Well, mah thankin
, is that our species has pretty much screwed the natural selection process. I know of no other species that strings along the "weak", per say, as we do via education, charity and health.
In a sense our scientific collaboration and laws have molded the eventual evolution of our species. Kinda how the common culture derived from the wampum (or whoever developed currency) has led to many variants of our survival. Meaning our survival is not based on physical stature as much as it is for other species. Medicine has perpetuated many lives beyond what nature had intended etc.- but but but- only because of intelligence.
The testing of the DNA is currently being tested mainly for health but I am wondering if it will ever be researched and funded for intelligence- which is another main factor in our survival.
So a bad trait can, in theory, designate who would receive such educational or health benefits (ie: scholarships, transplants... the list could go on) if a trait were found to reveal such efforts a burden to such efforts or even evolution. But would the people allow it? Would it become "scientific selection"? Would it so in times of peril or overpopulation?
Or will the health studies even cause controversy, say in so many decades when NFL contracts are billions of dollars, would they test individuals for a certain ligament laxity or some sort of advantagous muscle myofilaments. Would the Cowboys, in addition to performance stats and physicals, genetically test and make it standard procedure for an "elite" team? And would laws allow them to alter their players compensation in light of such a result? Would it be the same for employment in light of intelligence findings?
It's interesting, anyway.
It's too early in the morning for this stuff.