Hacker News Reader

From an evolutionary standpoint periods of famine were certainly a selective pressure for our ancestors. It could make sense that prolonged periods of no-food are not only something our bodies have adapted to survive, but have adapted to thrive upon as part of their natural cycle.

View on HN

Sorry for being nit-picky. It is not that we evolved to thrive during periods of famine. It is that we did not evolve under conditions where resources were plentiful. That is why so many people die from heart conditions brought on by excessive eating. The machinery in our body is simply insufficient to deal with the excess cholesterol.

He's saying that even when people are universally weakened by starvation, the other mutations that exhibit advantages (a regenerative immune system in this case) are rewarded with further generations. I think "evolved to thrive in famine" is fair to say.

Evolved to thrive on abundance of resources on the long-term, punctuated by brief intervals of scarcity.

It could make sense that prolonged periods of no-food are not only something our bodies have adapted to survive, but have adapted to thrive upon as part of their natural cycle.

How do you make the jump from "Most able to survive famine." to "Thrive on famine."? It doesn't seem obvious to me that we would automatically evolve to the latter result over the former.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com