3 ms·

If true, and I don't know enough about this area to comment, but if so, it seems for optimum gene selection, people should procreate (or at least freeze their g

by Allocator2008 18y ago

If true, and I don't know enough about this area to comment, but if so, it seems for optimum gene selection, people should procreate (or at least freeze their genetic material in a lab for future use) prior to this age. I have often thought that perhaps the rise in mental disorders in children such as autism could be related to people waiting until later in life to have children, at which point, their DNA has already begun to break down. Studies showing that the oldest child in a family tends to also have a higher IQ is consistent with this. The younger you are when you reproduce, the more fit your genes are, and therefore the smarter, healthier, etc. your children are likely to be. Economic pressures now make people wait until later to reproduce than they did a generation or two ago, but this could be counteracted by saving genetic material in a lab when one is young, then later, when one is economically ready to reproduce, one can make use of the stored material to do so. It is unlikely in the near future that people will all of a sudden want to go back to having kids right out of high school, so, for optimum gene selection, they should at least save off their genetic material (sperm, eggs) for future use. Otherwise, going forward, the average intelligence of the populace is likely to decline.

tokenadult 18y ago
What you say is consistent with what I said in my comment. I would point out, regarding storing genetic material, that I think the studies so far have not shown a large enough effect size from age on sperm to be sure that storing sperm (which has its own damaging effects in some cases) results in a better trade-off. But the general evolutionary picture would favor marrying and reproducing at younger rather than older ages.
menloparkbum 18y ago
I don't know enough about this area to comment The study you're thinking of about the oldest child having a higher IQ (3 points higher on average) made a point that it was nurture, not nature.
russell 18y ago
I think that, from the kid's point of view, it's better to be born to parents in their 30's. The genetic risk is small, but more than offset by the maturity and improved economic circumstances of the parents. It's not until the late 30's or 40's that genetic decline starts to be a serious risk.
- Allocator2008 18y ago
  The fact remains if IQ is tapering off in the late 20's, the a child born to the parents in their 30's may not have as high an IQ as the parents. Personally my parents were in their mid-20's when I crawled out of the evolutionary slime, and in a sense I agree with you on the maturity and economic front - both factors were issues - and I think there has been growth there since, and my younger siblings had it better as far as maturity went, but honestly I wouldn't have it any other way, at least I know I got the best evolutionary shot I could get, lol! :-)

tokenadult 18y ago

What you say is consistent with what I said in my comment. I would point out, regarding storing genetic material, that I think the studies so far have not shown a large enough effect size from age on sperm to be sure that storing sperm (which has its own damaging effects in some cases) results in a better trade-off. But the general evolutionary picture would favor marrying and reproducing at younger rather than older ages.

menloparkbum 18y ago

I don't know enough about this area to comment The study you're thinking of about the oldest child having a higher IQ (3 points higher on average) made a point that it was nurture, not nature.

russell 18y ago

I think that, from the kid's point of view, it's better to be born to parents in their 30's. The genetic risk is small, but more than offset by the maturity and improved economic circumstances of the parents. It's not until the late 30's or 40's that genetic decline starts to be a serious risk.

Allocator2008 18y ago
The fact remains if IQ is tapering off in the late 20's, the a child born to the parents in their 30's may not have as high an IQ as the parents. Personally my parents were in their mid-20's when I crawled out of the evolutionary slime, and in a sense I agree with you on the maturity and economic front - both factors were issues - and I think there has been growth there since, and my younger siblings had it better as far as maturity went, but honestly I wouldn't have it any other way, at least I know I got the best evolutionary shot I could get, lol! :-)