Well, back with that article now. It's in
NewScientist,10 July '04 issue.
The following is what it get from it:
The article seems quick to point out that this has been a very polarized debate--"These controversial claims (in recent studies on genetic and biochemical evidence) have reignited a lively and highly polarized debate that stretches back several decades." (fourth paragraph) It has quotes from Timothy Taylor of the University of Bradford (UK) and White (for) and Bill Arens (against)of Stony Brook University (US). The article sways towards a 'does-new-evidence-support-the-pro?' stance with the study reported on in
Science vol 300, p 640. That article deals with the Fore people of the remote highlands of Papua New Guinea, and kuru--a brain disease similar to BSE and CJD. John Collinge of University college London (UK)'s team, led by Simon Mead, studied the genetic effect of the disease knowing that some are more likely to contract it than others. People who have genes that code for the prion protein with both valine and methionine (heterozygotes) seem to be more resistant. (
Nature,vol 352, p 340) The team analysed the genotypes of a large group of Fore people and compared it to data of 1000 other genotypes representing different ethnic groups from around the world. They found that three-quarters of the Fore women over 50 (the mortuary feasts were banned in the 1950s) were heterozygotes, and reasoned that it could be a case of 'balancing selection'. In analysed DNA samples from all these groups, it was found that heterozygotes were found in every population, suggesting that there has been wide-spead 'balancing selection'--in the team's eyes. The question the team asks is-- what has given us that resistance? Arens claims that the study is fundimentally flawed because of its being based on the assumption that the Fore were actually cannibals. The article ends on a very interesting, though somewhat sensational, note--that Armin Meiwes, arrested for eating some of the person he had met on the net, claiming that there were about 800 cannibals in Germany.
I really appreciate what lexico said about the readiness of secondary handlers of scholarly information to be swayed by time-dependent trends. That is one of my concerns too, as it relates to Scientism. I had voted for the 'many' catagory, but it was with some hesitation, and largely based upon this article. I feel the article stresses the 'the-jury's-still-out-on-this-one' enough, but still lets a little sensationalism in. As I said before, you who played the bigger role in this thread have really done your homework, and can probably tell me a lot more of details and other aspects of this subject.
