Given that 99% of American (for example) households have a television and that that most (including myself) watch it too much, does anyone think this has a negative effect on human evolution? Would we have been better off without it? The reason I bring this up is I have nephews who wake up in the morning and go straight to the TV and watch cartoons until they go to school. I'm about to have a child and worried that they will learn the same habit.
This can be a positive if you lay down certain rules. Rules at my house are as follows: The only thing my children ages under 3: is PBS Kids or Animal Planet ages 3-13: Animal Planet, History Channel, Discovery, or Discovery Kids ages 13-18: Animal Planet, History Channel, Discovery, FoxNews, or BBC. Seems weird but the older kids now would rather watch History or Discovery than anything else, never even a want to watch MTV or such. When they go to freinds homes they obviously watch what they want, out of my hands, but there freinds even sometimes watch their channels cause they hate MTV and the like.
The other kids houses is what I'm going to be worried about...and yeah I'm definately into documentaries now esp about animals etc. I'd really reccommend "March of the Penguins" for me an amazing documentary about these incredible creatures.
i think alot of it has to do with the parents...i did watch a ton of tv when i was younger, and some of it was educational, like sesame street etc. but the age of reality tv isn't a good thing for kids to see, its shown to be how real life is, but its very skewed. that is definently something my kids wouldn't watch. as far as the effects on evolution, somewhat, kids can become fearful of the real world just by watching the news alone..
I must be the devil himself! I let my daughter who is now 5 years old watch just about anything she wants. Most of the time she likes watching some of the same shows I like. Las Vegas Fear Factor American Idol Surivor (my wife watches this one) South Park ***Don't flame me for this one.... it is one of her favorite shows. She does watch her share of Nick and Cartoon channel but what kid doesn't. She is very athletic and swims everyday so TV isn't her whole life. The important thing is to educate your kids on the violence and bad words. You can find bad words and violence on just about every show. Shit... just watch cartoons for a bit they are always trying to blow each other up and cause harm. Personally I think the more liberal you are with your kids the better off they turn out.
Haha. I love SP in small doses but they went too far with Team America I'm afraid. I totally agree it's about educating them (children) about what's real and what's not... It's good to hear the your daughter has got other more important interests. I hope that's the case for most young children and us "grown ups"...
i do have to agree with you there, i was able to watch whatever i want, and i turned out ok but, it is a different world we live in since i was a child
Social evolution - yes, it has become normal behavior now. As far as genetic evolution, I think that it would have to rely on some kind of gene that gets reinforced over many generations, but it looks like the gene was already present, just waiting for TV to happen. Speaking only for myself, I am so lazy that I will welcome any activity that helps me escape the drudgery of independent thought! However, I draw the line at Harlequin Romances, :O)
I think kid's nowadays spend too much time on computers/playing game consoles and watching television. When I was very very young, We wouldn't be allowed to just watch TV whenever we liked, and instead got encouraged to do other things, such as outdoor activities. I'm not saying it's wrong to let your kid watch TV as it stimulates their mind, and keeps them entertained, but there is such a thing as too much.
Can't wait until "they" discover the intelligence gene, the fat gene or the money making gene.....www .egenes.com www .thin-genes.com...www .gene-genie.com I don't think there's too much wrong with watching TV but not in a state of flat-line brain "trance" Anyway how many generations does it require of a gene to become reinforced?
There's good and bad. My daughter learned her alphabet before she was 2 because her favorite video was LeapFrog's Letter Factory. I don't worry too much so long as she's watching appropriate shows and doing lots of other things. She's 3 now and such an imagination! I never know what name to call her - Sleeping Beauty, Snow White, Cinderella, Rapunzel, Dora... the list goes on, but she's very insistent whenever she changes names, generally several times a day. She gets her ideas from books and TV.
I think controlling TV watching is just a choice one makes, and a habit or lack of habit that children will pick up in good or bad form from their parents' example. Personally, I threw out the TV several years ago and haven't missed it since. More time for the things in life that really matter. It doesn't quite work like that There generally needs to be a life-and-death reason (what biologists call "selection pressure") for a gene to become more widespread in a population. For instance, in the 14th century the Black Death (bubonic plague) killed off a third of Europe's inhabitants. Then, as now, there were individuals who survived it, because it couldn't enter their white blood cells. That's a form of genetic immunity, and in the generations that followed the Death, that gene became a lot more widespread than before. This was simply because those who didn't have the gene didn't have as good a chance of surviving the disease, and thus didn't pass on their version of the gene (an "allele") to any offspring. That's natural selection in action: simple mathematics. (It's interesting to note that the areas that were hardest hit by the plague match those where the gene for HIV resistance and immunity are the most common today. It's been hypothesized that the gene in question is one and the same.) Now, simply watching TV or not doesn't quite qualify as selection pressure quite in the same manner as bubonic plague It just doesn't have the same... urgency ...about it, you know On the other hand, becoming so glued to the boob tube that its negative side-effects (junk food and obesity, for instance) render you unattractive to the opposite sex, would certainly mean that any hypothetical genes (if they exist) that cause laziness and TV watching would necessarily decrease in the population, generation by generation, as more outgoing, successful people would gladly continue producing progeny. This would be an example of what scientists call "sexual selection", and some writers I've read argue than since pre-history, sexual selection has shaped human evolution more than natural selection, being largely responsible for trivial changes like different skin colors and such.
Hmmm, how about people that like to, uh, cuddle (LOL) and start hanky-panky while watching TV. If they have many, many kids as a result, and this results in those descendents 'watching TV' with other TV inspired offspring, eventually they will become a majority. I am thinking that any genetically propensity for couch potatoness will also have strong 'physical activity inhibiting' as a primary characteristic, and the hanky-panky inclivations will be minimal. Add to this the desultory nutritional practices that result in poor reproductive health, and you have a recipe(sic) for extinction. Oh, Mendleev, he must be turning in his grave :O)
My favourite programs to watch are anything about natural history or any interesting document. I dont like to watch things nowaday unless im learning something and natural history is a great passoin of mine.
On the topic of evolution, what do you think we will look like in a million years, if were still around.
Or what about that we were water dwelling creatures for part of our evolution? Webbed hands and feet...hair that grows down our appendages...nostrils pointing down...missing link etc etc