Positive Health Online

The phrase 'the eclipse of Darwinism' was coined by Julian Huxley, commonly known as Darwin's bulldog.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Thomas_Henry_Huxley._Photograph_by_Lock_%26_Whitfield._Wellcome_V0026596.jpg

Thomas Henry Huxley PC FRS HonFRSE FLS. Photograph by Lock & Whitfield on Wikipedia

Peter J Bowler's 1983 book The Eclipse Of Darwinism described the period from the late 1880s to the 1930s when Darwinism was indeed under a type of eclipse. It was caused by the publication of 2 papers from the creator of neo-Darwinism, August Weismann, attempting to show that Darwin's insistence on the environment (conditions of life, or conditions of existence) was the driver of natural selection and that natural selection was a force sufficient unto itself and did not need the environment apart from the central gene pool.[1,2]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Peter_J._Bowler,_HSS_2007.jpg

Historian of science Peter J. Bowler, at the 2007 History of Science Society meeting in Washington DC

Ragesoss on Wikipedia

During the decades of  'the Eclipse' various schools of thought competed for the vacuum created by Darwinism's possible demise. These included 'Theistic evolution',  Neo-Lamarckism, Orthogenesis, and Mutationism, all elegantly described in Bowler's excellent book. Weismann had long been jealous of Darwin and was also zealously anti-Lamarckian in all its forms. But he was widely regarded as Darwin's rightful heir, so when Darwin died in 1882 it took Weismann less than ten years to write the above two seminal papers and for them both to be published in English by 1893; ''The All-sufficiency of Natural Selection'', stating that natural selection did not need Darwin's Conditions, conditions of life or conditions of existence (which Darwin had mentioned over 100 times in the Origin of Species) and ''The Isolation of the Germ Plasm Theory'', known as Weismann's ''Isolation theory'', which stated that the germ plasm was almost completely insulated from somatic cells apart from radiation. Both these 130-year-old papers have been proved wrong by the new science of epigenetics (see below). [ref: Handbook of Epigenetics; the new Molecular and Medical Genetics]

Weismann, a Bavarian Jew, lectured at Oxford, Cambridge and London. He devised a crass experiment by cutting off the tails of several generations of mice (901 in all), and because they continued to give birth to mice with tails he declared Darwin's environmental theories were irrelevant. Someone noted - ''He could have saved himself a lot of work by looking at his penis.'' As the Jewish race traditionally circumcised male babies, he should have noted that Jewish babies were still always born with foreskins. His theory of mutilation had nothing to do with Darwin's conditions of life.

Regular readers of this column will know that I had spent the previous decade looking at various medical and philosophical systems, from Ayurveda in India, the philosophies of Yoga, Buddhism, Hinduism, and Sufism to the European environmental medicine of Rousseau. I also looked at the natural philosophies of Goethe and the theistic theories of Lamarck, the organic medicine of Drs Rudolph Breuss and Max Gerson, MD, both of whom claimed to cure cancer with a largely plant-based diet organically grown on fertiliser from volcanic (balsamic) rock. There was also the spiritual healing and Gerson Therapy Teachings of Beata Bishop in England, America and Hungary.[3]

Those years of research resulted in a large folder of comprehensive notes prepared as a 'storyboard' for a 13-part television series (those were during the days of Kenneth Clark's 'Civilisation' TV series) when in early 1981, I met Michael Crawford, currently Visiting professor at Imperial College,  London, who was then heading the department of nutritional medicine at the Nuffield Institute at the Zoological Society of London (ZSL). I  asked him about his views on the then termed 'degenerative diseases', now called  'the non-familiar diseases', and he requested I  leave my storyboard with him for a few days to look at.

https://profiles.imperial.ac.uk/michael.crawford

Michael A Crawford PhD, FRSB, FRCPath. Faculty of Medicine, Department of Metabolism, Digestion and Reproduction. Visiting Professor.

When next we met he commented  'You have not mentioned natural selection, what do you think about it?' I replied that 'it had never made much sense to me', thus establishing my ignorance of the subject. Having thus confessed, he generously suggested we write a book together: my role was to research 'natural selection'. Little did I realize that this would become a study of over 40 years. It was indeed a stroke of brilliance to think of this, and I thank him for suggesting what became a lifelong and continuing interest for me.[4]

Environment: Darwin's 'Conditions Of Life': Or 'Conditions Of Existence.

As Lamarck had become a laughing stock by the time Darwin started writing The Origin, he avoided using the word 'environment' as he knew very well that his theory of natural selection could be seen as Lamarckian, so he went to great lengths to avoid being seen as such. But in the 1st edition of  The Origin, he stated clearly that he saw the 'conditions of life'  as the power-pack driving natural selection, and indeed, the last paragraph of chapter 6 in all editions of Origin clearly states this claim.

Environmentally Induced Variation (which everyone understood), later renamed Epigenetics (which very few understood).

It had been long known that variation could be caused by a changing environment, research uncovers how environmental changes could cause genetic variation over time, and that such change was reversible, as such it was considered unimportant. People were looking for a fixed form of change as in a mutation, so little importance was attached to it. Darwin had his guesswork of 'pangenesis' which was later dismissed after no 'gemmules' could be found, but it turned out 150 years later to be an exact forerunner of epigenetics.

His theory of pangenesis stated that every cell in the body had tiny 'gemmules' which registered the environmental change, but at the time no gemmules could be found: this was hardly surprising, as genes had yet to be discovered, but 150 years later the new science of epigenetics explained how the genes in every cell could react to climate change – now known as 'alleles'. So Darwin's hunch was not far off the mark!

Understanding the new science of epigenetics, renamed by Edinburgh geneticist Conrad H Waddington, took a leap after 2003 and the completion of the Human Genome Map (HGM), when instead of the 130,000,000+ genes they expected to find, found less the 25,000. This made them realize that the environment was playing a larger role than they thought. It took a further 7 years of research until the publication of the 1st edition of the Handbook of Epigenetics, the new Molecular and Medical Genetics, ed. Trygve Tollesbol (Elsevier 2011) now in its 3rd edition.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Conrad_Hal_Waddington.jpg

Portrait photograph of Edinburgh geneticist Conrad Hal Waddington, 1934. Wikipedia.

Picture Credit: Ramsey & Muspratt, photographers, of Cambridge

Later epigenetics research shows how both of Weismann's aforementioned papers contained errors and do not hold water. [ref - Does our Current Understanding of Epigenetics Now Expose Neo-Darwinism as Pseudo-Science? (David E Marsh: Positive Health Online, Issue 290 - November 2023)]

I will now quote from heavily edited paper by Jonathan Klane in ......

Recent  Research From Arizona State University:

This study Challenges Traditional Views of Evolution
Research uncovers how environmental changes influence genetic variation over time In new research, Arizona State University scientists and their colleagues investigated genetic changes occurring in a naturally isolated population of the water flea, Daphnia pulex. This tiny crustacean, barely visible to the naked eye, plays a crucial role in freshwater ecosystems and offers a unique window into natural selection and evolution.

Their findings, reported in the current issue of the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS),  rely on a decade of research. https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2307107121   Using advanced genomic techniques, the research team analyzed DNA samples from nearly 1,000 Daphnia.[5]

They discovered that the strength of natural selection on individual genes varies significantly from year to year, maintaining variation and potentially enhancing the ability to adapt to future changing environmental conditions by providing raw material for natural selection to act on. In seemingly stable environments, there is significant fluctuation in the frequency of gene variants known as alleles at specific chromosomal regions over time, even if the overall strength of selection remains near zero on average over many years. This suggests that such genetic variation allows populations to remain adaptable to environmental changes.

“This study has, for the first time, given us a glimpse into the kinds of temporal changes in gene frequencies that occur even in seemingly constant environments, a sort of ongoing churn of genetic variation distributed across the genome,” says Michael Lynch, lead author of the new study.

Lynch is the director of the Biodesign Center for Mechanisms of Evolution and a professor in the School of Life Sciences at ASU. Additional researchers on the study include colleagues from ASU, Central China Normal University, and the University of Notre Dame.

The Power of Selection

Daphnia, a form of zooplankton, have fascinated biologists for centuries due to their crucial role in aquatic ecosystems and ability to adapt to environmental stressors. In addition to their value for multigenerational genetic research, Daphnia are widely used model organisms for freshwater toxicity testing because they have a rapid asexual reproductive cycle and are sensitive to various environmental pollutants.

The tiny creatures are a vital food source for fish and help keep algae growth in check. Their ability to adapt quickly to environmental changes could hold clues for how other species –including those important to human food supplies– might respond to pollution, climate change, and other human-induced stressors.

Most of the sites examined on the Daphnia genome were shown to experience changing selection pressures over the study period. On average, these pressures tend to balance out to have little overall effect, meaning that no single direction of selection consistently dominates over time. Instead, the genetic advantages or disadvantages of specific traits change from one period to the next.

These findings challenge the traditional belief that measuring genetic diversity (the range of different traits in a population) and genetic divergence (the differences between populations) can easily show how natural selection is consistently operating. Instead, natural selection seems to operate with greater subtlety and complexity than previously thought.

Rethinking Genetic Variation

The study breaks new ground by pinpointing when and where selection pressures occur within the genome. Other than traits known to be strongly influenced by natural selection, there is little information on how allele frequencies change over time in natural populations.

The multi-year, genome-wide analysis of nearly 1,000 genetic samples from a Daphnia pulex population shows that most genetic sites experience varying selection, with an average effect close to zero, indicating little consistent selection pressure over different times and selection spread across many genomic regions.

These findings challenge the usual understanding of genetic diversity and divergence as indicators of random genetic drift and selection intensity.

Variation and Survival

The observed patterns of selection on various gene sites provide a mechanism for maintaining genetic diversity, which is essential for rapid adaptation. The study also revealed that genes located near each other on chromosomes tend to evolve in a coordinated manner. This linkage allows beneficial combinations of gene variants to be inherited together, potentially accelerating the adaptation process.

This effect could help explain how species sometimes adapt faster than scientists would normally expect. On the other hand, the same phenomenon may result in deleterious alleles being swept to higher frequencies by linked beneficial alleles, reducing the overall efficiency of selection in some cases. 

The study shows that evolution is more dynamic and complex than previously appreciated. The environment's influence on genes changes frequently, possibly helping species keep the genetic variety needed to adapt to future conditions. This new understanding may prompt scientists to rethink how they study evolution in the wild.

While the study focused on Daphnia pulex, the findings may have implications for understanding how other species might respond to rapid environmental changes, including those driven by human activities, such as pollution and climate change. Assessing the stability of allele frequencies in more stable environments is an important preliminary step. Such studies are critical, as laboratory experiments alone cannot duplicate the complexity of environmental influences acting on wild populations.

Further, understanding how Daphnia evolve may provide insights into the resilience of entire ecosystems. This knowledge could help researchers predict and potentially mitigate the impacts of environmental changes on biodiversity and food webs.

As the world grapples with an accelerating environmental crisis, studies like this one provide crucial insights into nature's capacity for resilience and adaptation. By continuing to study these tiny creatures, the scientists hope to better understand the fundamental mechanisms of evolution and apply these lessons to broader ecological and conservation efforts.

This press release was originally published on the Arizona State University website and has been edited for style and clarity.

With thanks to Jonathan Klane M.S.Ed. CIH CSP CHMM, CIT
info@labmanager.com 
and Arizona State University https://www.asu.edu

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Shrinking-Brain-Michael-Crawford/dp/1915465125

The Shrinking Brain by Crawford & Marsh. 2023.

I suspect we are entering a period that may become called 'the Eclipse of neo-Darwinism'' and suggest that it may take another 40-50 years before the medical establishment accepts that the true original Darwinism is the rightful theory, as we proposed in our recent book the Shrinking Brain, Crawford & Marsh, 2023. Although we have known the brain has been shrinking for 30,000 years for some time, our book is really about much more: i.e. what Darwin called ''The Conditions of Life'', or ''The Conditions of Existence''.

By adhering to an outmoded and yet-to-be disproved environmental theory we have done irreparable harm to our struggling planet.

ref    http://www.davidmarsh.org.uk/?Books    – Reviews of The Driving Force; Nutrition_and_Evolution: and The Shrinking Brain; Crawford & Marsh, 1989-2023.

http://www.davidmarsh.org.uk/?Articles

http://www.davidmarsh.org.uk/?Articles___The_Shrinking_Brain_%28book%2C_2023%29

References

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Peter_J._Bowler,_HSS_2007.jpg
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/August_Weismann
3. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Time-Heal-Beata-Bishop/dp/1904439632
4. https://profiles.imperial.ac.uk/michael.crawford
5. The journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS),