Are Humans Still Evolving?

Follow me to @pbsorigins! / pbsorigins
We’re on PATREON! Join the community / itsokaytobesmart
↓↓↓ More info and sources below ↓↓↓
We’re living longer. Dying less. Human life expectancy has doubled in just a couple centuries. Machines and meals and medicines keeping us alive long past the age where we can make babies. Does this mean our species is no longer under the influence of natural selection? Have humans stopped evolving?
-----------
Special thanks to our Brain Trust Patrons:
Ali Freiburger
Mehdi Damou
Barbora Bei
Ken Board
Clinger-Hamilton Family
Attila Pix
Burt Humburg
DeliciousKashmiri
Roy Lasris
dani bowman
David Johnston
Salih Arslan
Baerbel Winkler
Robert Young
Amy Sowada
Eric Meer
Dustin
Karen Haskell
Join us on Patreon!
/ itsokaytobesmart
Twitter
/ drjoehanson
/ okaytobesmart
Instagram
/ drjoehanson
/ okaytobesmart
Merch
store.dftba.com/collections/i...
Facebook
/ itsokaytobesmartpbs

[@besmart]

I'm definitely still evolving. This isn't even my final form! Leave me a comment and let me know how weirded out you are by the future prospects for human evolution

[@Gentlysix]

1st

[@tomwr22]

2nd

[@tomwr22]

@@Gentlysix 2nd

[@Rekker1]

3rd I guess

[@mymemeacademia]

1st

[@hettyscetty9785]

In a lot of cases the Bajou people lose their hearing as they get older due to the constant diving under water. So they have this amazing ability to hold their breath under water for longer than anyone else but the constant pressure changes damage their hearing overtime so they essentially traded their hearing for the ability.

[@sixtus9559]

They just have to wait another 10.000 years until the fitting gene pops up

[@cestlavegan5793]

Interesting note. Trade-offs! It’s always a trade-off. Just a matter of finding them.

[@budd2nd]

That’s super interesting.👍👍

[@destinyhero4795]

Woah, maybe in far future they'll gain another ability to compensate the hearing lost

[@R.E.factor]

@@destinyhero4795 I’d bet against that as we have already evolved our technology to compensate for hearing loss.

[@Tockrellman]

I’ve evolved into a couch potato. Edit: 7K likes? Mom, get the camera!

[@sandychen1381]

Same

[@nepterr715]

i Am more like a bed potato

[@altosack]

You _adapted_ into a couch potato.

[@nepterr715]

@Don't Read My Profile Photo i won't np

[@mattm7777]

Sofa potato*

[@christianperkins9508]

Absolutely love "Civilization is filthy, y'all."

[@catdoctrigeek1464]

Truer words never said!

[@eskrior6094]

I imagine a parallel universe were he just drowns at the beginning and the whole video is just him with he's head in the water bowl

[@ericparrish1515]

What's D2O I breath good with that.

[@legoyoda66]

Oh god why would you make me think that?

[@Jwellsuhhuh]

Sir you have been deemed to be a risk factor in our society, please seek out a rehab facility immediately.

[@finnromy6304]

😂😂😂😂😂

[@JonasWilms]

"Humans die less" Last time i checked the average death rate per person was still 1, i'm happy that they are improving on it.

[@StephanFitzgeraldTay]

Lol. Mortality rates are down. It is far more likely today than ever before that a baby born right now will grow up, have kids, and get to old age.

[@rossjennings4755]

Hey, look at it this way: there's, like, nearly 8 billion of us who haven't died yet. That's out of only about 117 billion who ever lived, so the average death rate per person is really only 93%! Could be worse!

[@mistermaumau]

Humans die (young) less

[@darrenrobinson9041]

Yes, I thought this was an odd statement to make, but from a certain point of view (credit Obi Wan Kenobi) it is true.

[@KaiserMattTygore927]

That's because you haven't cracked open your 1UP boxes yet.

[@darmakusuma891]

Not just the Bajaus, the Orang Laut (we call them the Sekaks in my island) of Sumatran eastern coasts and the Mokens of southern Myanmar have this adaptation too. The Mokens even take it further. They can see clearly underwater without the help of goggles. And they all share the exact same lifestyle. Only in different places.

[@arved.jeltsch]

Convergent evolution?

[@nosotrosloslobosestamosreg4115]

So they need diversity enrichment.

[@Louis-kw6yk]

@@arved.jeltsch likely

[@darmakusuma891]

@@arved.jeltsch I suppose it is... But there is one more thing they have in common that I forgot to mention. They're all Austronesians.

[@chidaluokoro9104]

Interesting

[@aquetzalcoatl4663]

My favorite part was when evolution said "It's carcanization time" and then carcanized over everyone.

[@RuyVuusen]

I mean, technically into crab-like forms, not crabs-and it mainly concerns only crustaceans, but you get the point.

[@aquetzalcoatl4663]

@@RuyVuusen Yes it's just a science joke.

[@RuyVuusen]

@@aquetzalcoatl4663 Yeah, and I just explained it to the people who don't know the meaning of the word. It saves them the time of having to Google it.

[@aquetzalcoatl4663]

@@RuyVuusen I'm sorry, I misunderstood your intent.

[@RuyVuusen]

@@aquetzalcoatl4663 No problem, I do that too, at times.

[@alex.g7317]

I’ve been asking the same question. Thanks for answering it.

[@vdevov]

5:50 I’m half Native American and half European, and this fact blew my mind. Some time in the past few years, my earwax changed dramatically. From what would be considered Native to European, according to this… My doctors seemed confused by it. Dormant genes somehow switched on due to age maybe? So weird.

[@mixtlillness9825]

It might be because your brain is working extra hard, overheating your earwax. Ever thought about wearing cooling fins on your head? Just a theory.

[@Carlo-nc9qw]

My earwax also changed in consistency as I aged. Yet I'm pretty sure that I have little to no European admixture.

[@MrSchivy]

You are the tenths among a hundred

[@commandosolo1266]

You're all forgetting the relatively new understanding of epi-genetics. While acquired traits cannot affect your genetic makeup, your environment, or even the bygone environment of your parents, can influence what genes turn on or off and when. As one ages, it's entirely possible for a set of recessive genes to "switch on."

[@Prawny]

The same thing can happen with lactose intolerance; not everyone who suffers with it has had it from birth. It's common for someone to develop it in their mid-twenties.

[@applegal3058]

If it wasn't for modern medicine, I probably wouldn't have survived my childhood. I spent a lot of time in hospitals and took lots of antibiotics as a child, and now I take a medication that saves my liver from inflammation and possible cancer, which actually ended up killing my grandmother who has the same liver disease. I wonder if medicine is allowing some genetic disorders to be passed on since more children survive?

[@AJPemberton]

Modern medicine has certainly allowed people to survive to reproductive age that would not have a century ago, but I'd say a minor downside to modern medicine. Take your own case. Are you fitter and healthier than most people? Are you more likely to successfully reproduce than a genetically 'normal' person? I do know of cases where people have been diagnosed with a genetic disorder that either has effect after they reach adulthood or is recessive and have chosen not to have children or at least have any embryos screened. So it works both ways. And with the rapid advances in DNA tests, I'd be inclined to think modern medicine will gradually start to eliminate genetic diseases

[@applegal3058]

@@AJPemberton Yes, that's true. We are checking for genetic issues before deciding to have children.

[@mechanomics2649]

@@applegal3058 I'm not sure eugenics is what they're getting at lmao

[@applegal3058]

@@mechanomics2649 oh ok...I don't mean eugenics. I mean, we're looking for diseases that can negatively impact a child, but I can see the ethics of even that. I guess I didn't read their comment well enough.

[@EXP256]

Realistically if there was no medicine there would be no weak offspring by you

[@deadman9335]

I am a mutant. We found that my dads side of the family carried genes for extra muscle strands. Out of 3 sons, I was the one that inherited this gene which my brothers always found weird growing up. No matter how much taller and more muscled they were, I was always in the same weight class and could always lift the same if not more than them. We finally found this out when I was 15 as without any previous weight training I was able to bench press 400 pounds in a competitive lifting challenge bet us, adding more and more weight each 20 reps I stopped there knowing that I could have gone higher but I would struggled passed it. Later on when I was getting my body checked out on a completely unrelated note, they noticed my muscle looked weird and when they got back to me later, they told me that I had 15 more muscle strands per millimeter of muscle than normal people which not only makes me stronger but also makes me about 40-50 pounds heavier. Which is why I almost sink in water. Today after being starved at 16 and having a stroke at 17, I weight 210-220 pounds and I can still lift 300 pounds but I don't push myself anymore do to health reasons caused by the stroke. This isn't my only mutation however as I also have color changing eyes which contain green, brown, blue, yellow, and orange colors. I also have an extreme metabolism which causes me to lose up to 11 pounds a day if I'm working. When I first caught covid, I was quarantined to my bedroom, my sister was told to feed me but she only fed me one PB&J every other day and I was sick for a month in a half. Around the end of that my mother started to feed me because I came out and explained I was starving as despite the fact I was laying down all day not doing anything except fighting covid, I lost 32 pounds which at the time put me at 150 pounds and I looked like a Skeleton. Now I am a little taller, I'm still mostly muscle but always have a little gut because if I don't, a days work is horrible on my body.

[@basedostrich]

You did the 400 pounds for 20 reps?

[@deadman9335]

@@basedostrich did I use the wrong word, or do you not believe me? If Reps means to lift 400 pounds all the way up above my chest and back down just above my chest before doing it again 20 times, then yes it was twenty reps. If reps means something else than I understand your confusion and that would be proof I didn't do frequent work outs. I wasn't a frequent gym goer so I understand if I got this wrong.

[@basedostrich]

@@deadman9335 between being unbelievably impressive and a coma separating 400 pounds from 20 reps I wasn't sure is all.

[@LeegallyBliindLOL]

Genes are crazy.I only have a small but fortunate gene mix. Due to my mom being completely white and full of freckles and my dad being north african (barbary tribe, so 12000 years of adjusting to the sahara and regions around it) and me being born in Denmark and growing up there, I can tolerate very cold weather. At 0 degrees, if I have a sweater on, I'm sweating... BUT at the same time, when I am in a warmer climate my skin tone will adjust all the way and I won't get sun burnt until 50 degrees celsius.

[@madox.74]

@@LeegallyBliindLOL this is very interesting and cool

[@binaryglitch64]

When was the last time I was worried about getting eaten by a tiger on the way to lunch? The last time I questioned whether or not I would survive the predators around me long enough to make it to lunch, was about a week ago. The predators I was worried about, were my fellow homeless people making their way to the food line.

[@binaryglitch64]

@@dad1158 Obama phones with EBB (Emergency Broadband Benefits) are a thing... I'm homeless, not jobless, and some (not all) homeless do survive by leveraging a predatorial mentality. Does that help you understand? (Sorry I didn't actually read your comment, I just skimmed it. Battery low, charging opportunities aren't great and I have other things to do on my phone.) Come to portland and ask for Grant Imahara at The Blanche House (not a shelter just a place to get a free hot meal and I'll show you my camp if you don't believe I'm homeless. I work during lunch so look for me at breakfast or dinner feeding only.) I've been living it for over a decade. I'm not here to spread disinformation, I'm just retorting what the guy in the video said. The fact that some other homeless people are dangerous is not misinformation.

[@mikethehunter5212]

@@binaryglitch64 I don't know what that guy said, but I apologize on his behalf. I hope things work out for you.

[@kenneth9874]

@@binaryglitch64 the homeless situation will attract predators as well as encourage predatory behavior

[@binaryglitch64]

@@mikethehunter5212 Honestly I don't remember either, but thanx for the sentiment. ( It was something like 'homeless people aren't dangerous, saying they are is spreading misinformation, I don't believe you that you're homeless.' )

[@binaryglitch64]

@@kenneth9874 unfortunatly, this is all too true.

[@delphinidin]

The LOSS of certain kinds of natural selection can also have an effect on our genetics! For instance, I've heard that the average size of babies' heads at birth is going up! It used to be that a baby with a big head could not fit through the birth canal, causing death for both child and (usually) mother. That was a natural selection pressure that kept the number of people with big-headed-baby genes low in the population. But now, with safe c-section births, these babies can be born! This means a larger number of people in the population can now have genes for big-headed babies.

[@mechanomics2649]

Only a matter of time before we have M.O.D.O.K. babies lmao

[@otakuhunter4817]

interesting

[@AdrianParsons]

The same could be said for any genetically related cause of death, really. As our medical interventions become more effective the number of people with the genetic predisposition that survive to have children will increase. Which will have a positive feedback effect.

[@ekosubandie2094]

@@mechanomics2649 Megamind babies seems more realistic though

[@bobbiusshadow6985]

ooohhh .. that explains anime and some comics/cartoons and the wobbling head figurines we put on our dashboards

[@pabloquijadasalazar7507]

So if a Himalayan has a kid with an Indonesian, that kid might be able to hold their breath for 16 min with little effort? Larger spleen + low oxygen breathing = “I only need to breathe once every 15 minutes?”

[@seanrea550]

I believe that we are able to acclimatize to higher elevations or difrent temperature ranges overtime even without genetic variation.

[@zy9662]

Depends if its recessive or dominant, could be just as us if its inherits the small spleen of the Himalayan and the high oxygen breathing of the Bajau :)

[@QUBIQUBED]

*possibly* As in, maybe not immediately, but maybe because of recessive genes, your grandchildren might have 1 or two of those genes

[@maddie-1]

@@seanrea550 yeah but, i forgot the details, but theres a himilayan ethnic group that have very powerful breathing capacity, and their people dominate the amount of people who have hiked Everest. if you want more details go google

[@nepnick5950]

The thing about life expectancy is a bit distorted. Yes, there were more younger deaths earlier in history, but most of them were at a very young age (young children) and countered by higher birth rates. - It doesn't devalidate the point of there being natural selection (children dying from some germs, thus potentially breeding a higher resistance to it in the survivors), but makes the impact seem more profound than it is.

[@Shockprowl]

I only discovered this channel recently after stumbling upon the crossover with SpaceTime and Eons on the origins of life- but I am now hooked. Great content presented in a fun and informative way. Thank you for all the hard work.

[@gregb8488]

It doesn't hook me at all lol. He calls race evolution😂

[@badger_ninja8681]

If I know anything about evolution the thumbnail was a lie we will all evolve into crabs. Crab is inevitable.

[@alexrouault7421]

The first thing I thought of as a cause for evolution is how many children we have. Couples who have more children are contributing more to the collective gene pool than those who have fewer children.

[@jimgoff1170]

See Idiocracy the movie

Correct. That explains why the average height in the Dutch population hasn’t stopped increasing. The main reason there’s a positive correlation between the height of males and the size of their offspring. That is, the taller the male, the more numerous (on average) his offspring will be. And that isn’t because taller men are on average more fertile but because they have access to more resources to afford a more numerous offspring.

[@jezuconz7299]

@ or look sexier to females

[@isabel.bolivia]

People who have more kids generally don't offer the best education, nurturing etc

[@loosiegoosie5229]

I don't think that really contributes all that much to more populated areas like big cities since the offspring will just account for a smaller fraction of the population than if they were isolated in a small town. Granted, if their offspring continue to produce many offspring of their own over the course of several generations, we may beguin to notice more significant trends in the genetic drift of the overall population. Though, children that grew up in massive families tend to make smaller families of their own from what I've seen, so it's hard to tell if we'll ever see this phenomenon at a grand scale. Still interesting to think about nonetheless

[@Mo.Faried]

I loved your explanation man ❤

[@meetthecassiani]

This was a really good presentation. However it seems as if the topic(s) covered were rather broad. Could the production team consider going a little deeper on each of these sub points? Perhaps a small series all based on this one subject? I found myself fascinated with this and want to know more. Well done! It’s almost as if you are trying to get people interested in the subjects you cover. Please - MORE! -

[@misterkite99]

Yeah, it felt like a teaser! I want more!

[@jippedgamer9723]

I sent him a message on his Patreon account a while back, in which I gave him a reason why evolution is literally impossible. He even replied back to me, so I know for a fact he read it. My point for mentioning that, is he flat out lied to more than 300,000 viewers, and he assumes it's fine. You shouldn't trust him, and need to double check his claims.

[@Hope12Grace90]

@@jippedgamer9723 what did he lie about?

[@daniellaytonmusic9865]

@@jippedgamer9723 you're living proof that evolution is possible. Now shut up.

[@ohmbasa]

@@jippedgamer9723 Could please back up your claim? Why is evolution impossible?

[@lordsiomai]

"I'm in peak condition" "I never go viral" "Reindeer? More like snowdeer" Something tells me whoever wrote these waited their entire life just to write them.

[@DavidChipman]

The speech bubbles in this video are a riot. LOL Whether they should become a common occurrence in these videos, I don't know, though.

[@supergoat1507]

I feel like in the future something might happen with our eardrums them being able to tolerate more noise or something along those lines since people now and probably in the future are still gonna be using headphones constantly

[@prodigion1]

That would only occur if people with weaker eardrums were dying before reproduction or having fewer children I think, which is not the case

[@davimelo9181]

Ok Lamarck

[@BlankEmporium]

Asking "are humans still evolving?" Is like asking water if it's wet, or asking if snow will melt in a fire.

[@NunyaMcBusiness]

Both of which are bad examples, because: A) we can't exactly detect true 'wet' and B) Snow BURNS when in contact with fire because sublimation At least, that's what I've learned.

[@rebeccagibson9644]

😂❤😂❤

[@shaider1982]

The Bajao are known as good divers in my country. I did not know they have the genetic predisposition for working underwater. Thanks for the info. (Edit: should have bee genetic adaptation).

[@mechanomics2649]

They don't have a genetic predisposition from working underwater. The genetic alteration came from them working underwater.

[@WhyIsRandomTaken]

@@mechanomics2649 You just reiterated the same phrase in two different fashsions saying it wasn't lmao.

[@WhyIsRandomTaken]

@@mechanomics2649 the predisposition can be an alteration.

[@mrluuiisa]

Joe there!!! Thanks for using the term “folks”. And thanks for everything else :3

[@Newblackpoet]

Great video as usual. It's true that the process that leads to an innovation or scientific advancements is a bumpy ride and it involves many people working and collaborating with each other. However, I'm surprised that Joe didn't mention Louis Pasteur and Robert Koch, both remarkable scientists that made substantial contributions to the fields of vaccination,microbiology and bacteriology. I guess that you have to select among many people and those were left apart for this video. Maybe you can talk about them in the future. Just a thought.

[@GD15555]

Mark Zuckerberg on the thumbnail.

[@Coconut2724]

bruhh 💀

[@Sam_on_YouTube]

From what I've heard, milk drinking only evolved in humans once or twice. Most likely, most humans who can drink milk got that gene from a mutation shortly before Northern Europeans and Northern Asians split and then that gene spread more widely from there. But some think that it evolved in both Northern Europeans and Northern Asians separately after they split (I find that less likely, but I'm no expert). And then much more recently, a population in Northern Africa developed a completely different mutation to dogest lactose. But that mutation hasn't had that much time to spread yet.

[@nosotrosloslobosestamosreg4115]

It evolved in what's called the Siberian Steppe, and it helped to spread far and violently across Europe, they're known as Aryans, Kurgani, or Yamnaya.

[@nore5888]

is that why so many black people are lactose intolerant

[@MrPaxio]

still doesn't explain why you will eventually be able to digest lactose when you expose urself enough to it. its not like u suddenly evolved new anti-milk genes or deleted something after you grew up. the tolerance to lactose changes depending on exposure. anything that is great for you will have some tolerance bs to ruin the fun

[@Sara-dv2nj]

Interesting, can you link me an article to the merge of the gene in north Africa ??

[@adarshmohapatra5058]

So does that mean a lot of Africans can't drink milk?

[@benjaminfrazier5624]

I'm new to this channel, but he called me a smart person. I'm subscribing.

[@krio1267]

as a person living in sabah, malaysia bajau people do live in our state, and they're very good!

[@nazhifamzan5507]

im bajau but the darat one hahah

[@peacekeeper9840]

Humans are not only evolving but we are also moulding intelligence in other animals with whom we interact and pet, like dogs. Dogs will become more and more intelligent as a result of our interactions with them.

[@joshpalao6466]

Yeah makes sense

[@zippyparakeet1074]

Depends on how you define "intelligence". Dogs have evolved and are evolving to interact with humans better due to thousands of years of interaction with us. It is why most humans can almost naturally pick up on a dog's expressions and body language. Dogs are also more facially expressive than other animals because of their interaction with humans. Dogs have also learned to vocalise in a large variety of manners which other canids such as wolves and wild dogs cannot do because humans can instinctively pick up on such barks and vocalisations. In terms of basic problem solving skills and memory wild dogs and wolves are just as intelligent, if not more in certain cases, than domestic dogs due to natural pressures and the need to be adaptive.

[@GregMoress]

^ Found the dog.

[@jochem1986]

It’s a gross misrepresentation by calling dogs animals that we interact with. We decide which dogs live, die and breed. Dogs are our toys, that’s the only reason for their existence.

[@HuyNguyen-ll9gz]

@@jochem1986 but dog are literally animals, what do you want to call it a slave? jeez

[@NA-ge3ll]

I wonder if sexual selection is also influenced by how sexual attraction is passed down as a trait in itself. People who like a certain trait would be more likely to have kids with people who have that trait, passing down both the gene carrying the trait and the gene carrying their attraction towards it to their children. Given enough generations, people would just end up being attracted to those with the most similar traits(If sexual selection was the only factor and if sexual attraction was purely genetic. Neither of those are the case, but I am curious how much influence they would have)

[@tylerdurden3722]

Sexual attraction is mostly genetic. Romantic attraction is more important in modern times. Human females have two main criteria for a mate. His genetics and his physical and behavioral traits related to raising offspring. That is genetics and nurture. Sexual attraction is basically attraction someone's genetics. Romantic attraction, is attraction to the traits that made raising offspring more successful. Humans raise offspring in pairs, and evolved to split that role between the two sex's. The role of each sex requires specific traits. And it's those traits that humans are romantically attracted to. For women, in general they are attracted to tall, strong, fit, ambitious, confident, charming, successful, experienced men. The majority of women are attracted to these things. A study was done, mostly 10% of males are having sex with 80% of women. And those 10% of men overwhelmingly have the above traits. Human females evolved to find a romantic partner, and then find a sexually attractive partner to be a sperm donor to secretly concieve offspring. Then bring it back for the romantically attractive partner to raise. The sexual partner is good at genetics. The romantic partner is good at nurture (providing and protecting). Our behavior is heavily influenced by our genetics. No human can choose what they feel, want are attracted to, etc. It's chosen for us by our biology. And we mearly try hard to follow our "heart's desires" (it's really our biology's desires) and our biology "desires" the most optimal proliferation of our species. Emotion is the biological mechsnism by which our biology influences our behavior toward optimal proliferation.

[@great_channel]

@@tylerdurden3722 bro are you a writer

[@xdaisho]

@@great_channel no he just simply seeks the truth

[@dragonlordskater5028]

There is a theory about that, it's called Fischerian runaway

[@kiaradoesart9682]

@@tylerdurden3722 We found the incel

[@willmpet]

The only example of genetic drift I heard of in my Anthropology course was in Eskimos, who had been estranged from the general population.

[@vegannascimento]

3:18 - You got it totally the the other way. 3:20 - "Luckly"

[@Failed_Vestige_of_Exandria]

I actually did a presentation for my Evolution course about a paper that talked about whether humans are still evolving. The general conclusion of the paper was that humans are in fact still evolving due to increased gene flow and decreased genetic drift -- which are important to maintain genetic variety -- due to an increase in movability and a larger population size. Of course, I would need to look into some other articles to see whether this one is entirely reliable, but it was an interesting find nonetheless.

[@nosotrosloslobosestamosreg4115]

Did you check the falsehood of "Hybrid Vigor"?

[@Youngnrrwhtjwtjetk]

@@nosotrosloslobosestamosreg4115 the only info I see is about dogs and plants. Care to elaborate?

[@nosotrosloslobosestamosreg4115]

@@Youngnrrwhtjwtjetk Yeah. You should look for the case of hybridization done in India, Indian Lions + African Lions = a total disaster, sick and weak animals plus the reduction of Indian Lions. There is this study conducted in Oxford University regarding the disadvantages shown by """multirracial""" peopl, like bone marrow transplants/histocomaptibility, behavioural issues, besides the commitment in a mixed couple. I think my contact info is my google profile, if that's thec ase, email me and I will send you the paper. (I'm pretty confident I downloaded it)

[@zg4705]

@@nosotrosloslobosestamosreg4115 tell me you're racist without telling me you're racist

[@EnRaye]

...

[@sumtingwong8592]

I feel like, if we ever get really good an genetic engineering, that we could become something better than we are now. But it definitely won't be natural selection, but more so artificial. We very well could see superhumans at some point

[@bartolomeothesatyr]

I like to think of it as "deliberate selection" as opposed to "artificial selection". The things we do aren't somehow outside of the scope of nature; the natural world encompasses everything we can observe, including us.

[@sophierobinson2738]

Have you read “Origin in Death”, the murder mystery by J D Robb (aka Nora Robert’s)? Cloning for perfect women.

[@Duck_Praise]

@@bartolomeothesatyr natural in this case means that it happens by itself, without premeditation, as a synonym of expontaneous.

[@r6u356une56ney]

If humans start cloning themselves instead of having babies, perhaps.. That has its own implications however.

[@MaseraSteve]

Aaanndd welcome to our realization club that we still being halted in that department because of : 1 outdated ancient superstition 2. human right “ack”tivist bollocks (also caused by the issue no 1) for example that baby crispr experiment are being criticized and foiled by well.. you guessed which country that has 2 problems mentioned above...

[@seraph82]

Who or what is saying, "I'm well aware," in the background? lol. I love those little production details.

[@LavroseRovender]

The globe he has

[@alexiusscott9880]

Thank you for your gift 🎁

[@mckeonlaws1243]

Its also highly worth mentioning that as of right now we can insert genes but with low specificity. CRISPR/Cas9 only allows us to cut at a certain place, insertion orientation is not assured. CRISPR/Cas9 DA allows us to change a nucleotide but has limitations and is still in it early phases. We WILL get to better gene editing but its a long road

[@davidkopp2467]

I have thought about this for many years. Good video.

[@elisa.llew-send]

I read that as pants instead of plants on the evolutionary poster and was confused. Lol. Great episode. The whole designer baby bit weirds me out. So much of our advancements aren’t natural, yet picking and choosing the traits we want our offspring to have off of a menu is ICK.

[@dr.jamesolack8504]

Perhaps if you didn’t refer to it as a “menu”, it wouldn’t sound so “ICK”.

[@tylerdurden3722]

People are already doing that. People are choosing which partners they wanna mix genes with like it's a menu. Certain traits, have always been attractive to women. Height, strength, fitness, confidence, charm, ambitiousness, assertiveness, etc. These are the ones mostly picked by women on the menu. Humans have an ability to measure a person's genetic flaws. It's called Fluctual Assymetry. It's a fancy word for beauty. People partially figured out how the brain calculates beauty (it uses mostly ratio's and mirror comparisons, and they're working on the rest. A lot of it is not superficial. E.g. You're immune system plays a big role in how physically beautiful and individual appears.

[@Spicy_ghost.]

Who let Mark Zuckerberg on the thumb nail?

[@ghoulishwastaken6020]

“We are evolving just backwards” -pewdiepie

[@The_Jovian]

I'm excited for the future of mechanically integrated humans, but I'm scared of what could be done by the people who own the patents for those technologies

[@CorwinFound]

It's already happening. I'm a trans guy and have been on HRT for just over a year and got top surgery. People are already modifying their bodies in ways never before possible. And there are already issues with supply chain and availability of this technology. (There is a near yearly testosterone shortage across Canada. A lot of people think that it's a manufactured scarcity in order to keep prices high. The cost of hormones does impact some people's ability to meet their transition goals.) I don't think patents are going to be the issue. Rather cost and availability. I am hyper aware of the fact that being a trans guy in Canada my situation is very different than that of a trans person in say Russia or Uganda. As we further integrate technology with our bodies it's going to be the case (as it is now) of the haves versus the have nots. There will always be people who can afford the technology both financially and politically. They will in turn have increased purchasing power and the cycle continues. As an example, trans people who are able to transition and pass have lower unemployment and better work outcomes. So being able to afford to medically transition leads to better financial situations.

[@The_Jovian]

@@CorwinFound right, those are certainly relevant issues as well, but I was thinking more neural implants and prostheses that are owned by corporations who now have direct access to your mind and body. Subscription models for prostheses, the sale of knowledge directly from your brain, advertisements in your own vision. And of course artificial scarcity and inflated prices for life saving technologies owned by private interests.

[@metametodo]

There's always the option of changing the way we look at patents, intellectual property. The option is just severely undervalued because it has fundamental implications on private entities. These things have way broader negative impact on society than people think. The price of a ton of drugs is inflated, most notably for HIV, the way the legislation is today takes part in the severity of USA's opioid crisis. The so called vaccine apartheid and the speed at which we face the pandemic, are also related in part to this.

[@firstname405]

I'm more scared about the capitalists who will abuse that tech for their own profit at all costs - just like what we see today. Of course, many of those capitalists will hold the patents

[@nobody8328]

I've been telling my mother (75) for years that all she lacks is the red laser eye thingies. She's had two knee replacements, several vertebrae in her lower back fused with plates, two more in her neck fused with still more hardware and ~three~ shoulder replacements. None of it is robotic, but at this point she's more aftermarket than OEM! 😆

[@InfoChannelOfficial]

I've always wondered about the question! Thanks for making a video on it.

[@ricososa2990]

The thumbnail is what got me here :)

[@Jarekthegamingdragon]

That thumbnail is more like PLEASE YES

[@edwardkrawczak8927]

Thanks for all the great videos you folks produce!

[@bobtuckey2409]

Great topic. I have wondered about this for awhile, so thanks for this.

[@jojointrinsic]

I hope you give true facts because every video I feel like I at least learn 1 thing. I love talking and I didn't want to look stupid due to misinformation. If it's just biased opinions then I'll still love to watch your videos as you still make great videos

[@Hollowdude15]

Humans evolving is so cool and great video man :]

[@hicheeeee5003]

I don't know about us but Joe is evolving. He is way more funnier than he used to.

[@racoonfederationhecker4173]

One if not only the science channel that I watch getting good laughs out of while learning

[@justadragonnamemarcus1751]

He's so powerful

[@devanloa]

Who's joe

[@hicheeeee5003]

@@devanloa This content creator's name

[@ericparrish1515]

Jway

[@martinze11]

People are definitely still evolving. Unfortunately, many people tend to conflate adaptation with evolution. Also, we are evolving much faster culturally than biologically. It wasn't so very long ago that the fashion was that men wore hats and powdered wigs. Cultural evolution proceeds much faster than biological evolution. Some ornithologists have observed cultural evolution in bird populations.

[@blackoak4978]

What do you mean when you say that evolution and adaptation tend to get conflated? Genetic adaptation to an environment IS evolution, though evolution is not necessarily adaptive. Is that what you meant?

[@loturzelrestaurant]

@@blackoak4978 LGBTQ-Hating Hatepreachers (and other things...) run for Office + Congress right-now. If you can, vote Left; the Telltale Atheist can list to you all the Problem-Politicans.

[@ZedaZ80]

@@blackoak4978 I live in a place that has varied by about 140°F (78°C) ambient temperature depending on time of year. We have seasons, and as winter approaches, it takes a little while for my body to adapt to the new cold, and as summer approaches, it takes a little while for my body to adapt to the heat. There are people living in environments that they have adapted to, but it's not due to differences in genetics, it's just within our existing tolerances as humans. I think what the OP is saying, is people often mistake those adaptations for evolution (especially if it's more extreme than they are personally accustomed to).

[@johndelong5574]

Delusions of virtue is the real pandemic.

[@chuckmeyer5501]

Here is a case where the proper use of terms is critical to clarity. An 'adaptation' is defined by biologists as a genetically determined trait contributing to an organisms 'fitness'. You personally are stuck with the genetic cards given to you by your parents. As such an individual can't evolve/change their adaptations. One CAN however become 'acclimatized' to changing environmental conditions within your genetic limits.

[@heygema]

I love that Bajau is mentioned here, it's cool nomadic tribe that basically members of three country at the same time. But some Bajau now I think gradually becoming members of urbanized society.

[@fanta_claws]

5:50 ok quick question, my mother has wet wax on one ear and dry on the other one, is that normal?

[@leobol6866]

I did my biology a level two weeks ago. And man, I knew it all before and could understand the whole video. Feel so smart!

[@Sophakingreal]

It’s funny that you talked about the people who can hold their breath because I was literally talking about them 2 hours watching this.

[@katsurashido4763]

kinda surprise and love that he uses Lombok Island as example AND BLOW IT UP!!!!

[@kinn4280]

9:30 … we are heading for All Tomorrow’s 💀

[@dontforgetyoursunscreen]

Well that is not to bad just as long as you end up a asteromorph

[@KwakWack]

This whole video answers a question I have been asking myself (and my friends) for maybe 5 years. I was only missing the genetic drift 😌 thank you

[@idontknow4434]

This video helps me study for my Biology test, thanks man!

[@Izlude84]

It is very helpful when engaging in the debate of evolution versus creationism to have real world examples of human evolution that you can observe to backup your argument. Thank you.

[@mrunemployed8652]

Well done 🎉🎉🎉

[@maiamaiapapaya]

Perfect timing. We are learning about evolution in my bio 2 class right now and I've been wondering about this

[@MultiTomcat67]

@8:11 "Sexual Selection" aka "Survival of the Sexiest"

[@samlokureglan4761]

I would love evolve into that

[@jmoralesh]

Anyone knows how it's called the diagram showed around 10:02 ? Like a natural selection maze (or something like that lol).

[@poorplayer9249]

Vive la difference! On that thumbnail. About 10 years ago one of my kids gave me a book called "The Live Earth Global Warming Survival Handbook". The last section addressed what to do if all else failed. It's titled Evolve. A couple of the physiological changes it mentioned were scaly/bumpy skin and green skin pigmentation. Respectively, for better moisture retention, and potential photosynthetic adaptations.

[@ppepr96]

The Andean People have an adaptation. Their blood stream can catch and hold more oxigen per blood cell than any other human being, becouse they lived thousands of years over the andes, a place where The concentration of oxigen is very low.

[@mani_mincraft]

8:39 the smile you make is hilarious

[@keithmichael112]

The thumbnail gives me hope, I always hoped I would evolve into Gex

[@elizabethjohn577]

Hi, hope everything goes well for you guys. Love all your videos 💖💖💖💖 Would it be possible for you to do WHY sugar can revive flowers? Or keep them look fresh longer? Whyyy

[@juzoli]

If we look back to evolutionary history, we will see that the majority of permanent changes were happening when the population of the given species was low. Low population means, that any change will much more likely to spread amongst the predecessors. It also means that the circumstances are likely to be not optimal, and there is a real need for change. Humans can survive as is very well without any change. So any beneficial mutation in anyone, will not spread out on large scale.

[@altrag]

True, genetic drift is not likely to be a significant factor in humanity's evolution at this point. That might change if we end up nuking ourselves into annihilation (because the survivors will be back to the "low population" level), but barring that its unlikely. Even climate change isn't likely to do enough damage to the species as a whole to change that (or it will do all the damage if the worst predictions of runaway effects come true, but extinct species don't evolve either so same result). But we _are_ still subject to "natural" selection. Its just not a selection based on nature - its a selection based on our technological developments. For example, humans are strongly adapted to use the sky's blue light to drive our circadian rhythm. Assuming we continue to use screens or some other light-producing analog to screens far enough into the future, that adaptation will have to change. We don't get enough natural sunlight and get too much artificial blue light to maintain this, and evolution will (eventually) figure that out for us. Its a relatively small problem from an evolutionary perspective, so it'll likely take on the order of thousands of years before notable adaptation to having screens on all the time would evolve, but it will happen if we survive (and maintain our technological advancement) long enough. On the other hand, there's a more compelling adaptation pressure: People are having kids later in life. Those who are capable of having healthy children into their 40s are going to have a fairly significant evolutionary advantage over those who can't as society continues to push toward having fewer children later in life. That amounts to an _extremely_ strong selection pressure and could easily drive adaptation across most of our species within a few centuries, barring a significant change in the way our economic and political systems function over that time frame. Of course its also an adaptation that wouldn't have an easily-recognizable phenotype, so the only way we'd even be able to measure the change would be to track the success rate of births in later life stages, but even then it'd be hard to separate evolutionary improvements vs medical improvements.

[@BioTheHuman]

@@altrag I don't see why natural selection should incide on screen light and so on. Even if a specific gene arises, it doesn't select anything. Why should the individual with that gene have a better fitness? But, you could be right about the late offpsring. A lot of people tend to have their kids in their late 30s and if they have some kind of serious health problem, they abort, so this is indeed a heavy natural selection. Maybe in the future people will yes have a better reproduction even when they're older, but I think that a trade off wil arise. Maybe it will be that humans start to enter puberty later and so their reproductive cells start to deteriorate later. I don't how cool would be to enter puberty later 😅

[@altrag]

@@BioTheHuman > Why should the individual with that gene have a better fitness? Well that's the question now isn't it? There's a growing body of research showing that the blue light from all the screens around us is affecting our natural circadian rhythms, leading to poor sleep which in turn leads to a variety of negative health outcomes. And if you can avoid negative health outcomes, then you will be, on average, a fitter person (in the genetic sense - your workout routine is a whole different topic). Is that circadian rhythm disruption enough to trigger a selection pressure? I don't know. I just picked a random thing that I know happens to affect health outcomes in subtle but noticeable ways. There are any number of other things that could potentially trigger a selection pressure - tolerance for heavy metals as we continue to pollute our air and waterways. Better ability to notice and react to things at high speed (because we drive so much - fewer accidents). Body plans adjusted for longer periods sitting rather than being active. I can't say for sure that any of those _will_ trigger a selection pressure, but any of them _could._ And likely would if our way of life remained relatively unchanged for a long enough timespan. On the order of a few thousand years, at least. Not something you or your children or even your grandchildren are likely to see just happen one day. Evolution can be "fast" in the sense that strong pressures can trigger adaptation over the course of a dozen or two generations, but that's far too long a timespan for any individual to notice the change. It can only really be noticed in retrospect (and only if there's sufficient knowledge about the lifestyles of both the older and current generations). > I don't how cool would be to enter puberty later No more or less "cool" than it is now. Again, such adaptations happen over multiple generations. Nobody's going to really notice if puberty slips two or three weeks on average over the course of a single generation - it'll just get chalked up to statistical variability. But if that repeats over 20 generations then you've pushed it back a year or so, while no single generation among those 20 could tell the difference. So a scientist who decides to measure the average onset of puberty in 2500 and compare it against the data from 2100 will notice a fairly significant difference, even if they wouldn't have noticed when comparing against data from 2450 (assuming of course that we haven't invented some sort of new way of measuring things that's drastically more precise than our current statistical modeling, or are capable of genetically engineering ourselves to the point where such comparisons are meaningless or some such thing - 400 years might not be that long for evolution, but its a pretty massive jump for scientific innovation!)

[@venpeddapalli7189]

Great video. I would have preferred "And an Oreo" to "And Oreo".

[@miathealien3911]

This thumbnail is PRICELESS!! 😂😂🤣

[@sylviahoffman9440]

Excellent exploration of evolution! I'm so glad I'm predisposed to watch these kinds of videos. You're awesome!

[@Totally_Jotaro]

This dude explained evolution extremely well in my opinion

[@artknurenko4541]

Man, that Fast and Furious joke was top-notch!

[@vocalsunleashed]

10 minutes?! I would have passed out way before reaching that mark 😵‍💫

[@MicaelaFrojdh]

How you mention crispr without mentioning crispr 👏. Man this is interesting and sooooo scary at the same time.

[@besmart]

I've got older videos about CRISPR and gene editing and all that, go check em out!

[@StarWarrior91]

I just hope people evolve to accept evolution to begin with

[@Tarik360]

Bro this ain't 2008, do you live in some cultist enclave or something?

[@dendroxden440]

@@Tarik360 I've still seen tons of people who don't believe in it

[@jasonpeng5798]

@@Tarik360 have you ever been to America lol

[@oximas]

@@dendroxden440 yep most people think religious people don't belive in evolution and that may be true but here I am Muslim and I believe in it so ya I guess humans are evolving to be more open to scientific ideas as we have more than just god to rely on

[@kiransingh5519]

So, conclusion is that we r still evolving but most people not accept because of religion..... So horrible....

[@koopa5504]

10:09 WHERE IS THIS ROUND DIAGRAM FROM??? PLEASE

[@pirimi]

I love how furbies were used to represent what 'highly advanced lifeforms" would look like lol

[@SubAnima]

Great video touching on neutral evolution Joe and team!! I made a video about it on my channel too :) Sometimes we biologists get obsessed with adaptations but of course there’s a lot of randomness involved too. Life never ceases to surprise us, and we’ll never stop changing (unless we blow ourselves up).

[@Faustobellissimo]

neutral?

[@SubAnima]

@@Faustobellissimo the stuff on the founder effect/evolution in isolated populations comes under the umbrella of genetic drift.

[@kidmohair8151]

we better be evolving, cuz the current iteration is none too good at being able to maintain the planet in such a way that we can continue to evolve

[@JFrazer4303]

The ilk thing is a little more complicated too. Some people cannot drink it, others don't get as much benefit and more disadvantages.

[@user-sz7gl5dv4u]

i can't hold my breathe not even for 40 seconds..

[@Ephus]

Do you think if more humans move into space and colonize planets like Mars, we will start to be affected by natural selection again? Or do you think our technology will prevent/reduce it?

[@KenMathis1]

More humans won't live in space unless we develop technology to prevent natural selection caused by the hostile environment. We aren't going to have a ton of babies die off planet while we hope natural selection solves the problems for us.

[@metametodo]

As soon as the martian environment begins to have power on which kid gets to live or not to adulthood (which I think is very probable, considering the harsh conditions of living there), natural selection will be taking action on martian humans. These conditions can be really hard to control technologically, like the martian gravity. However, I believe natural selection won't be the only hard issue we'd have to face. Genetic drift would have a large impact, as the populations would be very small, especially if there isn't much genetic exchange between them and earthlings.

[@alexdsp9468]

If we do try to colonize Mars or other planets, I think we'll probably bio-engineer the settlers to make their bodies more adapted to the local environnement. Water world ? Grow some gills ! Frozen world ? Make your body less susceptible to cold ! ...

[@TitularHeroine]

@@metametodo There isn't much genetic exchange between me and other earthlings *now* .

[@gogauze]

To be clear, we are still subject to natural selection even though we've mostly sidestepped some of the more obvious selection pressures. To the point that if we cloned earth down to the atom, put it on the other side of the sun-assuming a scenario where that doesn't bork the entire solar system's gravitational equilibrium-somehow keep technological parity, eliminate extinction events, etc... then run the clock forward, we'll still eventually become distinct species.

[@necroticpoison]

There's niche filling as well, kind of like the founder effect but more so naturally selected. I would imagine that for things like lower oxygen levels at higher altitudes, people that could make it up out of those that tried managed to get a living going in that area. It would also continue for each increase in altitude I'd imagine. And then natural selection by death would maintain the prevalence of the genetic traits.

[@susantocp]

5:23 I recognized that island. It's Lombok, Indonesia

[@RoyGutierrez001]

As long as I get to be a space Cowboy in my old age - I’m in.

[@sirholycow]

I always find the lactose example super interesting lol.

[@jerlee620]

“As humans live longer, die less..” I’m dead 🤣

[@dr.jamesolack8504]

Apparently, not yet…..

[@Lacaballera.pedaleante]

MAAAAN I LOVE THIS CHANNEL❣️❣️❣️❣️✨

[@Homo_sAPEien]

“I’m your future.” Please no.” What’s the issue with that? It’s not like it will actually be you personally.

[@kharnthebetrayer8251]

There are also small things still happening as well. Like, Blue Eyes. Apparently, Blue Eyes only emerged a couple hundred years ago. From 1 guy, who apparently got really busy, and everyone wanted to get with the mysterious stranger with the pale eyes

[@bradentheman1373]

was it that 7,000 year old Stone Age man? funny thing is my dad who’s from Brazil looks scarily similar to that guy

[@tgaming8745]

Of course we're still evolving. Everything evolves. Some faster, some slower but everything evolves.

[@jakemortimer6519]

Why did I watch this and start getting excited

[@nocaster5120]

Negative effects of an enlarged spleen, very interested to know