Human variation in Nature
Nice little article in Nature. Here’s the conclusion:
“This is a very delicate time, and a dangerous time, as people start to come up with things that the general public, or the media, or various groups might misinterpret,” Sabeti says. “I like the fact that, so far, the evidence we find for natural selection in humans is only skin deep.”
Here’s an interview with Pardis Sabeti (she is also the first speaker at this 2006 “Inspiration Festival” sponsored by Seed). She is lead author on Genome-wide detection and characterization of positive selection in human populations in the current issue of Nature (step away from the computer Assman….).
Labels: human biodiversity
I like the fact that, so far, the evidence we find for natural selection in humans is only skin deep
of course, the genetics of things like skin color are now pretty well-known (am I really saying that? how times have changed…). so if you see 20 strong signals for selection, 15 of them are on genes of unknown function, and 5 are involved in skin color, you end up writing the paper about selection on skin color. but what do those other ones?
“This is a very delicate time, and a dangerous time, as people start to come up with things that the general public, or the media, or various groups might misinterpret,” Sabeti says. “I like the fact that, so far, the evidence we find for natural selection in humans is only skin deep.”
Reading her article I find this quote is not so much her conclusion as it is something she throws in at the end to deflect hostile blowback.
She has a great phenotype by the way…
She has a great phenotype by the way…
sir,
i will not dispute the veracity of your claim, but truly is such public comment befitting a civilized gentleman? let us pay tribute to grace and beauty without a word but within our hearts.
sincerely
c.v. snicker
Then we are to gather, Chet, that in a gentlemanly way, you’re telling us “I’d hit it?”
Like a rat up a drainpipe.
You can hardly blame her for the ‘skin deep’ pre-emptive defensive strategy.
Then we are to gather, Chet, that in a gentlemanly way, you’re telling us “I’d hit it?
sir!
a dark day indeed that a gentleman of senior stature as yourself should find it worthy to emit such vulgarities!
c.v. snicker
chet:
A “gentlemen of senior stature” might point out that it’s “utter” rather than “emit,” while acknowledgeing that, though emissions are most frequently gaseous, utterances, including my own, occasionally fall into such category.
So, to express the original intended profundity in manner most deserving of your esteemed attention, I resort to the form practiced by those of the most advanced understanding (and whose most outstanding practitioners were William Shakespeare and Ogden Nash):
He who wouldn’t say “I’d hit it”
Is, of course (and, alas) an idiot.
chet:
And, yes, I know (and both anticipate and forestall your pointing it out)–I seem to have a preference for doing it doggerel-style.