OK, I hope my question doesn’t get misunderstood, I can see how that could happen.
Just a product of overthinking.

Idea is that we can live fairly easily even with some diseases/disorders which could be-life threatening. Many of these are hereditary.
Since modern medicine increases our survival capabilities, the “weaker” individuals can also survive and have offsprings that could potentially inherit these weaknesses, and as this continues it could perhaps leave nearly all people suffering from such conditions further into future.

Does that sound like a realistic scenario? (Assuming we don’t destroy ourselves along with the environment first…)

  • Windex007@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    6 months ago

    Yes, but I’d argue that capital has a more profound impact than “modern medicine”.

    There is a massive MASSIVE selection pressure against reproduction for if you can afford kids or not.

    You can look around the world and see countries with amazing health outcomes, beyond anything our ancestors even a few generations back could have dreamed of…

    … And yet these countries no longer even have children at a replacement rate.

    I’m not saying medicine isn’t a factor… Just saying that in terms of evolutionary pressure, capitalism is even greater a pressure.

    • jj4211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      if you can afford kids or not.

      To amend that, if you are responsible and think you can’t afford kids and have the restraint and planning to select not to have children… there are plenty of people that can’t afford as many children as they have.

      In fact of those that can “afford” kids easily, they are still more likely to stay at one or two.