Evolutionary Disconnection = Earlier Puberty

Posted Mon, 09/06/2010 - 19:31 by Melissa

It's easy enough to stop eating crap and start eating a diet closer to what evolution intended. Other evolutionary disconnects are harder to remedy. As a young woman, I can say one of the hardest is childbearing. Most middle-class young women in developed countries cannot afford to have children during our prime childbearing years. Furthermore, having children often means relying on two incomes and leaving the childcare to someone else outside the family. American children start school young (Swedish children start school at 7, American at 4-5) and our schools generally do a terrible job at providing an evolutionarily-appropriate environment. Think about hunter-gatherer children: lots of play, mixed age groups, and spending time and learning from relatives.

What are the consequences of this evolutionary disconnect? I think we are just starting to see them. One alarming trend is that the age of puberty is falling. Some blame diet, others blame pollution, but it's probably all that and more. Here is an interesting study on how social factors might influence puberty. It suggests that poor mother-child bonds might lead to early puberty. The unfortunate thing about these studies is that it's often hard to tease out social issues like that fact that children whose mothers have to work long hours often live in environments that are poor in many other ways.

The evolutionary disconnect goes so much deeper than just eating inappropriate foods for our species like bread....it goes into how we work, move, and raise our children. The problem here is that the disconnect is so deep that it's hard to remedy it unless you want to run off and become Amish. And that the disconnect is psychological and social as well. How many 24-year-old women want to spend their days taking care of children anyway? How many of us have the extended family to help us? 

Comments

"How many 24-year-old women

by Matt Metzgar - 09/13/2010 - 18:23

"How many 24-year-old women want to spend their days taking care of children anyway?"

Well, whether women want to have children at that age is one issue. But in terms of health, there are studies showing that health indicators are better for both mom and child when the mother is younger:

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/517532

Age 24 is actually late in evolutionary terms for a first pregnancy.

Yes, there are many

by Melissa - 09/14/2010 - 00:21

Yes, there are many indicators that things like late-life bone loss, breast cancer, etc. are tied to waiting too long.

I want to comment on one myth

by Paul - 09/11/2010 - 17:47

I want to comment on one myth you are propagating, that I fight with my friends who are soon-to-be-parents everyday.

A little background, I'm a 30 year old father of a five year old and 2 year old. My wife is also 30.

Your statement that most women cannot afford to have children in their childbearing years is off. My wife has always stayed at home, and when our first was born I was making roughly $45,000, which put us right in line with average income in America at the time. If you make it a priority it is absolutely possible to thrive with a one income family.

It's definitely possible. I

by Melissa - 09/11/2010 - 19:46

It's definitely possible. I grew up with a stay at home mother and I've read the "two income trap." Right now there is significant cultural pressure for women to work though.

For my family, the diet is

by Justin - 09/07/2010 - 22:04

For my family, the diet is the last evolutionary disconnect to remedy. My wife and I are 24 and -- given it has been a sacrifice -- we have found it to be no great difficulty to have her stay home with our three [and growing] children -- as well as homeschooling.

Fo us, the paleo-diet is the newest thing. Just like it is with the diet, the other disconnects are easy to remedy, if you are willing to make them a priority.

Have you read Radical

by Melissa - 09/08/2010 - 22:59

Have you read Radical Homemakers? It sounds like you guys might like it.

I was homeschooled too. My mother did most of the teaching. She'll never be rich, but it's not like we ended up in the poorhouse either.

I have not -- it does sound

by Justin - 09/09/2010 - 07:08

I have not -- it does sound like our kind of book. I'll bring it up to my wife. Thanks for sharing.

Online interaction replacing

by Ned Kock - 09/07/2010 - 09:00

Online interaction replacing a significant proportion of face-to-face interaction is another one. And we'll only know the actual effects many years from now.

As a father of a 22 month

by Mark - 09/07/2010 - 07:42

As a father of a 22 month old, with another on the way, this post really hits home. If you examine What Your Kindergartner Needs To Know, it's really not that much. These things can be learned throughout the days, weeks, and months of the fifth year in the course of normal conversations at home with mom and dad, who purposefully talk about these things with the aim of teaching. The little sponges simply soak it all up.

In my experience, parents fall into 3 categories: (1)Public school is like free day care; (2)True Believers, for whom public education is an Unreproachable Civic Virtue; and (3)the clueless, who simply assume this is how it's supposed to be.

And this is just education. Your entire post is spot on. The evolutionary disconnect is total, and we're all paying for it. Great post.

Great elaboration on the

by pieter d - 09/07/2010 - 03:33

Great elaboration on the disconnect. Diet is easy compared to other factors. For the other things to change, you need other people to change. And that's hard. Thanks for this post.