Hacker News Reader

Comment by b0rsuk | Hacker News Reader

I remember reading an article like that. Also, it's a bit of a meme that if depression was 100% harmful then it would already be eliminated by evolution. I mean why shouldn't people prone to depression die off?

Don't make a mistake, I'm still working on improving my life and uncovering the root causes. It is a silent thief of life.

View on HN

Evolution does not and cannot give a shit about you is why really. Elimination by evolution requires it to be both utterly nonviable and not tied to anything else. Look at sickle cell anemia - one copy protects against malaria via mild blood cell deformation. Two makes them concave.

There are plenty of non-optimal things kept around because there isn't sufficient pressure to ensure it dies out.

Or sinuses!

An Annoying Quirk Of Our Evolution

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSSmJLb468k

But what I meant is that according to the theory of evolution, individuals with disadvantageous traits reproduce less often. If they reproduce less often, they pass their genes less often. I think they say the trait is regressive.

> Elimination by evolution requires it to be both utterly nonviable and not tied to anything else.

Neither of those things are required. Any disadvantage to reproduction frequency of an allele can lead to its extinction. Even a 'good' allele can lose to a 'better' one.

(The scare quotes are to acknowledge that these terms are just frequency re-stated)

> I mean why shouldn't people prone to depression die off?

"Having a child will make me happy". And hell, maybe it will - it's the perfect ruse by our genes - keep us depressed until we reproduce.

Or maybe we leading a path in life with no meaning causes us to be depressed and seek a solution. Having a child puts one in the present moment and does give some meaning back though is not a cure for depression. I highly doubt the genetics make us depressed to have children.

The appendix is 100% harmful but not eliminated. As is nearsightedness.

Evolution is only affected by genotypes that prevent reproduction.

Uhm, no.

https://academic.oup.com/mbe/article/35/12/2957/5112969

"the strongest signals of recent human adaptation in Europe did not coincide with the Neolithic transition but with more recent changes in environment, diet, or efficiency of selection due to increases in effective population size."

> The appendix is 100% harmful

It is not.

Much better examples would be cancer and auto-immune diseases. Evolution is not magical, it can't produce 100% fault-free organisms. Or maybe it will, given a few more billion years. But in a limited time span, there is no reason to expect it to correct any potential flaw in an organism (and experience obviously shows that it hasn't).

That's a rather antiquated view. Nowadays, the appendix is considered an active organ again, essentially a spawning zone for the gut flora. I recall reading that people that still have their appendix have a more diverse gut microbiome, and more importantly, their gut flora recover more quickly after antibiotic treatments.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com