# New Human Species in Brazil? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [May 8, 2002, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-human-species-in-brazil/107898 "2002-05-08T14:23:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 10\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![AWB](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/bb73d2/32.png) [@AWB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AWB)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2002, 11:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-human-species-in-brazil/107898/21 "2002-05-09T11:12:36Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Vinnie Virginslayer \* > \*\*IIRC, a new species can only be formed over hundreds of thousands of years by adapting to their environment to SURVIVE, not get totally fucked up by some Brazzillion dollar South American multi-national dumping DDT in the Amazon and shrnking their brains. \*\* Actually, less complex animals can evolve at a startling rate, like on the order of a couple of centuries. Even more complex animals like birds can differentiate enough in a millennium to be different species. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2002, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-human-species-in-brazil/107898/22 "2002-05-09T15:47:41Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by AWB \* > \*\*Even more complex animals like birds can differentiate enough in a millennium to be different species. \*\* Examples, please? I am not aware of any biological species of birds that have originated in the past 1,000 years. There are probably some that have differentiated in the past 10,000 years, however. ---
**Author:** ![Ms.Lois](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b5e925/32.png) [@Ms.Lois](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ms.Lois)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2002, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-human-species-in-brazil/107898/23 "2002-05-09T17:04:25Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Lemur866 \* > \*\* Chromosomal abnormalities do not make a new species. > > \*\* Um, chromosomal abnormalities (also known as mutations), passed on to subsequent generations are exactly what differentiate species. I don’t believe a single additional digit can qualify as a separate species, however since the offspring is still able to reproduce with the offspring of 5-digited individuals. It could be construed as a “sub-species”, as could the isolated, starved population if it could be differentiated from the larger, less isolated whole. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2002, 5:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-human-species-in-brazil/107898/24 "2002-05-10T05:39:38Z")
> [@](#): > > Close, but not exactly. Under the Biological Species Concept, the rule is that, to be considered separate species, two forms must not regularly hybridize under natural conditions. It’s OK if they produce fertile offspring in captivity, or only rarely or under exceptional conditions in nature - they still will be considered separate. Wouldn’t geography alone be enough to make a species, then? As an example: Consider as our two populations the inhabitants of North America and of Europe. Yes, individuals of the two populations are perfectly capable of interbreeding, but a North American is much more likely to breed with another North American than with a European. Even in the cases where a North American and a European do breed, one might argue that the one had first become a member of the other population. ---
**Author:** ![Truth\_Seeker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/5fc32e/32.png) [@Truth\_Seeker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Truth_Seeker)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2002, 6:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-human-species-in-brazil/107898/25 "2002-05-10T06:29:20Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Chronos \* > \*\*Consider as our two populations the inhabitants of North America and of Europe. Yes, individuals of the two populations are perfectly capable of interbreeding, but a North American is much more likely to breed with another North American than with a European. \*\* [That’s what you think, **Chronos**](http://www.theonion.com/onion3510/european_romantic.html) I can’t say I’m too impressed. Chomsky has discovered kwashiorkor. > [@](#): > > \*\*and this may be unremediable except after generations, because of the lingering effects of malnutrition on one’s offspring. \*\* All I can say is, cite? I am aware of some evidence suggesting that poor nutrition during pregnancy can cause health problems to crop up much later in the baby’s life. However, I’m unaware of any medical evidence indicating that your poor nutrition will somehow affect your grandchildren. ---
**Author:** ![Juan3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/bb73d2/32.png) [@Juan3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Juan3)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2002, 7:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-human-species-in-brazil/107898/26 "2002-05-10T07:02:02Z")
We all have chromosomal abnormalities so, um, the poster you were replying to was exactly right. Alot of them get passed on to subesequent generations and the great vast majority of the time do not end in new species. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Ms. Lois \* > \*\* > > Um, chromosomal abnormalities (also known as mutations), passed on to subsequent generations are exactly what differentiate species. > > I don’t believe a single additional digit can qualify as a separate species, however since the offspring is still able to reproduce with the offspring of 5-digited individuals. > > It could be construed as a “sub-species”, as could the isolated, starved population if it could be differentiated from the larger, less isolated whole. \*\* ---
**Author:** ![Hazel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e56c9b/32.png) [@Hazel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hazel)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2002, 1:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-human-species-in-brazil/107898/27 "2002-05-10T13:03:29Z")
**Truth Seeker** I think Chomsky may be right about the effects of malnutrition. Consider Europe in the middle ages. We know from the size of the suits of armor, and the size of the chairs, that people of that time and place were shorter and smaller then the Europeans of today. The increase in height and size came about gradualy. The average hight/size of adult humans has, I gather, been increasing very slowly throughout history. The increase was caused (mainly or entirely?) by improved nutrition. During the middle ages, there must have been at least some people who got plenty to eat, and a not too unbalanced diet. Yet that minority appearently had children about the same size as everyone else. Throughout history, there must have been a few people here and there who got resonably good nutrition. Yet they don’t seem to have had extra-big, extra-tall children. Surely this would have been noticed if it was occuring; we’d have some sort of record of it. It would seem that it’s true that it takes a number of generations of good nutrition to undo the damage done by generations of poor nutrition. ---
**Author:** ![ratatoskK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ratatoskk/32/2987_2.png) [@ratatoskK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ratatoskK)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2002, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-human-species-in-brazil/107898/28 "2002-05-10T13:17:35Z")
So what’s the definition of “species”? The African pygmies aren’t considered a separate species, so why should these Brazilian people? ---
**Author:** ![Hazel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e56c9b/32.png) [@Hazel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hazel)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2002, 1:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-human-species-in-brazil/107898/29 "2002-05-10T13:29:44Z")
P.S. I’d guess that the children of the minority who got good nutrition were probably a bit bigger and taller then was average for the time and place – but doesen’t it seem unlikely that they produced children who were the average hight/size of today’s developed-world humans? I don’t find it at all hard to believe that it takes generations of good nutrition to undo the damage done by genrations of bad nutrition. OTOH, perhaps I’m wrong to think that people in the past who got plenty to eat (the rich and powerful) were getting good nutrition? Maybe they were getting lots of food, but not enough… what? Protein? The right mix of vitamins/minerals? But it seems likey that the rich and powerful would have been able to get plenty of meat, which should have provided enough protein at least. ---
**Author:** ![Hazel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e56c9b/32.png) [@Hazel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hazel)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2002, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-human-species-in-brazil/107898/30 "2002-05-10T13:57:37Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by ratatoskK \* > \*\*So what’s the definition of “species”? The African pygmies aren’t considered a separate species, so why should these Brazilian people? \*\* Yes, agreed, they’re not _really_ a separate species! As I said in an earlier post, “Granted, they can presumably make babies with ‘regular people’ and so are not technially a separate species. But it would seem that we have a group of people who are enough smaller then whatever’s normal for their region that they are being called pygmies, and whose brain size is aprox. 60% of the current human norm – due to generations of abysmally poor nutrition.” I think the point is that there is a group of people in Brazil who have diverged so far from the norm that they _appear to be_ a different species. In appearance, and in brain size, they’re as different from the average developed-world human of today as the average developed-world human of today is different from, I’d guess, whichever pre-human species immediately proceeded Neanderthal. Homo Whatever. I don’t really know my prehuman species that well. I think the point is that the existance of this situation is an indication that _something is wrong._ No group should be that deprived. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-human-species-in-brazil/107898.md?page=1)