Human Evolution in Modern
Society
(Copyright James Michael
Howard,
(I wrote this years ago but
did not publish it. A new piece of
research has provided direct support for my ideas so I am now putting this at
my website in 2006. The NEW SUPPORT is immediately
below this document.)
Further Support of the Howard
Theory of Human Evolution
James Michael Howard
This document is designed to
explain a number of phenomena, occurring within society, which are being
noticed by the majority of people. While
it is being eroded, the most accepted model of human behavior is the environmental
model. That is, our behavior patterns
are primarily formed by outside influences, such as parents, siblings,
teachers, etc., and the places where we “grow-up.” While most people agree to some combination
of environment and genetic influences, most lean heavily toward the environment. Some still think children “learn” to
walk. This is because most are not aware
that walking is directly dependent upon myelination of the spinal nerves that
serve that function. So, they assume
that their “teaching” about that time is the cause. They lack information about spinal nerve
development. The following is designed
to explain some new findings (new information) which further tip the balance
towards “genes” in determining human behavior.
This happens to also directly support my explanation of human
evolution. I suggest that the same
mechanism that caused human evolution, in the past, is extant and ongoing.
My explanation of human
evolution is based on the impact of hormones on expression of hominid DNA. While very small differences in DNA probably
existed between the hominids, I think differential expression of essentially
identical DNA’s created differences in the various hominids and, therefore, the
fossil record. Since chimpanzee and
human DNA are about 99% identical, the DNA of hominids must have been even
closer. Basically, I suggest hominid
group dynamics caused the formation of subordinate groups which eventually
exhibited permanent hormonal differences.
That is, individuals of a “base” group forced individuals of a
“subordinate” group away from favorable “breed and feed” sites. Competition for food and reproduction
resulted in less aggressive individuals being forced out. When this occurs sufficiently enough to move
subordinate groups into sufficiently differing ecosystems, advantages accrue to
some, slightly different, individuals who have a natural survival
advantage. Those that can live start
reproducing in the new place. Some of
the “refugees” form new “feed and breed” sites.
Once formed, competition for food and reproduction, again, forces
subordinate individuals to flee. The
situation always repeats. Since the
DNA’s of each base group and subordinate group were probably changed very
little by these forced migrations, I suggest the survival advantage of refugee
groups entering new, more physically demanding ecosystems, rests in hormonal
differences. Those individuals, that
survived, lived to produce offspring and form new groups composed of
individuals alike in hormones. These
hormonal differences produced differences in gene expression that produced
individuals of differing physiology and anatomy that culminated in “Homo
sapiens.” (Please see my explanation of
human evolution at http://www.anthropogeny.com/Androgens%20in%20Human%20Evolution.htm for greater detail. This is a published paper of my theory of
human evolution; 2001.)
In 1985, I developed my
explanation of the “flight or fight” mechanism; it resulted from my work on my
explanation of human evolution.
Basically, I suggested that the decision to fight, or run from, an
adversary rested in the ratio of two hormones, dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA)
and cortisol, the two major hormones produced by the adrenal glands. At its most basic, my reasoning was that DHEA
evolved to push biological mechanisms forward, that is cellular
mechanisms. Since complex behavioral
patterns (neurological mechanisms) result from evolution of cellular
mechanisms, DHEA pushes behavior. In
terms of amount, DHEA is the major adrenal hormone; cortisol is the other. Cortisol is produced during stress; cortisol
produces stress. I reasoned that
cortisol evolved to counteract DHEA, that is, to stop the actions of DHEA. If one’s ratio of DHEA to cortisol is higher
than DHEA, a behavior goes forward; one fights.
If the ratio favors cortisol, one flees out of fear. According to my explanation, then, lack of
cortisol would indicate a predisposition to fight.
January 14, 2000, the
Associated Press reviewed the findings of K. McBurnett, et al., from the
Archives of General Psychiatry 2000; 57: 38-43.
McBurnett, et al., found that “Low cortisol levels were associated with
persistence and early onset of aggression, particularly when measures of
cortisol concentrations were pooled.
Boys with low cortisol concentrations at both time points exhibited
triple the number of aggressive symptoms and were named as most aggressive by
peers 3 times as often as boys who had higher cortisol concentrations at either
sampling time.” In other words, low
cortisol results in the “fight” response.
The AP quotes Dr. McBurnett to say: “Perhaps what we’re dealing with
here is a biological propensity that’s resistant to treatment, which is very
troubling.” …also: “Low cortisol would
make you bold,” he said. In youngsters
with low levels of the hormone, “it doesn’t bother them when you do things to
them. It’s hard to make them behave.”
It has been known for some
time that low cortisol is characteristic of habitual, antisocial, violent offenders.
“Only among the habitually violent offenders with antisocial personality were
the values [of cortisol] low when compared with other violent offenders,
antisocial personality without the habitually violent tendency, and male clinic
personnel. Poor motivation already in
school, truancy, attention deficit and undersocialized aggressive conduct
disorder seemed to be connected with the low cortisol levels.” (Acta Psychiatr Scand 1985; 72: 40-4) Low cortisol runs in families who exhibit
conduct disorder and antisocial personality disorder (Psychiatry Res 1993: 46:
9-17). It has “genetic”
characteristics. Young individuals who
exhibit conduct disorder are also more likely to join gangs (J Abnorm Child
Psychol 1999; 27: 261-76). Low cortisol
is also found in individuals who cannot control their behavior, that is,
attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (Biol Psychiatry 1998; 44: 72-4). These individuals are best described by some
combination of: habitual, antisocial, and violent. Their cortisol is low; their ratio of
cortisol to DHEA is low.
The individuals, described
above, things being equal, would probably win in a “fight or flight”
confrontation. They have no fear and
will not be intimidated. However, things
are seldom equal, and that brings me to the other hormone involved in my theory
of human evolution, that is, testosterone.
Human males and females produce more testosterone than male and female
chimpanzees. The other element in
individuals of “base” groups that causes them to be more aggressive and more
powerful (unequal, if you will) is increased testosterone. I suggest increased testosterone in
successive hominids is the driving force of evolution. Increased testosterone would increase sexual
drive in both males and females; their numbers would increase faster than lower
testosterone types. The increased
aggressiveness and sexuality that increased testosterone provokes, along with
reduced cortisol, in “base” groups would quickly build groups that would often
create “refugees.” That is, many lower
testosterone individuals would be pushed into new ecosystems by large,
aggressive, base groups. This
combination would speed human evolution, that is, changes in hormones,
according to my theory.
Testosterone is connected to
offensive behaviors: “A positive relation between testosterone and offensive
behaviors was obtained in the sense that the greater the hormonal titer, the
greater the number of threats, fights, and attacks.” (Physiol Behav 1999; 68:
205-9). This is also characteristic of
testosterone in women: “Testosterone is related to criminal violence and
aggressive dominance in prison among women, as has been reported among men.”
(Psychosom Med 1997; 59: 477-80). Even
in simple “button-pushing” response tests, which can differentiate between
aggressive and non-aggressive responses, “Testosterone administration resulted
in a significantly higher number of aggressive responding compared to placebo.”
(Drug Alcohol Depend 1995; 40: 73-9).
So, my explanation of human
evolution suggests that we will often (always) form groups when the situation
allows it. That is, we will form “feed
and breed” groups when conditions are propitious. When this occurs, competition will
occur. Individuals of higher
testosterone and lower cortisol will increase at the expense of lower
testosterone, higher cortisol individuals.
The former will have higher sex drives and have little fear of
consequences. When we reach a state of
civilization which provides for the least among us, we will first see this in
ghettos. Remember from above: “Poor
motivation already in school, truancy, attention deficit and undersocialized
aggressive conduct disorder seemed to be connected with the low cortisol
levels.” (Acta Psychiatr Scand 1985; 72:
40-4) In general, in this society,
better places to live are owned by people who do well in school. People who cannot perform well in school
often fall into the groups which benefit from the affluent society. Since even the affluent society does not
provide absolute equality, this will cause a concentration of high
testosterone, low cortisol individuals in areas, especially within cities, that
are considered less desirable. The lower
testosterone, higher cortisol individuals already there will leave. When this occurs, an evolutionarily-programmed,
aggressive “base” group will arise. When
their numbers increase beyond the ability of police to control their conduct,
they will affect surrounding neighborhoods.
This has been occurring in urban areas for some time. For years, our large, urban areas have been
producing lower testosterone, higher cortisol “refugee” groups which flee their
current environment for another, we call them “suburbanites.”
Now, you may be aware of the
current decline in young teen birth rates.
It may seem paradoxical but this is also explained by the increase in
testosterone: http://www.anthropogeny.com/birth%20rate%20secular%20trend.htm
.
Here is the new support.
Psychoneuroendocrinology.
2006 Nov;31(10):1245-56.
Adrenal androgen
and gonadal hormone levels in adolescent girls with conduct disorder.
Kathleen
Pajer, et al., Columbus Children's Research Institute, Department of
Pediatrics, The Ohio State University College of Medicine and Public Health,
Columbus, OH, USA.
There are few data on the biological
correlates of female antisocial behavior. This study compared adrenal androgen
and gonadal hormone levels in adolescent girls with conduct disorder (CD) to
girls without any psychiatric disorder (NC). We studied 87 girls, (47 CD; 36
NC), ages 15-17 years, obtaining three blood samples, drawn 20min apart between
8 and 9 AM in the first 72h of the onset of menstrual flow. Plasma was assayed
for testosterone, estradiol, androstenedione, dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA),
dehydroepiandrosterone-sulfate (DHEA-S), sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG),
and cortisol; area under the curve (AUC) for each of the three samples was used
in the data analysis. We also calculated the Free Testosterone Index, Free
Estrogen Index, Index of Hyperandrogenism and cortisol to DHEA ratio. In
addition to receiving a full psychiatric interview, each girl completed a
self-report questionnaire on general aggression. Main hormone analyses
controlled for potentially confounding variables such as psychiatric comorbidity
and race. Girls with CD had significantly lower cortisol to DHEA ratios, but
did not differ from NC girls on any other hormone variable. Girls with symptoms
of aggressive CD had significantly higher mean free testosterone indexes, lower
SHBG levels, and lower cortisol to DHEA ratios than girls with non-aggressive
CD. Girls with CD scored higher on the aggression questionnaire, but there was
no association between general aggression and any hormone variable for the
sample. Our data suggest that girls with CD, particularly aggressive CD, have
lower cortisol to DHEA ratios, higher levels of free testosterone, and lower
levels of SHBG. Clinical and research implications of these findings are
discussed.