- Reaction score
- 5,209
My point is this:
Say you were to trace hereditary heart disease in a family. You would eventually find a cutoff point where no one seemed to have it before them; you can find the person whose genes likely introduced it. If you managed to find someone from 200 years back in your family who had it, but few or no one else did, that is not conclusive evidence that you genetically inherited it.
It's like the old myth of "your mother's side of the family is where baldness comes from". Well, just about no one of close ancestry or relation on either side of my family has baldness to any severe degree.
Male-pattern baldness has afflicted humans regularly across the globe since basically the dawn of homo sapien. To me, that suggests this is different from hereditary diseases and is instead a human characteristic. Even statistically, it suggests that men who don't bald are an irregularity. In something like heart disease, the disease itself is an irregularity. I don't think you'll find any family on Earth where a great percentage of males didn't have male pattern baldness.
If that makes sense.
yeah, definitely could be. I don't really know tbh. It may even be due to genes that aren't being transcribed in certain generations that are later turned on in newer ones. there are so many factors involved, you are absolutely right. I don't really know too much about it, I just like to pretend I do.