# Attached vs. Detached earlobes?
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/attached-vs-detached-earlobes/168940
**Category:** Factual Questions
**Created:** [April 15, 2003, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/attached-vs-detached-earlobes/168940 "2003-04-15T20:56:18Z")
**Posts on this page:** 14
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@moejuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/moejuck)
#### Post date: [April 15, 2003, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/attached-vs-detached-earlobes/168940/1 "2003-04-15T20:56:18Z")
It seems to me that every part of our wonderful body serves SOME purpose no matter how big or small. Why the difference in earlobes then? It would only make sense that there would be a difference if one was superior to the other. Is this the case? Also, is one type of earlobe more dominant than the other?
---
### Author:  [@cornflakes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cornflakes)
#### Post date: [April 15, 2003, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/attached-vs-detached-earlobes/168940/2 "2003-04-15T21:29:58Z")
I remember reading (caveat-in a pop-medicine magazine) that there was a correlation between attached earlobes and blood sugar levels in expectant mothers. I have no idea why this might be the case.
---
### Author:  [@USCDiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/USCDiver)
#### Post date: [April 16, 2003, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/attached-vs-detached-earlobes/168940/3 "2003-04-16T00:58:16Z")
> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by moejuck \*
> \*\* It would only make sense that there would be a difference if one was superior to the other. \*\*
Some real evolutionists will be along shortly and this may end up in GD, but this isn’t true. Traits get selected out only if they are detrimental to the organism. Earlobes are not.
---
### Author:  [@Alereon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alereon)
#### Post date: [April 16, 2003, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/attached-vs-detached-earlobes/168940/4 "2003-04-16T00:59:47Z")
It’s incorrect that every part of our body is functional. Genes are propagated if they help a creature survive, or pruned if they harm its survival. Genes that don’t matter a lick, such as free vs. attached ear lobes, either spread or disappear by random chance. IANAGeneticist, however.
---
### Author:  [@KarlGauss](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KarlGauss)
#### Post date: [April 16, 2003, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/attached-vs-detached-earlobes/168940/5 "2003-04-16T02:12:25Z")
> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by cornflakes \*
> \*\*I remember reading (caveat-in a pop-medicine magazine) that there was a correlation between attached earlobes and blood sugar levels in expectant mothers. I have no idea why this might be the case. \*\*
I’d love to have a cite for that. I’m not saying it’s false, but I haven’t heard of it nor could I find it referenced on Medline.
There is though, possibly, a relationship between having _diagonal ear lobe creases_ and having coronary disease. [Here](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=6359874&dopt=Abstract) is a link. More recent studies have tended not to confirm the association.
As I said in another thread a long time ago:
> [@](#):
>
> AFAIK, the mechanism (if any) is equally unclear. One possibility is that there is indeed a genetic link between diagonal ear lobe creases and heart attacks. Another, and in my opinion more appealing, hypothesis is that the creased ear lob reflects a weakness of the collagen (structural and supporting protein) in the tissues of the ear lobe. Conceivably, if the collagen is weak in the ear lobe it would be weak elsewhere in the body too. Well, collagen happens to be a key component in the lining of your arteries. And, if the collagen lining your arteries is weak, it may crack and allow the influx of cholesterol and, more generally, facilitate the process of athersclerosis.
---
### Author:  [@cornflakes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cornflakes)
#### Post date: [April 16, 2003, 2:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/attached-vs-detached-earlobes/168940/6 "2003-04-16T02:48:12Z")
**KarlGauss** , IIRC Mom read it in _Prevention_ magazine, around 1980 or so. Considering the combination of the source and age of the citation it’s probably not worth looking for.
---
### Author:  [@Darwins\_Finch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darwins_Finch)
#### Post date: [April 16, 2003, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/attached-vs-detached-earlobes/168940/7 "2003-04-16T03:31:19Z")
As mentioned, only those traits which are clearly detrimental will be selected against. Others will either impart some advantage, thereby increasing their representation in a population, or are selectively neutral, in which case their relative appearance in the population will likely be determined largely by chance.
In addition, not every morphological trait is directly the result of genetics. There’s a lot that happens during development which can likewise result in morphological differences. Since such traits are typically not, therefore, heritable, they are largely evolutionarily irrelevant, regardless what relative advantage or disadvantage they might impart.
Granted, in the case of attached/detached earlobes, the trait does appear to be genetic in nature (but as evolutionarily significant as the color of one’s eyes); it is simply worth noting that this is not always the case.
---
### Author:  [@Mort\_Furd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mort_Furd)
#### Post date: [April 16, 2003, 7:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/attached-vs-detached-earlobes/168940/8 "2003-04-16T07:47:03Z")
Germans (at least the ones I know) are convinced that people without detached earlobes are more likely to be criminal or some how not as good as those folks with detached earlobes. YMMV.
---
### Author:  [@Philster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Philster)
#### Post date: [April 16, 2003, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/attached-vs-detached-earlobes/168940/9 "2003-04-16T13:17:22Z")
It’s misguided to think evolutionary process would lead to one earlob being favored over another, just as it would be misguided to think that everyone should have one color for hair, skin, eyes…that every tongue could be rolled…that no one was colorblind, etc.
Earlobs are different…we have attached and detached. This is supporting evidence that helps demonstrate how earlobs being attached or detached have no relevance to survival (and survival means hanging around long enough to reproduce and having offspring that can do the same).
If attached earlobs scared away potential mates, or if they somehow were related to poor survival rates of newborns, I’m sure we wouldn’t be here talking about them because…ta da…they wouldn’t be found on anyone.
It’s a catch-22, old chum.
So,
---
### Author:  [@moejuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/moejuck)
#### Post date: [April 16, 2003, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/attached-vs-detached-earlobes/168940/10 "2003-04-16T15:30:58Z")
After reading all the posts, then it seems that the earlobe must be a genetic trait. Is this true then? Eye color, hair color and the rest are passed on through the genes. I never thought this was true of earlobes, but if we follow the logic above, then it must be true.
---
### Author:  [@Wallenstein](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wallenstein)
#### Post date: [April 16, 2003, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/attached-vs-detached-earlobes/168940/11 "2003-04-16T15:52:55Z")
WAG: my housemates and I were discussing this the other day, and we thought that perhaps there some relation to the need for multi-directional hearing when hunting etc in the past. Loose earlobes perhaps permit more mobility and thus are better at direction-finding. Maybe those people with fixed lobes are able to collect more sound coming from in front of them, and are therefore better equipped to communicate in a speech-driven society.
Quite possibly way off the mark (particularly 'cos it’s hard to see that it would make _that_ much difference) but it’s the best we were able to come up with. 🙂
---
### Author:  [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)
#### Post date: [April 16, 2003, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/attached-vs-detached-earlobes/168940/12 "2003-04-16T20:54:46Z")
> [@](#):
>
> After reading all the posts, then it seems that the earlobe must be a genetic trait. Is this true then? Eye color, hair color and the rest are passed on through the genes. I never thought this was true of earlobes, but if we follow the logic above, then it must be true.
I remember learning in high school biology that attached/detached earlobes were a classical Medellian pair, but I can’t remember which is dominant and which recessive. Not much help, I guess.
---
### Author:  [@Darwins\_Finch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darwins_Finch)
#### Post date: [April 16, 2003, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/attached-vs-detached-earlobes/168940/13 "2003-04-16T22:01:40Z")
Detached earlobes are the dominant allele.
---
### Author:  [@FlippyFly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FlippyFly)
#### Post date: [December 3, 2004, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/attached-vs-detached-earlobes/168940/14 "2004-12-03T18:30:47Z")
Is there any correlation between ethnic groups and earlobes? Do people of certain decent have a genetic bias towards one form over the other or are the rate of occurrence for attached / detached earlobes pretty much constant across all ethnic boundaries?