Comments on: Why do humans have zits?

By: Lobster

Lobster — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

I think it’s the same reason so many humans have a natural aversion to spiders: you only need to screw up once and you’re done. Think of what a tickle is. It’s a very light touch on a sensitive area, and your reaction is to get away from it. Kind of like if there were a spider crawling on you.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Please look up “teleonomy” or “apparent purposefulness”. Evolution itself gives a reason for features to develop without the need of an external agent, and there’s no harm in discussing it in these terms.

By: Matt Maher

Matt Maher — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

What I’ve wanted to know is why we’re ticklish. What’s the evolutionary reason for that?

By: Church

Church — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

I heard a theory years ago that it’s a sort of camouflage for youngsters. By sporting unsightly blemishes, they’re perceived as less of a sexual threat by the elders in the tribe.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Um, no. The carbs people eat today are mostly white flour and white sugar. Pre-industry, people would eat whole wheat and such. HUGE difference in terms of what it does to your GCI.

As for the link between inflammation and GCI, you can look it up yourself. It’s old news at this point.

By: Rob

Rob — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Hypothesis, not theory.

By: murrayhenson

murrayhenson — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Doy. It’s messages from our alien founders that dropped our DNA here long ago. We’re supposed to connect up the dots to get a star constellation map so can visit them. Freckles are supposed to be connected up to get the formulae needed for the technology to get where we’re supposed to go. Doesn’t school teach anyone anything any more?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

It’s intelligent design. God gives you zits when you sin. Duh.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

I hate when people talk about ‘reasons’ or ‘purposes’ for the evolution of certain features. It’s evolution, not intelligent design. There’s no purpose behind things evolving, there are only circumstances that favor certain traits.

This article seems to be a pretty good theory in those terms. It’s not actually arguing that zits have any purpose at all — rather, we evolved hairless skin to stay cool, and get zits because nothing else really changed. We get zits because evolving hairless skin doesn’t necessarily mean evolving less active sebaceous glands, and sebaceous glands that are too active don’t really harm our reproductive ability — so that wouldn’t be eliminated by evolution. Seems the most likely explanation in terms of Occam’s Razor and just how evolution actually works.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Part of the theory was about when we lost our body hair, but don’t most apes already have hairless faces?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Acne is a form of inflammation, and as such it’s going to be aggravated by a high-carb diet. I’m guessing if you were to go back in time to before the industrial revolution, you’d see very little acne.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

So why do I have zits under my luxuriant beard then?

Incidentally, the phrase “chthonic allegory” is one you don’t hear too often.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

And teenagers “sin” every day, explaining why it’s so bad during those years. An airtight theory, fellow anon.

By: archmagetrexasaurus

archmagetrexasaurus — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

reason: A cause, explanation, or justification for an action or event. (or so says google)

Not that I don’t see the merit in pointing out that evolution doesn’t involve an agent of intent (insofar as it’s “natural”; artificial selection requires one, by definition), but I think it’s quite reasonable to consider an explanation of how a trait has (or hasn’t) developed to constitute as a reason why the trait exists in whatever state it does in the present day.

As to purposes, there’s a big difference between attributing a purpose to a trait and claiming a purpose behind evolution (namely to generate a certain trait).

Is casual/convenient language used to discuss scientific topics really so harmful?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

“I have NO IDEA who told you that the industrial revolution made people eat carbs, but they’re an idiot. The *agricultural* revolution is responsible for that, about 10000 years ago.”

Whoever failed to explain to you the difference between carbs and refined carbohydrates is an idiot.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Acne is only present in industrial cultures– if you look at cultures that still eat a non-industrial diet, like the Kitavans, Ache, etc, their teenagers don’t have a trace of acne. It’s been published a few times in the anthropology lit. Acne has no evolutionary significance because it probably wasn’t common until very recently.

By: Jerril

Jerril — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

1) Citation please re carbs.

2) Pre industrial revolution, the vast majority of people ate monoculture diets, generally a single grain product with a very small amount of extra variety. That’s why everyone was SHORT. I have NO IDEA who told you that the industrial revolution made people eat carbs, but they’re an idiot. The *agricultural* revolution is responsible for that, about 10000 years ago. :P