Tough luck, this might affect his grandkid, not the kid. Epigenetic imprinting (the semi-permanent kind) is done during oogenesis, which if I am right occurs during pregnancy.
It’s also not necessarily a net-gain. There are a bunch of trade-offs to being better able to deal with a lack of food. Specifically, by sacrificing body mass and brain development to conserve energy.
Surviving adverse conditions can mean developing novel evolutionary strategies. But it can also just amount to evolutionary downsizing. Living as a smaller, weaker, stunted version of your predecessors because the runt of the litter needs fewer calories to get by.
Yeah I was about to say. Aren’t children from families that suffered famines much more likely to have (and have children that have) digestive problems and food related deficensies?
And heart and respiratory and neurological, etc etc
What’s the plan with the raptor? Increase the kid’s running speed? Anxiety? Fear of birds? Love for Spielberg movies?
The ability to perfectly deliver the line, “clever girl.”
“Epigenetics shows…” cries in evolutionary biology having demonstrated inter-generational plasticity for more than 30 years, totally ignored by molecular geneticists who discovered after everybody else that everything is not about DNA
Epigenetics is black magic to me. The starvation thing is true, but it mostly happens in the liver and pancreas and stuff. The testicles and ovaries don’t express the genes relating to starvation, even when starved. So how does the reproductive DNA pass on epigenetic data to the child and grandchild?
“is is”
If they starve as young
Plan for the future
Cuck vore
Nothing wrong with that
Epigenetics is part of how DNA works though, it isn’t separate
