they hadn't heard or reported it before (just one of many links findable with the right words, like the name of the place). It often seems as though I'm the only person on this planet not afflicted with 1984-style double-think and revisionist history, who can actually remember and think for themselves. Is everyone else dead or thoroughly brainwashed - or just hiding their knowledge better than I am so that the establishment doesn't catch them?

Hyndis

I, for one, welcome our new corporate overlords. :love:


</silliness>

Wounded King

You mean a raccoon did give birth to a giraffe?!!

Plognark

If I could, i'd have Don Hertzfeld's babies :notworthy

Jet Black

I thought that. the closest I can find is that a report was published in may, and now it's almost september.

hey, have you heard about the "all your base are belong to us" video?

Rhaedas

I've noticed that about a lot of science related stories. Old science topics make great filler stories, but you've got to spin them so it sounds like it's a new discovery. The best ones are when you can get a recent quote from a scientist on a decade old subject...makes it look fresh, but it's old enough so you won't have to retract any information that may change on a new finding.

Anyway, my first impression of the OP was, ha, there's more evidence of evolution in action, plus beneficial changes vs. the constantly argued entropy of genetics. But it'll be classified as microevolution by a creationist, and once again the forest is lost for the trees. It's not like we've been lacking evidence, they just don't get it (or get it, but prefer their worldview that says they can't believe it).

Tufted

I doubt that that gene (OP) would have much of a Darwinian effect on the population. Most people who get heart disease do so well after their reproductive years.