Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: A question about the epicanthic fold
Atomic 3.0 > The Geeks > The Green Room
TheSecret
Many Asian people have this fold under their eye, giving them a distinctive look. Interestingly, (AFAIK), this fold only exists in people who ethnically come from the Asian geographic region. What is it about this side of the world, that would cause people to develop this fold near their eyes? Even many animals found in the Asia region have this fold, the most famous example probably being siamese cats.

Would Australians eventually evolve to have this fold as well, if we were to remain on this content for a long enough period of time? The most popular theory for the fold is that it helps to protect against UV radiation, something Australia is more prone to than most other regions. Assuming that it is possible, and how it works etc, I would guess that the increasing mixing of races would cancel that out before it had a chance to happen...
plebsmacker
Define a long enough period of time.
Lazzarus2nd
WTF?

New Zealanders have darker skin, Africans have Black skin, Japanese are shorter than the norm, the brits dont shower. Every race has a distinction based on their ancestry, why bother analysing it? Instead worry your cranium about where to get the next renewable enrgy source from.

Profit.
TheSecret
Lazzarus, I think you may have missed the point of what I was asking :|

I'm curious why the fold is only present in humans from that particular reigion, and if Australians would eventually adapt to have a similar fold...

On the other hand, native NZ'ers definitly don't, so we could just be too far south maybe...
Director
QUOTE
I'm curious why the fold is only present in humans from that particular reigion, and if Australians would eventually adapt to have a similar fold...


Umm, it's called 'genetics' dude and if the aussie population interbreeds with the asian population enough the yeah it'd probably become a feature.
1shot1kill
QUOTE (TheSecret @ Aug 14 2009, 12:47 AM) *
The most popular theory for the fold is that it helps to protect against UV radiation, something Australia is more prone to than most other regions.


If that's the case, why don't Kooris have it?
Fillerbunny
From memory it was originally to protect the eyes against the large sand and dust storms of the region.
Elfarch
QUOTE (Fillerbunny @ Aug 14 2009, 07:40 AM) *
From memory it was originally to protect the eyes against the large sand and dust storms of the region.


Yep, heard that one. Wonder why Berbers and Bedouin don't have em?
Cybes
According to Wikipedia:
QUOTE
In children

All humans initially develop epicanthic folds in the womb. Some children lose them by birth, but epicanthic folds may also be seen in young children of any ethnicity before the bridge of the nose begins to elevate.


I don't know why it should be, but I reckon you'll find a pretty good correlation between nasal bridge depth and ethnicity. ie: Asians have a pretty flat nasal bridge, and whiteys don't.

Also, if the thing were present due to UV, glare, or sandstorms, wouldn't you expect to find it amongst Australian aboriginal populations?
Director
QUOTE
In children

All humans initially develop epicanthic folds in the womb. Some children lose them by birth, but epicanthic folds may also be seen in young children of any ethnicity before the bridge of the nose begins to elevate.


So is it a simply a genetic malfunction that doesn't allow that to happen?
thesorehead
QUOTE (Director @ Aug 14 2009, 09:02 AM) *
QUOTE
In children

All humans initially develop epicanthic folds in the womb. Some children lose them by birth, but epicanthic folds may also be seen in young children of any ethnicity before the bridge of the nose begins to elevate.


So is it a simply a genetic malfunction that doesn't allow that to happen?

Cool!

Genetic malfunctions that don't adversely affect survival = diversity. I'd think it'd have to be more than pure mutation though - it's not as though the whole Asian continent was populated from one seed family. Or maybe it was ... but it seems unlikely.
Kimmo
I seem to recall it's from the Mongols, who supposedly developed it as an adaptation to protect against snowblindness.
Taranthor
QUOTE (thesorehead @ Aug 14 2009, 09:16 AM) *
QUOTE (Director @ Aug 14 2009, 09:02 AM) *
QUOTE
In children

All humans initially develop epicanthic folds in the womb. Some children lose them by birth, but epicanthic folds may also be seen in young children of any ethnicity before the bridge of the nose begins to elevate.


So is it a simply a genetic malfunction that doesn't allow that to happen?

Cool!

Genetic malfunctions that don't adversely affect survival = diversity. I'd think it'd have to be more than pure mutation though - it's not as though the whole Asian continent was populated from one seed family. Or maybe it was ... but it seems unlikely.



The human race has ensured that pretty much no genetic malfunction affects survival anymore.

Stupid humans keeping alive people that shouldn't be alive.
ArcaneMagik
Because God decided to make different people look different. Variety and all that stuff.

Nich...
That really reads like you don't know how genetics/evolution works, TS : \
Kimmo
Are Eskimos/Inuits descended from Mongols, or did they develop the eye thing independently?
bu14-1
QUOTE (1shot1kill @ Aug 14 2009, 07:14 AM) *
QUOTE (TheSecret @ Aug 14 2009, 12:47 AM) *
The most popular theory for the fold is that it helps to protect against UV radiation, something Australia is more prone to than most other regions.


If that's the case, why don't Kooris have it?

That's what I was thinking.


QUOTE (ArcaneMagik @ Aug 14 2009, 09:30 AM) *
Because God decided to make different people look different. Variety and all that stuff.

Well I think that pretty much according to the Bible we all came from two people, so it wouldn't be like God spontaneously made a heap of different races at the beginning.
Nich...
I'm not sure if the Bible is going to be seen as an authoritative source by many in this instance.
Elfarch
QUOTE (Kimmo @ Aug 14 2009, 11:36 AM) *
Are Eskimos/Inuits descended from Mongols, or did they develop the eye thing independently?


Supposedly they did migrate from asia. But then so did all the north american indians. Oops, native north americans as they say now. Even though they are long term immigrants that killed off or drove other peoples (that came earlier) south.
DEVERE
QUOTE (Kimmo @ Aug 14 2009, 10:36 AM) *
Are Eskimos/Inuits descended from Mongols, or did they develop the eye thing independently?



According to many sources I have been skimming through, it appeared in the Eskinos/Inuits due to their living in a harsh icy climate, and was there to protect against the glare from the snow and ice, along with the Mongols who developed it for the same reason.

The Inuits seem to have originated somewhere along the line from the Mongols, but the race separated when some (now Inuits) crossed the Beringian Strait and moved into the Northern Americas. The fold itself seems to have been around long before the last ice age.

The capoid peoples in Africa (who seem to have about 85% Asian DNA) also have the same fold, and this seems to be due to their harsh windy climate and offers some protection from sand storms and bright sunlight... but again, due to their DNA, could be just genetics.

I also found this:
QUOTE
Because of the main staple in the Asian diet. Rice is known as fan, or foundation, of the chinese diet.

Rice, by tself is missing essential amino acids neccesary for proper occullar muscle formation.

Mexicans (central americans) experienced a similar genetic affliction due to their diet consisting mainly of corn.

The disease is known as polagra. When you mix corn and rice, or rice and beans, or corn and beans (any combo, thereof), you complete the amino chain and make a protein...

The effect of polagra has wound itself into the evolutionary chain for so long that the common, modern diet has little effect of revering the occular muscle contraction.


QUOTE (Elfarch @ Aug 14 2009, 10:57 AM) *
QUOTE (Kimmo @ Aug 14 2009, 11:36 AM) *
Are Eskimos/Inuits descended from Mongols, or did they develop the eye thing independently?


Supposedly they did migrate from asia. But then so did all the north american indians. Oops, native north americans as they say now. Even though they are long term immigrants that killed off or drove other peoples (that came earlier) south.


And there we have another question... why don't ALL native amerindians have the fold.... due to selective breeding maybe?
thesorehead
QUOTE (Taranthor @ Aug 14 2009, 09:21 AM) *
QUOTE (thesorehead @ Aug 14 2009, 09:16 AM) *
Cool!

Genetic malfunctions that don't adversely affect survival = diversity. I'd think it'd have to be more than pure mutation though - it's not as though the whole Asian continent was populated from one seed family. Or maybe it was ... but it seems unlikely.

The human race has ensured that pretty much no genetic malfunction affects survival anymore.

Stupid humans keeping alive people that shouldn't be alive.

I doubt that would have been the case 40 000 years ago (or however long it was) when the place was colonised by humans. Most human death was at, near or because of childbirth in those days - having a different-shaped eye probably wouldn't have factored in that heavily when it came to survival.

Perhaps it was an anti-snowblindness thing from the Mongols. Perhaps it was just a random, non-harmful mutation that happened to propogate over time through minor positive selection - you gotta admit that as eyes go it's hard to beat pretty Asian peepers. :--P
Kimmo
The fact that Eskimos hung onto it while other early Americans lost it should tell you something...
Cybes
QUOTE (Kimmo @ Aug 14 2009, 11:48 AM) *
The fact that Eskimos hung onto it while other early Americans lost it should tell you something...

If you're going to hold forth snow glare as a causative factor, I'm going to ask you ahy all the asian races south of China also have it.
battlefield_gir
what about the mongolian advance in to europe.....

Nich...
QUOTE (Cybes @ Aug 14 2009, 12:24 PM) *
QUOTE (Kimmo @ Aug 14 2009, 11:48 AM) *
The fact that Eskimos hung onto it while other early Americans lost it should tell you something...
If you're going to hold forth snow glare as a causative factor, I'm going to ask you ahy all the asian races south of China also have it.
No! There is no common sense allowed in this thread! Get out!
Cybes
QUOTE (Nich... @ Aug 14 2009, 12:17 PM) *
No! There is no common sense allowed in this thread! Get out!

Hmpf! Stoopid Nich... <mumble mumble>
/stomps off with hands in pockets and chin tucked in

/kicks grass on way out
theunknownsoldier
QUOTE (TheSecret @ Aug 14 2009, 05:07 AM) *
Lazzarus, I think you may have missed the point of what I was asking :|

I'm curious why the fold is only present in humans from that particular reigion, and if Australians would eventually adapt to have a similar fold...

On the other hand, native NZ'ers definitly don't, so we could just be too far south maybe...


There's no such thing as a native NZ'er. They were all wiped out by the Maoris. It's why I always laugh when people talk about native land rights in NZ. The Maoris have no rights to any land in New Zealand. They conquered the original inhabitants, and then the Brits conquered them. The big difference being the white people didn't eat them and wipe their race out.
Noone in NZ has been in this region long enough to adapt in ways similar to the Asians. The Maoris came from the polynesian islands. You don't get too many deserts and sandstorms on little tropical islands.
Nich...
QUOTE (theunknownsoldier @ Aug 14 2009, 01:06 PM) *
You don't get too many deserts and sandstorms on little tropical islands.
Is the sun reflecting off open water much less harsh than the sun reflecting off snow or sand?

Out of curiosity.
1shot1kill
QUOTE (Cybes @ Aug 14 2009, 12:24 PM) *
QUOTE (Kimmo @ Aug 14 2009, 11:48 AM) *
The fact that Eskimos hung onto it while other early Americans lost it should tell you something...

If you're going to hold forth snow glare as a causative factor, I'm going to ask you ahy all the asian races south of China also have it.


Indians don't have it.
mykl_c
Well, this is likely to get some bites...

It's all about breeding and perceived attractive features. We took dog 1 and turned them into everything from Chihuahuas to Great Danes and Salukis. Chickens, cats, you name it, no issue but that human driven selective breeding has driven the differentiation of appearance to a huge degree. We do it to ourselves.

Wonder if it's a dominant genetic trait.
Hlass
QUOTE (TheSecret @ Aug 14 2009, 12:47 AM) *
Many Asian people have this fold under their eye, giving them a distinctive look. Interestingly, (AFAIK), this fold only exists in people who ethnically come from the Asian geographic region.


Ya reckon? http://cdlanderson.files.wordpress.com/200...kimo-family.jpg
mykl_c
hlass - some of us would include the Arctic in Asia, at least the more habitable parts. Eskimaux may be seen as simply far-northern Mongolians.
Foods
QUOTE (Nich... @ Aug 14 2009, 11:51 AM) *
I'm not sure if the Bible is going to be seen as an authoritative source by many in this instance.


Shut up or I'll get Judas to kick your arse.


'
Hlass
QUOTE (DEVERE @ Aug 14 2009, 12:10 PM) *
QUOTE
Because of the main staple in the Asian diet. Rice is known as fan, or foundation, of the chinese diet.

Rice, by tself is missing essential amino acids neccesary for proper occullar muscle formation.

Mexicans (central americans) experienced a similar genetic affliction due to their diet consisting mainly of corn.

The disease is known as polagra. When you mix corn and rice, or rice and beans, or corn and beans (any combo, thereof), you complete the amino chain and make a protein...

The effect of polagra has wound itself into the evolutionary chain for so long that the common, modern diet has little effect of revering the occular muscle contraction.





Well there is a massive pile of horse shit. We probably don't need to pick it apart further after we recognise the author cannot spell "Pellagra".


QUOTE (mykl_c @ Aug 14 2009, 05:42 PM) *
hlass - some of us would include the Arctic in Asia, at least the more habitable parts. Eskimaux may be seen as simply far-northern Mongolians.


I reckon most of us would be hard pressed to call the circumpolar regions of Canada "Asia".
mykl_c
hlass - perhaps not entirely horseshit - there do seem to be a lot of sight issues in the asian community, especially amongst the non-Han Chinese. I would be more likely to accept a dietary cause for systemic sight issues than the fold.

And as for Canadian Eskimaux, I'm confident that they're little different to their more Westerly cousins, on a genetic level.
Hlass
QUOTE (mykl_c @ Aug 14 2009, 05:52 PM) *
hlass - perhaps not entirely horseshit - there do seem to be a lot of sight issues in the asian community, especially amongst the non-Han Chinese. I would be more likely to accept a dietary cause for systemic sight issues than the fold.

And as for Canadian Eskimaux, I'm confident that they're little different to their more Westerly cousins, on a genetic level.


Heredity dietary deficiencies? That's what the quote is claiming. Horseshit as I said before.

Maybe you are. They still have the fold though and still don't live in Asia.
Cybes
QUOTE (1shot1kill @ Aug 14 2009, 04:55 PM) *
QUOTE (Cybes @ Aug 14 2009, 12:24 PM) *

If you're going to hold forth snow glare as a causative factor, I'm going to ask you ahy all the asian races south of China also have it.

Indians don't have it.

Smartarse. You know damn well what I was talking about. Indians are quite clearly a different racial group, despite their geographic location.
VannA
QUOTE (hlass @ Aug 14 2009, 05:59 PM) *
QUOTE (mykl_c @ Aug 14 2009, 05:52 PM) *
hlass - perhaps not entirely horseshit - there do seem to be a lot of sight issues in the asian community, especially amongst the non-Han Chinese. I would be more likely to accept a dietary cause for systemic sight issues than the fold.

And as for Canadian Eskimaux, I'm confident that they're little different to their more Westerly cousins, on a genetic level.


Heredity dietary deficiencies? That's what the quote is claiming. Horseshit as I said before.

Maybe you are. They still have the fold though and still don't live in Asia.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epigenetics

While the article is worded poorly, there is space in epigenetics for that kind of dietary-triggered-missing protein.

Which would never be fixed, outside of gene-therapy, even after the diet is corrected.

Having said that, I'm not inclined to give it much weight :D
Hlass
QUOTE (theunknownsoldier @ Aug 14 2009, 01:06 PM) *
There's no such thing as a native NZ'er. They were all wiped out by the Maoris. It's why I always laugh when people talk about native land rights in NZ. The Maoris have no rights to any land in New Zealand. They conquered the original inhabitants, and then the Brits conquered them. The big difference being the white people didn't eat them and wipe their race out.
Noone in NZ has been in this region long enough to adapt in ways similar to the Asians. The Maoris came from the polynesian islands. You don't get too many deserts and sandstorms on little tropical islands.


By your reasoning the people the Maoris had displaced weren't "native NZ'er"s either.
1shot1kill
QUOTE (Cybes @ Aug 14 2009, 06:15 PM) *
Smartarse. You know damn well what I was talking about. Indians are quite clearly a different racial group, despite their geographic location.


They're an Asian race. :p How about the people of Timor Leste?


QUOTE (theunknownsoldier @ Aug 14 2009, 01:06 PM) *
They conquered the original inhabitants, and then the Brits conquered them.


No, the Brits never conquered the Maori.
TheSecret
Thanks all for the replies, some very interesting stuff!

QUOTE (Director @ Aug 13 2009, 09:37 PM) *
QUOTE
I'm curious why the fold is only present in humans from that particular reigion, and if Australians would eventually adapt to have a similar fold...


Umm, it's called 'genetics' dude and if the aussie population interbreeds with the asian population enough the yeah it'd probably become a feature.


Actually, no, my question was more about natural selection....


QUOTE (1shot1kill @ Aug 13 2009, 10:14 PM) *
If that's the case, why don't Kooris have it?


I do not know, as I said above....


QUOTE (Nich... @ Aug 14 2009, 12:32 AM) *
That really reads like you don't know how genetics/evolution works, TS : \


Why? I'm not at all a biologist, but I *think* I have the basics down...

I had thought the fold was mainly found of the people in only a particular reigion, and surely it then makes sense to say those people tend to have it as a result of it being naturally selected...somewhat similar to people in africa having darker skin....

I'm probably missing out a lot, and I don't understand it completely, hence asking the question. Of course, the question does not just to have to apply to the fold. It can apply to skin color as well..., if Australians remained on our island for tens of thousands of years, would we eventually adapt to have a darker skin color? Ignoring the fact that mxied races and such would probably negate that ever happening....
AIMBOT
I know a surgeon. He does a lot of surgery to remove this fold. I find that this fold is part reason of what I enjoy looking at Asians, or eating them. They taste like caramel. Also, this fold can make you stupid-rich if you know how to remove it.
1shot1kill
QUOTE (TheSecret @ Aug 14 2009, 08:34 PM) *
Of course, the question does not just to have to apply to the fold. It can apply to skin color as well..., if Australians remained on our island for tens of thousands of years, would we eventually adapt to have a darker skin color?


It's possible. Genetic mutation does happen. Just look at Devon Rex cats. They came about through a mutation. But the more likely way Australians would become darker is through breeding with darker skinned people, just like African-Americans are getting lighter skins through the centuries.
Nich...
I am now confused about whether this is all about epicanthic folds, or smaller noses.

Also.

QUOTE (TheSecret @ Aug 14 2009, 08:34 PM) *
I had thought the fold was mainly found of the people in only a particular reigion, and surely it then makes sense to say those people tend to have it as a result of it being naturally selected...somewhat similar to people in africa having darker skin....

I'm probably missing out a lot, and I don't understand it completely, hence asking the question. Of course, the question does not just to have to apply to the fold. It can apply to skin color as well..., if Australians remained on our island for tens of thousands of years, would we eventually adapt to have a darker skin color? Ignoring the fact that mxied races and such would probably negate that ever happening....
Say we take it as a given that the various ancestors of the peoples of eastern Asia, and their descendants, have the fold.

I am surprised to see it not appear elsewhere, in parallel.

Also, if there was some selective pressure for it in place, what advantage does it actually give? I mean, is a person without that fold going to die in noticeably larger numbers before their, i don't know, 15th birthday?

I am also a little confused as to how the sun on snow causes one group of peoples to develop epicanthic folds, but the sun elsewhere causes people to get darker skin. I mean, I can understand darker skin because it'll lower the incidence of cancer, or maybe infection from bad sunburn, but I'm slightly struggling to see even the reasoning behind that one.

Assuming the sun does provide some selective pressure on skin colour, then I don't really see Australians - even if you cut off all immigration now and into the future - getting magically darker skin. Because I don't think that selective pressure is there anymore.
TheSecret
QUOTE
Say we take it as a given that the various ancestors of the peoples of eastern Asia, and their descendants, have the fold.

I am surprised to see it not appear elsewhere, in parallel.


Yes, that is why I wanted to ask the question. That is why I thought it must besomething unique to the Asian region, before hlass brought up the fact that eskmoes have it.....

QUOTE
Also, if there was some selective pressure for it in place, what advantage does it actually give? I mean, is a person without that fold going to die in noticeably larger numbers before their, i don't know, 15th birthday?


Not anymore, but apparantly people with that fold were better at surviving at one point in time....

QUOTE
Assuming the sun does provide some selective pressure on skin colour, then I don't really see Australians - even if you cut off all immigration now and into the future - getting magically darker skin. Because I don't think that selective pressure is there anymore.


That is what I am wondering though. The selective pressure was apparantly just the environemnt...., which we can succusfully hide from and mitigate...is this enough to remove the selective pressure completely?
Nich...
QUOTE (TheSecret @ Aug 14 2009, 08:54 PM) *
QUOTE
Also, if there was some selective pressure for it in place, what advantage does it actually give? I mean, is a person without that fold going to die in noticeably larger numbers before their, i don't know, 15th birthday?
Not anymore, but apparantly people with that fold were better at surviving at one point in time....
TBH, that is just an assumption. It could have been a dominant mutation that had no survival benefits at all. (I have no idea how dominant the trait is) It could also be the by-product of something else that did have some selective advantage.


QUOTE
QUOTE
Assuming the sun does provide some selective pressure on skin colour, then I don't really see Australians - even if you cut off all immigration now and into the future - getting magically darker skin. Because I don't think that selective pressure is there anymore.
That is what I am wondering though. The selective pressure was apparantly just the environemnt...., which we can succusfully hide from and mitigate...is this enough to remove the selective pressure completely?
I really don't know. I mean, I don't understand why, with a migration from africa theory, people living on the Mediterranean rim are not of darker skin, as a whole.

From what I know, people tend to develop skin cancer in their later years. I don't think it's going to do much to reduce reproduction, if anything.
VannA
QUOTE (TheSecret @ Aug 14 2009, 08:54 PM) *
QUOTE
Also, if there was some selective pressure for it in place, what advantage does it actually give? I mean, is a person without that fold going to die in noticeably larger numbers before their, i don't know, 15th birthday?


Not anymore, but apparantly people with that fold were better at surviving at one point in time....



Untrue.

It means more people bred for those qualites, finding them asthetically pleasing, after survival.

Things like the fold don't have to offer survial benefits at all. Nothing does. Just breeding ones.

A set of genes that caused quadruplets every 2nd generation and granted long lasting health, but killed the mother of that 2nd generation after childbirth, would still likely spread, despite being lethal to every 2nd generation.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2014 Invision Power Services, Inc.