NO COUNTRY FOR THE AVERAGE MAN

Would you marry someone if they said that they had nothing exceptionally nice about them? Would you buy a product that says it wont do much for your skin, probably just make it average? Would you watch a show that claims that its TRP are just OK- not skyrocketing?

Im guessing not.

And marketing companies make a fortune out of this very fact of human psychology. They cleverly sell their product/people to make you believe that they are the best for you. And if they are all so exceptionally good then they are obviously worth it. 

Well don't feel duped.We love anything that is gift wrapped to make it pretty- compliments, criticism, spouses, friends, facebook pics, latest books, TV shows....even our hospitals nowadays have to be pretty first, for Gods sake!!

Feeling vain suddenly? Shallow? 

Dont!!

Its not your fault.

If liking only the best was vain, then Mother Nature (and please spare me from thy wrath) is the vainest of us all. When Darwin landed on the Galapogas, we learnt a hard fact of nature- it doesnt care about the weak or average. Only those survive who are fittest for that circumstance. Anything a percent below the best, and Nature will spit you off this face of earth without any condolence message. Tough love!

If you are not the best, you dont get any empathy from Nature. Evolution is a guilt-free elimination mechanism reserved only for the fittest. This context of fittest could be in terms of physical attributes, height, weight, skin color, sturdiness or the sweet melody of the cooing you use in your mating call- whatever you do ; it better be the best or your species will see the end of the tunnel soon (soon ie in terms of earth years).

And it is this incessant survival of the fittest that our genes are programmed for. We are genetically programmed to choose only the best and not an ounce below. And this behaviour, meant for evolution and mate selection, has trickled into our socio-economical sphere of life. Its too hardwired in our genes to be allocated only to one sphere, after all!

"Eye-ball grabbing" was a concept started in marketing that is now trickling into our everyday life courtesy Facebook. All our pics have to be the prettiest. All our travels have to be to the exotic locations which allow photo opportunities to be posted on FB. All our anniversaries and birthdays have to be full of love and hugs and kisses. Even going into the labour room should end up into the perfect pic.

Putting our best foot forward or marketing our life in a grand way is something intrinsic to our survival. And its not only us whose worth in life is directly proportional to the number of likes on our profile pic. Everywhere you see in the Natural world, you see an insane driving force to "like me".

Whether its the Red Knot birds ritual of "becoming prettier" to attract females or the Hyenas violent show of aggression to impress prospective mates; we all are prey to the "like me coz im better" philosophy. By hook or crook we want our mates to believe that they have landed the "fittest" mate that evolution will favor in a chance of any likely event in the future. We want our mates to believe that our progeny will benefit from our genes because we offer them the best permutation of features possible.

(The Red Knot male during non breeding season (on left) changes its plumage to look attractive during breeding season (on the right) to attract females. Pic courtesy: Cornell deppt of ornithology)

Though animals make all this effort for the sole goal of survival and mating; we of course have extrapolated it to suit our more complex social make-up. (And also the fact that animals dont have access to FB helps to keep their behaviour restricted!!)

However the underlying genetic intent that governs us all is the same- Be and choose only the fittest or else you might vanish from the face of this earth.

This horrible end that our genes are only too well aware of makes us do everything in our capacity to project the "fittest" image. Hence, we market ourselves in the best packing. And in return, we find ourselves drawn to that which promises a "happily ever after".

And no, it doesnt make you a horrible person. Like I always say, " We are just biochemical entities that our genes  use to propagate themselves. We are just a tool of evolution. Mere slaves to our master!"

So go right ahead and be guilt-free to post that image that Instagram has put so many cool filters on that it doesnt look anything like you in real life but is surely going to get you a hundred likes on day 1 from people you havent met in more than a decade!

It all will be worth it in the long run of evolution!

ASWACHTA MISSION

No dont get me wrong.
Im completely a supporter of the Swatchta mission started by our new government. I love the way they are marketing it, selling it and emphasizing it. And i think i could make our country a wee bit prettier. So hats off!!

However, this whole gung-ho around Clean India mission set me thinking on a slightly different tangent. In the flow of making each city into a western city (making Delhi like Tokyo and Calcutta, sorry Kolkatta! like Shangai) we are slowly trying to turn our country into a developed western world nation. Again, no issues with that. Changing the spelling of Calcutta to Kolkatta was such a political debate, so best of luck with Shangai!! But politics is not what i like to think about.

Being from a life science background I always subject every idea to a single question "But what does it mean at a biological level?"
Swachta has a lovely cultural, political, environmental and Gandhian ring to it. But at the biological level, it has a whole new meaning. And a very interesting one at that!

To save you a Google search, let me describe "biological immunity" a little bit before plunging into Biological jargon. Immunity to diseases is contributed by certain entities inside our body called B cells and T cells. When a body is attacked by a foreign body, say Influenza virus, these cells become activated and "search out" the virus in our body and engulf it thereby killing the viral infection slowly. In this process of identifying and searching the virus, these cells "teach" themselves about the virus. Hence next time, the influenza virus attacks, these cells act much more rapidly and kill the virus before it can create havoc. So, though the virus might have given you the flu first time, the next time it attacks it is unlikely to make you sick because now the body has what mothers love to see in their kids-  "resistance". Actually in terms of immunity, literally- "What doesnt kill you makes you stronger."

How does it all loop into Modi's Swachta mission? Well, the "teaching" that immune cells undergo has its implications in a revolution that has increased the world population by decreasing the infant mortality rate and increasing life expectancy by unimaginable volumes. A revolution started by British physician Dr Edward Jenner when he came up with the world's first vaccine against smallpox.
Dr Jenner noticed that while the whole community was succumbing to the epidemic of smallpox, the milkmaids who worked with cows in the farms, seemed to be magically immune to this deadly disease. On further investigation, he realised that milkmaids had baseline infection of cowpox ( a disease in cows similar to smallpox in humans). Having these cowpox virus in their body was making them immune to smallpox. He inoculated cowpox virus in some of his healthy human subjects and viola! they were all immune to smallpox.

Thats when Jenner gave the world the valuable knowledge that to confer lifelong resistance to a certain disease, you need to subject your immune system to baseline infection of that virus. This is how from Dr Jenner's time to now, we have been able to completely eradicate certain diseases like smallpox and polio. No wonder this fascinating and I would say daring experiment of Dr Jenner is considered as one of the most significant medical discoveries till date!

However immunity acquired through vaccinations is part of what is called "acquired immunity." We make tiny packets of pathogens we know of, inject our toddlers with it and the immune system "teaches" itself to fight those diseases if and when the body sees it in the future. But these are just a handful of vaccinations we are talking about. There are millions of bacteria/virus/fungi (some even unknown to Man till now) that the body sees daily. How is it that we are not then dying everyday??

That is because our immune system has evolved to be smarter than us. It has the capacity to confer resistance on its own. It sees a pathogen (known or unknown to Man), it engulfs it and in turn teaches itself about the pathogen and how to win against it in future combats. This is called "natural immunity". These everyday battles that our immune system wins against these pathogens confers us with resistance against millions of pathogens. Thus, without us even knowing it, our immune system is making us more and more resistant (and thus healthy) daily.

Where is the damn link to Mr Modi's obviously full benefits SWACHTA MISSION  yet? Now that we know about diseases and immunity, let me introduce you to a very fascinating paradigm called "Western Disease Paradigm" or Diseases of Affluence.

Though leaps and bounds ahead of developing countries, when it comes to immunity the West is sitting on a time bomb. (Note: by West i mean all developed countries). Due to the clean roads, buildings, schools, houses and extra sanitized everything, the immune system of the residents of the developed world doesnt come across many pathogens in its life time. This slowly makes the immune system idle and inexperienced that directly translates into lower resistance to pathogens. Though the chances of falling ill are low (due to cleanliness) but the minute a tiny virus does get a chance to invade, the whole body succumbs to the disease because the immune system has not acquired natural immunity to that pathogen before (again due to cleanliness). Therefore to gain wide spectrum restistance at a biological level, you need to give your immune system a chance to "see" some tiny bits of pathogens.

Of course i am not talking of Ebola level of viral infection. Super nasty viruses cant be tackled by even the most experienced and sophisticated immune system of the world. Neither am i advocating slum dwelling. You would be so sick combating the existing pathogens that your immune system wont get the time or the resources to "teach" itself.

So Mr Modi please go right ahead and teach the nation to sweep and clean. However please allow little pools of stagnant water and tiny heaps of garbage in dedicated "unclean" areas so that 10 years later when my kids want to travel to Africa to enjoy the jungle safari experience, they wont have to carry Bisleri bottles with them.

DAWN OF THE ABNORMALS

Yes, i have shamelessly picked up the title of this blog from a recent blockbuster- DAWN OF THE APES. Well, there are more than one correlation about this. All of which, behold, are scientifically driven!

Apes and humans share the maximum gene similarity. We are merely 2% genetically divergent from our ancestors ie 98% of genetic make-up of apes and human is the same. This statistic however is a classic example of so close yet so far.

We share 98% of our genes and yet look and behave like two ends of the spectrum. Would anyone have bought the hypothesis that apes and humans are just 2% apart? Some humans, i can assure you, would find it insulting to be categorized with Apes.

This is, in fact, the whole basis of my post. What you see might not always be what the reality is. I remember being hauled up by my strict convent English teacher for botching up one of my exam answers in grade IV. Complete the proverb "Seeing is...." was the question put before me. And i had completed it with "NOT BELIEVING." I guess the science enthusiast in me has woken up early.

However, Iam not a point off any linear curve. No cuckoo is flying over my nest.
Have you ever wondered what you see is the reality or not? Mark Twain, one of the earliest literary genius, summed it up very well when he said "Truth is stranger than fiction,but it is because fiction is obliged to stick to possiblities; Truth isnt."

Our truth is what we see. Literally. A bus appears red because our eyes sees it that way. Our eyes then send this signal to our brain which in turn processes it and pastes a image of red and a bus like structure. And voila! We have a beautiful red bus zipping by in front of our eyes. Well then where is seeing NOT believing, you ask?? Oh its not that boring.

Lets not look at this whole picture in one go. Lets unlock this labyrinth bit by bit.

Step 1: Our eyes see red: We all know the science behind that. Wriggle back Grade VI physics. Light falls on an object. Object absorbs part of the white light spectra but reflects back one color (Iam assuming we all know that white light is made up of spectrum of colors. Grade IV science- in Indian schools that is :). Anyway, coming back....so the bus we see absorbs the rest of the spectra but reflects the red wavelength back to us.

Step 2: Our retina transmits this information to the brain: The back of our eye has a sort of projector called the Retina. The retina has several color identifying cells called cones.When wavelength corresponding to red falls on the retina the "Red cones" light up and send an electric signal to the part of the brain that is responsible for seeing(Visual Cortex).

Step 3: Visual cortex process this signal: The signal that is sent to the brain as an electric impulse is processed by the highly "intellegent" brain cells and the brain then stores this information as "Red".

Meanwhile similar pathways that lead into the visual cortex hold information about the bus- shape, size, depth.
And another pathway tells the brain how fast the bus was moving, which direction it was going ie all the motor inputs.

And that, my dear Watson, is how we see a red bus moving across.

Sounds insanely complex. Esp when you add the fact that we process all this information in fraction of milliseconds. Right?

Thats where my Class IV English teacher was wrong in cutting my one mark in the exam.

Now that we have understood "seeing", you can appreciate how it can be easily "NOT believing."
So much electric signal, so little time. Can we not goof up? And I dont mean we as people. I mean we as electric impulses, chemical signals and wavelength detectors.
What if our cones got mixed up and the blue cones started picking up the incoming red signal? Would we see a blue bus?
What if the pathway got altered and the visual signal was sent to the part of the brain that was responsible for hearing. Would we "hear" red?
 And please Mr Stan Lee....before you get your writing pad out to see how this plot will unfold into another X-men series...put your pen away. I am talking of Truth and very much the truth. Coz like Mark Twain said- truth is not obliged to stick to what is possible. ("Hearing" red is part of a condition called Synaesthesia. See more of it: here)

It is my days of studying Neuroscience that i realised that there is nothing called "normal" in this world. Its merely like a democracy.Truth or lets call it "Reality" is the one that gets the larger votes. Since most of us perceive red as red, it must be red. And seeing red must be normal.
We forget that what we see is only electric signal. To the person who sees red as blue- thats his truth as much as the red is to the red seeing person. For him the bus is blue. The electric impulse hold no information about right or wrong in them. It doesnt say that you are seeing it as blue but its wrong coz its actually red for the rest of the world. The blue seeing person will know that he is seeing differently only if some red team member mentioned to him that he saw the bus as red.
We perceive the world as much as our wiring will allow us to.

A colorblind person will die thinking that she looks best in that grey cocktail gown while it actually was a red dress. A person with hemispatial neglect will keep thinking he is clean shaven though his left half of the face is bearded. (A video about hemispatial neglect can be seen here) To most of us it might seem odd. Because these behaviours dont conform to the normal. But then like my post says- do you really know what is normal? Normal is what our brain tell us. So as far as these people are concerned, they are all normal. When it comes to the brain- nothing is abnormal. Its just something that doesnt fall in the larger subset.

Any person who has remotely studied Neuroscience will have this awe for the "abnormal." The brain is so complex that to understand its functioning- we turn to whats not functioning. For example, to study color perception; we study pathways in colorblind brains. By studying what happens when things are wired a little differently, we get clues on how they should be wired in a "normal" brain. For studying how the brain perceives motion, we turn to a lady who saw the world in snapshots and not in one continuous motion.

The abnormal tells us what normal should be.

And im not even going into ideals, morals, rebels, society etc. Iam talking of plain and simple brain wiring. If brain tells us red, we see red. Tomorrow if the brain decides to tell us blue, then blue it is. Its that easy to fool us. Infact illusions take advantage of this very fact. However, thats a topic that requires another dedicated post. Some other time, then!

Coming back......
In fact "abnormals" have done us more favors than the ones listed above.  Beethoven, one of the most famous musicians was deaf! How he heard music can be only known by seeing his brain wiring. Professor John Nash popularised in the movie "A beautiful mind" is considered one of the greatest intellect. Was schizophrenia helping him solve problems that a normal brain couldnt? Lewis Carolls's visual hallucinations due to his schizophrenia has given us one of the most creative and dreamy childhood books- Alice in Wonderland which is suspected to be a descriptive of his hallucinations.

I would like to end this post by quoting from that very book. It says what all i said in just one line- another indicative of the creative genuis Lewis Carroll was.

A dialogue between Alice and Chesire Cat:
      "But I don't want to go among mad people," Alice remarked.

"Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat: "We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad."

"How do you know I'm mad?" said Alice.

"You must be," said the Cat, "otherwise you wouldn't have come here."

Alice didn't think that proved it at all: however she went on. "And how do you know that you're mad?"

"To begin with," said the Cat, "a dog's not mad. You grant that?"

"I suppose so," said Alice

"Well, then," the Cat went on, "you see a dog growls when it's angry, and wags its tail when it's pleased. Now I growl when I'm pleased, and wag my tail when I'm angry. Therefore I'm mad."

It took a hallucinating schizophrenic person to tell us the actual truth. if we cant categorise anything as normal probably its safer to call us all abnormal.

"Iam mad, you are mad. We all are mad"

THE GREATEST NOVEL EVER WRITTEN

A gentle disclaimer before even starting this post would be to please read and analyze it with open mindedness. It is just a free dialogue and not meant to hurt/disrespect anybody’s sentiments.

What could be so sensitive that before talking about it requires such apologies and clearance in anticipation?

The one thing that was meant to bring a code of conduct into our life, but it is nowadays (esp with the approaching elections) being used as a (brownie) point in everybodys  personal manifesto- RELIGION.

Had i written this blog a month back, it would be smeared with a lot of strong and raging sentiments reflected by a person of science who are loosely categorized under atheists. We question the natural phenomenon so we must be non-believers in God. That’s the common perception. It might have its justification actually. If we would have not questioned the world around us and left everything to be explained by a super power then Darwin, Feyman and Mendel would have died jobless!

However, lets keep our biases aside. As core to our being is curiosity to find answers so is also the feeling to have faith and to believe. Both these feelings make up Human Nature. So why should we choose between them? If I belong to a class of society that proved the phenomenon behind water droplets acting as prisms for sunlight to give rise to the beautiful rainbow does it mean I have to opt out of believing in the beautiful luck of having rain and sun simultaneously? I certainly hope not.

But what is it about religion that brings a plethora of complications with it?

Refer to a video post on my company’s facebook page BIODEALS(www.facebook.com/biodealsdelhi(www.facebook.com/biodealsdelhi) showing  an interview clip of Sir Richard Dawkins about myth and religion. He says (a little bit arrogantly though..but everybody has their style about showing their passion!) that he feels that the various stories in religion (again, he talks of Christianity but I would extrapolate to any religion) are mere myths because there are no scientific findings to suggest that those events actually took place. Yet, they are important to be told to a child because of the sheer joy of expanding his imagination.

Agreed. A five year old who doesn’t know about what life holds for him needs to be carved into a believer because its his faith that will ease his journey through life. Not only personally, but even professionally too if he has faith in achieving he is more likely to become an achiever.

If everything is so simple, then why has religion been so abused? (Pardon my language, but there is no other decent word that correctly applies here!)

GOD, I feel, is our faith. It is and should be a very personal equation. For me the smile on my child keeps my faith alive. For someone else it might be his ailing wife or the beauty of a panaromic landscape. Religion on the other hand is a means. Thats more generic. The stories can be applied and told to a larger community who can sculpt it to suit their own personal equilibrium with faith.

The problem arises when these stories fall into the hand of haters. If you have faith (in anything you derive peace from), you are sure to be a lover. You love and respect other peoples’ faith too. A godman said in a fantastic bollywood movie ‘Oh my God’- “We are a community of God FEARING not God LOVING.” We have picked up a beautifully intended entity like religion and associated it with everything negative. Random rituals, extravagant consequences for non-believers and irrational fear of the supreme power. Such meaningless complications have arisen because religion, unfortunately, has become one of the most lucrative businesses in the world. Pick up any sales book and you will find an underlying commandment for high sale value- sell against your customers’ fear. Highlight how helpless/despondent your customer is till now and then slowly introduce your product to him so that he feels that he should purchase it right away. And, ladies and gentleman, that’s how religion is also being sold today! A few Godmen with great entreuprenual skills interpret our religion in a particular way and serve it to us. And we lap it up without a second thought. Our religion has been corrupted, my friends. And this corruption is affects us worse than the corruption new political parties are rampantly trying to eradicate. This is psychological corruption. Its far deep rooted than any economical corruption.

But tell me one thing- if you fall prey to a quack treating you, do you change the doctor or lose faith in medicine as a whole? Similarly, if you don’t find solace in whatever is being told you about the faith you are born into I suggest that you start on a journey of self exploration. I can be so confident because of a recent encounter with religion. I emphasise- encounter with religion not faith. Faith is something that I have already developed over time. Lots of experiences showed me the power of positivity, love and giving. But its religion that has erupted as my hero in recent times. And it is this clarity that I want to share with you.

A recent huge achievement that was evading us for a long time made me undertake an oath that I knew in my heart was meaningless to me at that time. I promised that if things work out in our favor I would go to my local Gurudwara everyday. Something that was quite against my core of bribing GOD to get something. It is this bribing that is hacking into the helpless peoples’ emotions to build the vast business empire centered around religion. However, being helpless myself at that point I took this pledge. And surprisingly, we got through with flying colors!!

Hence, started my tryst with religion. The first few days seemed meaningless and I failed to see what my calling was. Just as I was about to dismiss and cement my disbelief in religion, I thought of going one day and doing what I wanted to do in the Gurudwara. If I dint want to bow or bend here and there, I would not. And that’s when I discovered the true meaning and need of religion in our life.

I started going there regularly. On entering the premises I said a casual “hi” to God and sat down to write. I find a lot of peace in writing-  almost anything. And these few days taught me that my religion is actually writing. I just go there and sit and write. Slowly, I started believing the need to bow down to the religious book. It was more knowledgeable of life than I was. I write for clarity. And since the book had more clarity than me, it sure deserved respect. Hence, I started bowing to it on entering the Gurudwara.

I started having dialogues in my head with the religious book in front of me. Stating my doubts, concerns, fears and joys; I started getting replies from my new friend- the book. I need to confess that I have still not opened the Granth Sahib (religious book) but it somehow started giving me answers. I wrote for hours sometimes. No matter how much time I spent there, I realized that I left the place with much more peace and clarity irrespective of having or not donated money or bowed down here or there. I was just more calm. More serene. And I loved it.

Into my second week, I realized something profound. I had not bribed God by taking that oath. On the contrary, I had been bribed into this religious experience. The achievement that was bestowed on us now seemed just an excuse to start my dialogues with God. I was no longer doing it for the bet. I was doing my daily rounds for myself.

Yet again, God has no form for me. Not human at all! But I slowly started seeing that religion took a story form to make it interesting. Ask any child about Alice and Wonderland and she has nothing but awe about the story and remembers it in pictorial memory. Same logic.

I started seeing that these “random” rituals had their roots in being an excuse to enter a premise that was so full of positivity, love and serenity. I realized that God infact is far more helpless than we are because he has been misconstrued into a very negative form by us Humans. God might be there for the same reason since birth of Humanity- to spread a message of love and positivity. But religion has been surely killed by our race.

And somehow the death of religion has been misinterpreted as death of faith. No yoga, no breathing exercise, no hours of hymns can help if you just do it blindly or half heartedly. Similarly, you will have all sorts of negativity towards religion till you don’t research it at your end.

My religion was writing my thoughts in a calm place. It made me more humane and loving. And the path to this was shown through a stupid bet with God (or whatever it is that you have faith in).

I suggest that lets reinvent the wheel here. It doesn’t matter which religion you are born into. They are all the same. Start your secret affair with religion. Secret because its just meant for you. Personalize it, indivdualise it.

So pick up the religious book lying in your bookshelf at home and start reading it the way you want to. It will only tell you of positive things. No harm in reading a story with a positive moral, right?

And slowly you will see what I now feel. You will realize that it’s the greatest novel ever written.

NEED FOR CHANGE

The recent political fever in Delhi had caught me too. From a point where we were wondering if the new party’s manifesto made sense, we recently witnessed a never seen before swearing in ceremony of Delhi’s youngest chief minister. In hindsight, though, it seems like the most logical outcome of a confused election. “ At least the newbies deserve a chance,” was the voters state of mind. “Anti-incumbancy” became the buzz word ruling the media waves.

A science blog talking of politics? That too by someone who reads only the science and bollywood pages of the daily newspaper? Don’t worry, for this again is a classic example of a science lover finding the basis of a scientific dialogue everywhere. Argumentative Indian, some may call!

I feel the basis of this unexpected politicial win is mostly because of our need for change. We all love change. We all pine for a break in the monotony. Its wired into our genes.

Which brings me to the next question- if a need for change is so wired in our genes- then is it in also wired into something the genes live for-i.e. reproduction? Is this high rate of infidelity we see in human society orchestrated by our very own selfish gene? Our genes telling us to “spread out” and strengthen the resulting variants?

No no don’t get me wrong. Im not advocating any way of life. I would any day vote for monogamy. Without sounding like a rebel or hurting anyone, im just trying to understand the evolution of monogamy. Because from all that we know of evolution, monogamy would be suicide as it limits the probable chances and variation of pushing your gene pool ahead. Even for the progeny, having a chance to mix with different MHC types would only improve the quality of their resultant genes.

So keeping aside all other aspects, im trying to understand monogamy at the genetic level.

Humans are complex organisms. So keeping the complex human aside, lets study monogamy at the level of some lower organisms (again lower in terms of genetic complexity and not because of some anthropocentric view).

A “pure” study model would be animals who are monogamous by nature. Many birds, goose, wolves etc are known to be monogamous. One partner pairing is rampant among them. Any ecologist will be able to tell you that the need of monogamy arouse from the higher chances of survival of a baby that was reared by parents who have mastered division of labor. The female took care of the baby and did not worry about finding worms to feed it while the male flew out of the nest to look for a hard day’s earned bread. With the mother behind to protect the young one, of course its chances of survival increased tremendously and it got fed well too. Hence we can attribute this increased chance of survival of progeny as a reason that might have caused birds and some other species to evolve this way of life revolving around monogamy. Makes sense evolutionary too.

At present there are not many views other than the child rearing angle in support of monogamy. But what happens when the children are reared?

Even in birds monogamy is now classified under varies tabs with monogamy being used in terms of one partner pairing at a time and doesn’t imply having one partner throughout ones’ life span. Another great trick by evolution actually. Rear the precious gene pool (ie progeny) to its maximum potential by forming monogamous pairs and then mix with another gene set for creating the next progeny with different permutations.

Coming back to my favourite specie- Humans. We seem to have gone a step further and advocated life long monogamy. At least it is taught to be the correct way of life. Cutting a long story short- is there a genetic basis of monogamy in human society where child rearing theory seems to have lost its shine because of the ultra luxury and convenience offered by the modern way of life? So if the life of our children is not being threatened even if both the parents are flying from the “nest” everyday and division of labor among male and female is losing its charm- what is telling us to be monogamous? Why are we comforted in monogamy? Are our genes tricking us again into believing what they want us to or has social conditioning finally blocked us from any genetic gut feeling?

There is no answer available even on Wikipedia right now for this question!

Of course evolution of the modern society is miniscule in terms of evolution of humans. Like I said in my previous blog “Mirror Mirror”, our emotional evolution is happening exponentially and our genes have not yet caught up. So monogamy could be probably another way of life advocated by society to bring some discipline in our lives without any genetic basis. Its like an unsaid universal law. “Forever and ever” is the ending of most fairy tales being fed to children everyday. Walking into the sunset holding hands is the way we all want our lives to be.

But I just had a thought recently that pushed me to investigate a probable genetic angle to monogamy. What if monogamy is helping save a life? It would make sense to evolution then, wont it?

So I started looking into the evolution of virus of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). The most popular among these is the AIDS virus. If you are not monogamous sexually this virus leads you to a death you don’t want to even imagine. And one of the major causes of AIDS in humans is having multiple sexual partners. That’s where monogamy is going to rescue you from a fatal horrible end.

So is monogamy one of nature’s way of telling us to steer clear of sexually transmitted diseases?

To test the “naturality” of monogamy, the most logical question is “Do animals of less complex social makeup also suffer from sexually transmitted diseases?”

The answer is YES.

In fact AIDS is a classical case of zoonosis, ie transfer of a pathogen from a non-human host to humans. Originating in chimpanzees, one bite to a hunter in Africa is postulated to be the origin of HIV in humans. Chimpanzees are largely polygamous. So sexually transmitted diseases might not be a surprise. What about goose, wolves and beavers that are strictly monogamous or birds for that matter? There have been incidences in birds of STDs like Chlamydia but in strictly monogamous animals, there have not been any reports or probably not been a study.

The answer is still vague. But it surely will be another angle that we could consider to answer the riddling question of what could have lead the beautiful birds or the ferocious wolves to devise this way of life? Why do we find happiness in monogamy? Why are we taught to “resist thy temptation”?

Lots of scientists are trying to find out the genetic basis to this question? I know for sure the emotional basis of this way of life is correct. Then why are our genes always pulling us into the devils’ fire? Is this one lone case where its better to ignore  our natural instincts?

So what about other natural instincts? Should we stop listening to our genes which are clearly making us falter?

What about my “happily ever after”??

The answer surely doesn’t lie within- for this question. But it sure is a great debate. A case where nurture Vs nature debate has the scale clearly tipping towards Nurture.

In our span of one human life (of around 100 years) opting for monogamy gives us happiness. But what about seeing this on a larger scale? Over the span of human evolution (which takes millions of years) will monogamy kill us by reducing the permutation and combinations of our genetic material and making us susceptible to some horrible disease of the future? Are the “straying” individuals of today’s society actually helping us save the human race by mixing their gene pool (of course without the knowledge of their wives!!)

Makes for a good debate, right? And I would leave it as I leave all my other blogs…open ended. All comments and thoughts would be welcome….

Lets talk about….eh….monogamy, baby!!

MIRROR MIRROR ON THE WALL....who is the most NATURAL of us all??

Four legged, bipedal, cranial volume of around 1600cc, reproduces sexually, complex social structure with dominance of alpha male- any sane person would find this description of a human absolutely absurb.
However this is how Nature and Evolution view us. As far as nature is concerned,we are doing no more than the tiny bacteria on our kitchen sink. For nature we are both tools to pass on our genes to future generations.

Whether its number, cranial volume or social structure there are ample examples in the animal kingdom that are at par with us or even ahead. Microbial bacteria beat us at the number game anyday. Not to extract the thrill out of your existence but even domestic chicken outnumber us!!! Yet we think we rule the earth.
Our very own ancestors, Neandrathals, had a bigger cranial volume. And dont even mention the social structure issue. Whether its bees dancing or ants following their queen, we are defnitely not the only smart race to come up with a social plan. In fact, many a times I feel that the society of the jungle is far more sophisticated and civilised than what i see on a busy commute to work everyday.

The Renaissance is said to have revived the human spirit. The focus shifted towards celebrating the human race. And this anthropocentric view of society has been deepening since then. Whether its research, its useful only if its aimed at increasing our longetivity. If its technology it better be making our life easy. We are even bending the ecosystem to suit our needs. The ecologists might be screaming at the top of their lungs about green house, ozone holes or destroying someone's habitat. But we cant hear their voices above our own. For gods sake; even Valentines day has more takers than Earth Day!!

Yet despite this undying love for ourselves, we can see society crumbling in front of our own eyes. Crime rates, divorces, stress just seems to be getting higher and higher while inner peace or zen is something we see very little of or search only every Sunday at our Art of Living class.

If over billions of years of our existence should have taught us anything, it should have been to decrease the mayhem within our social and organic selves. Clearly that is not the case. Are we headed towards a whirlpool that is going to suck the very life force out of us? Are we so clouded with everyday life that we dont see the bigger picture? What is the reason of this discord?

I shall put the question a little bit differently. It will help you understand where im heading.

Is it just us or does Nature also share our anthropocentric viewpoint? Does Evolution also consider us superior than any other gene pool?

The answer is No. Im afraid not. As far as Nature is concerned, the day we stop making "sense" to her, she will spit us out like a dead fly. And while evolution might be making a heartless cold distinction among our species in coherence with survival of the fittest, it makes no distinction across species. For evolution, all species are alike. They are nothing but organic vehicles waiting to push their gene pool forward.

And I think its this discord between how Nature and we veiw ourselves that is causing the unhappiness.

Let me link Anthropology and Evolutionary science a bit to show where im heading.

A married couple works in the same office, has the exact same salary and working hours and gives equal contribution at the work front both find themselves fighting over a mere household chore. When they are equals at work, in society and in each others head; then why is making dinner an obvious wife thing. In fact, come to think of it; she did have that extra board meeting than he did that day. Then why is she expected to think of the menu, lay down the table and cook for the family while all he helps is in chopping the chicken?
I have an answer to this age old question among couples- Evolution, my dear Watson, Evolution!

Male and female brains are wired up through years of evolution. Male brain is the hunter gatherer while female brain is wired to be the home maker. Over years of living in a society we might have come to a piont where we can teach the male brain to do some home making chores yet we are at our core what our genes are telling us to do. "Natural instinct" if i may call it.

Let me make it clear that Im in no way against women liberation. Being a working mother, an entrepreneur and a neuroscience graduate I am nothing but women rights put together! Im just saying that male and female brains are wired differently. They are of the same size, capacity and capabilities. Just wired differently

And the day we start respecting this fact, life will make more sense. The fact that at our core we are just slaves to our biochemical makeup.

Ask an infant and you will know instantly. An infant is nothing but genetic material. 100% natural and in very close touch with his instincts. Thats why an infant in his first few months of survival clearly picks mother over father. Nobody told him so. Even if you leave aside the 9 months of nurturing theory away; nobody can tell you more clearly than an infant that males and females have clear distinct roles- none less or more important than the other. Just different.

The problem is that society has evolved faster than our genes have. The wheel gave way to the jet age that tranformed into the internet age. While organically, we really dint catch up so fast. After all genetic mutation, natural selection and evolution doesnt happen in a matter of a few decades. Iam talking of billions of years of selection, trying to keep pace with few years of social rapid lane changing.

And though society and humans started together, they seem to have parted ways long back.

So next time you feel this giant black hole inside you and turn to search for inner peace; just know that the discord lies between what society is saying and what your genes are guiding you to do. They might not be in tandem always.

I dont know what the answer should be when you face such a dilemma. Its clearly a matter of personal choice. However, I do know for sure that if you are strong enough and have the guts to listen to what millenniums of years of evolution is telling you through your genes, then you clearly are not the kinds that will let a few years of social polishing bother you.

I leave the debate open for discussions.
Keep it natural. Keep it real-
Lahar

Its a bird, its a plane...no its SCIENCE!!!

Superman was a super power. A man flying in a red cape. Of course, he had to be powerful. He could do what no one else could. He was a pioneer. Ahead of the race!
And like anybody doing pioneer work, I think everybody doing science is at par with Superman. Science is a power. A power that can be both used and misused. Thats a topic of many a debate and Hollywood flicks. Sci-fi dealing with an experiment gone wrong are many. How scientifically accurate or well made are they is an entirely different debate.
However, the hero of these movies- superhuman, supershark or supersnake- all emerge from some cloning done by a bad guy or because the data was misused by an evil guy.
Why am I so rampant about discussing Hollywood movies? No, dont worry. Like Ranbir Kapoor I too dont  dream of a Hollywood career. Im told movies are a reflection of society. Hence I love to observe both equally well.
Sci-fi dealing with those mutated humans/animals stem from society's fear of misuse of science.
Anything powerful, if misused can be disastrous. And all those belonging to the generation of Hiroshima-Nagasaki are liable to think so. I do respect but unfortunately dont reflect their opinion.
Before even knowing the possibility of cloning or the definition of a foetus, the society is psyched by such a fear and negativity that there are bans on stem cell research already. What cloning are we scared of? We have after so much effort reached a point where we could probably dream of growing a heart in a petridish.

An experiment by Marko Mihovilovic group of Vienna university where they showed pluripotent cells differentiating into heart cells and beating is something that I like to call "The Kolaveri-D of science" cause it was a video that went viral. And why not? Imagine- tiny cells beating with a rythmn in a petridish! Its like love at first sight.
Thats why when you ban stem-cell research, its like you have banned love! When I saw that video I dont know if my heart was beating faster or those amazing little heart cells. It was not my experiment, my project or my thesis. But I was equally overjoyed and equally proud as the creator of those cells must have been.

Half baked knowledge is worse than no knowledge. How is stem cell research threatening the society that it was decided to ban it in some areas? If they feel that scientists are playing God by manipulating stem cells, then are they playing Devil by banning it? And for the record, we are trying to understand Nature. Not manipulate it. The remote possibility that it might lead to cloning which might be misused. Oh come on! The one incident where the Atomic power was misused does not make the findings of Oppenheimer and Fermi any less marvellous. Was Fermi planning to bomb Nagasaki? Would it have helped to ban Fermi Labs which is till date one of the most coveted and reputed places for science?

The face of the ban states debates like to use destruction of human embryos as a reason to ban stem cell research. Has anybody in the goverment sat through an ethics committee discussing the morals and safe painless use of any life form being used in science? Its one of the most gruelling and well thought of aspect of life sciences cause believe it or not- we want to make sure that though science is our passion, it should not be detrimental to Nature or Society. And as far as the issue of when to call a human embryo a life form; I have only one word- HeLa. And no, its not a weapon of mass destruction, Mr Bush!

We are lovers of science. Of knowledge. Of exploration. Are we still living in the times of Harvey who told the world about blood circulatoin? His crime? Wanting to study human physiology and anatomy at a time when dissections were banned by the Church? Why is Science always in a state of resistance from society? How long will our Renaissance last?

To know, to explore, to enquire- is a natural instinct for human. Be it a one year old walking in the park or a seventy year old researcher looking down a microscope. Banning science means banning the very basic nature of humanity.

What sets us apart from other life forms is our ability to observe, interpret and hypothesise. We are a curious lot. Curiosity, like many ill-worded proverbs, could never have killed a cat! And i think a certain Dr. Schrodinger will agree!!!

So please dont ban love. Dont ban SUPERMAN!