1. Imagine you’re with some friends talking about variation and how many races there are. One person says that there are three and another thinks that there are five. Would you agree with either one? Why or why not?
A little reasoning: I would agree with the second one granted that the scenario is based on a conversation of Russel Peters’ material, and if that second person is talking about Blumenbach. If its pop culture, then yes, sure there are five races. But~ if dipping into the territory of Biological Anthropology I would immediately disagree with both of them because of what I learned in my Anthro class (an expansion to my explanation is readable in question number 2).
2. For the same group of friends in question 01 (none of whom have had a course in biological anthropology), how would you explain how scientific knowledge doesn’t support their preconceived notions about human races?
The original scope of the conceptualization of race is ideological, based on the attribution of cultural characteristics to certain colors, eventually stating that people with light (or white) complexions are superior and the most civilized, the darker the more uncivilized and inferior. Usage of the term Race is also equivocal, and thus ambiguous for its references to either nationality or religious identity/affiliation. Third, the idea of race as color is inaccurate as it has no (classification) for “half-breeds”. An additional point of focus is how color has the potential to change either considering natural adaptation (an office guy from Washington getting a tan from the Philippines after a one-week stay at Boracay) or artificial (a white girl in LA spending lots of money in tanning spray sessions). These wouldn’t change a person’s race.
Skin also won’t say everything about race. Skeletal anatomy is more accurate, particularly the cranial profile of the person.
3. In the twentieth century, how did the scientific study of human diversity change from the more traditional approach?
It went from a skin and eye-colored – specific system of classification to skeletal (with particular attention on cranial profiling) after much debate on the issue of race, which was predominantly an emotionally sensitive issue considering the ideological overtones of the concept. The study of human variation also had come to include the application of evolutionary principles. Race according to DNA had also replaced the skin parameter. The genetic emphasis dispelled previously held misconceptions that races are fixed biological entities that don’t change over time and that are composed of individuals who all conform to a particular type.
Thanks to Blumenbach whom to my opinion, I think he began the change by stating the inaccuracy in the classification of race by color because of the matter of overlapping traits. This perhaps begun the idea of entertaining other physical details.
4. Why can we say that variations in human skin color are the result of natural selection in different environments? Why can we say that less pigmented skin is a result of conflicting selective factors?
Skin color differs in certain parts of the globe. Those near the equator experience tropical climate. People living in tropical areas experience more tanning as they have more direct sun exposure, producing more melanin as a protective response to UV rays. It is a developmental mode of adaptation. The case for those with less pigmented skin is that they are faced with the dilemma of needing adequate UV exposure for the promotion of vitamin D synthesis and still needing protection from overexposure to UV radiation as they do not have enough melanin to enjoy the sun and still be protected.
5. Do you think that infectious disease has played an important role in human evolution? Do you think it plays a current role in human adaptation?
Throughout the course of human evolution, infectious disease has exerted enormous selective pressures on populations and consequently has influenced the frequency of certain alleles that affect the immune response.
6. How have human cultural practices influenced the patterns of infectious disease seen today? Provide as many examples as you can including some not discussed in the chapter.
Over-usage of pesticides were the foundations for a new type of insects which are “bugspray” tolerant (imagine a group of bugs being sprayed, laughing and enjoying themselves in their “high” or “trippy” state)
There is recently a new strain of Tuberculosis which has become drug resistant. This came into existence after the practice of those on the poor census of the population where they don’t complete their medication either in the false belief that they are feeling better, or they simply cannot afford it. The drugs taken kill only some percentage of the TB while that remaining evolves.
Some humans have been victims of the Mad Cow disease after consuming products made of infected/contaminated beef.
Keeping used tires have been a major breeding ground for a vector. The Aedes albopictus also known as the Asian Tiger Mosquito, known for Dengue, has been spread widely in recent years, particularly through the intercontinental exportation of mosquito eggs in used car tires into Africa and the Americas.
Lyme disease is also one good example of which was the effect of changes in the ecosystem. A bacterial disease, it was first discovered in the USA in the town of Old Lyme. It was spread by ticks which transmitted Borrelia burgdorferi. Originally, the ticks fed on deer and certain mice. But forest fragmentation had led to changes in the biodiversity, resulting in the loss of predator species such as the wolf, fox, just to name a few. This led to the ticks feeding on human blood, as some suburban homes were established in the woodland area.
No comments:
Post a Comment