>Modern medicine does not make sense because it contradicts natural selection.
this is called a fallacious appeal to nature.
just because nature does something, that doesn't automatically make it right or logical.
In fact human success arises almost entirely from rejecting and ignoring what the rest of nature is doing.
Edge: the post
>Why does modern medicine bother with developing cures for diseases or keeping terminally ill patients and people with incurable diseases like Down's Syndrome alive with extremely expensive technology?
Because we don't give a shit about natural selection and we do care a lot about human beings.
>From an evolutionary perspective, it does not make sense. First, disease has been a way to naturally select the fittest and thanks to that we've been able to come this far. Second, what is the point of preserving genes that have proven to be useless for humanity?
Whether something makes sense or not from an evolutionary perspective does not in any way affect the way one ought to act or define society.
A) because people hace empathy and don't like to see others suffer, so try to alleviate it
B) precisely because these people are abnormal, treating their conditions leads to interesting insights about the way the body works. Theraputic insights gained from studying people with downs helped teach new diagnostic techniques for patent foramen ovale for instance.
>From an evolutionary perspective, it does not make sense.
how about you stop watching TV, you fucking retard.
<
>captcha
dafuq
Because modern society has completely superseded natural selection in the first place. Ever since we became intelligent enough to use tools we have been gradually breaking the system that had been in place for millions of years. You can't resume where you left off, irreparable damage has occurred and we need networked intelligence to continue to survive, not blind survivalist fitness.
Just because evolution is true does not mean you should worship it, you fucking edgelord. It wouldn't help us in the slightest to rely on it like a fucking deity.
>Because modern society has completely superseded natural selection in the first place. Ever since we became intelligent enough to use tools we have been gradually breaking the system that had been in place for millions of years. You can't resume where you left off, irreparable damage has occurred and we need networked intelligence to continue to survive, not blind survivalist fitness.
>
>Just because evolution is true does not mean you should worship it, you fucking edgelord. It wouldn't help us in the slightest to rely on it like a fucking deity.
Nice sources there, faggot.
>sources
are you retarded or just pretending? did you not notice how we can "better" ourselves through technology and medicine?
>First, disease has been a way to naturally select the fittest and thanks to that we've been able to come this far
There are only 7-70 single nucleotide polymorphisms per generation. On the other hand, horizontal gene transfer allows entire genes to enter a genome.
Evolution happens via poisoning and genetic contamination, not survival of the fittest. Convergent evolution happens because the same genes do the same things in all organisms, and the same allele will enter many different organisms and make them all mutate in the same way.
>Second, what is the point of preserving genes that have proven to be useless for humanity?
Most of human diversity emerges from alleles, including many forms of genetic disease. Many genetic diseases require a specific set of alleles to be inherited - G/T, for example. G/G, T/G or T/T won't pass on the disease - only G/T will.
G/T can emerge from a gene pool of mixed G and T alleles, and so the only way to purge the G/T genotype is to isolate G/G and T/T. But even this won't prevent acquisition of diseased alleles via horizontal gene transfer.
44% of the human genome is composed of transposable elements, meaning the genes encoded within this portion of the genome can be pushed in and out without removing any other genes. However, the above figure includes our silent DNA - only 7% of our functional 10,000 genes are transposable.
The answer isn't to prevent people from breeding - it's to assure that all pairings pass on a non-diseased pair of alleles. This entails eugenics, and in most cases a diseased person or carrier could still breed - the government would simply have to force such people to use designer sperm or ova which would result in non-diseased offspring.
Not even the Chinese have the focus and dedication to truly prevent genetic disease - we need a new culture, one where the first question people ask prospective lovers is, 'What are your alleles?'