Channel 4 - Michael Johnson Survival of the Fastest

Zamboni

On at 9pm - Could be an interesting watch for anyone interested in genetics/human performance.

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/michael-johnson-survival-of-the-fastest

Johnson explained, "All my life I believed I became an athlete through my own determination, but it's impossible to think that being descended from slaves hasn't left an imprint through the generations."
He added, "Difficult as it was to hear, slavery has benefited descendants like me -- I believe there is a superior athletic gene in us."

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/olympics-fourth-place-medal/michael-johnson-says-slavery-descendants-run-faster-because-155858303--oly.html

The Guvnor

Thanks for the heads up!:)

MJ was/is a legend.

Antisocialiser

This show was epic. It was a bit more personal journey than science and history but overall a very interesting watch.

14 out of the 15 100m sprint finalists at the last olympics were the descendants of slaves.

Very interesting insight into a unique process of human selection. Some of the experts likened it to rapid evolution.

Amazeballs.

Zamboni

I was actually a little dissapointed. It turned out to be more of a "who do you think you are" kind of program.
The science aspect was not very scientific either. Basically Michael Johnson comes up with a (far from original) premise and then looks for corresponding evidence.
The only solid answer he gets is a scientist stating that it is definately a possibility that slavery was a contributing factor in decendants athletic prowess.
In other words, m'eh it might've been a reason.

Still though - far more entertaining than 95% of the bull on TV.

Antisocialiser

Zamboni wrote: »

I was actually a little dissapointed. It turned out to be more of a "who do you think you are" kind of program.

I thoroughly enjoyed it but I take your point. I would have liked to know how the descendants of slaves' bodies had adapted / improved etc. I vaguely remember hearing something about the hamstrings of slave descendants being particularly more developed than non-slave descendant athletes. Could be just bad bro-science though.

nice_guy80

it was interesting, but like others I'd have liked to see more concrete genetic evidence

no coincidence that by taking/buying the largest, strongest and most athletic slaves from Africa that it was going to produce children that had those genes
and the fact that most of the female slaves bought were bought for their sturdiness and ability to work the fields meant that when you combined the two...

it is equivilent to selective breeding

calfmuscle

nice_guy80 wrote: »

it was interesting, but like others I'd have liked to see more concrete genetic evidence

no coincidence that by taking/buying the largest, strongest and most athletic slaves from Africa that it was going to produce children that had those genes
and the fact that most of the female slaves bought were bought for their sturdiness and ability to work the fields meant that when you combined the two...

it is equivilent to selective breeding Eugenics

nice_guy80

totally agree

but the way slaves were viewed and treated when brought to the new world was like animals.

Brian?

nice_guy80 wrote: »

it was interesting, but like others I'd have liked to see more concrete genetic evidence

no coincidence that by taking/buying the largest, strongest and most athletic slaves from Africa that it was going to produce children that had those genes
and the fact that most of the female slaves bought were bought for their sturdiness and ability to work the fields meant that when you combined the two...

it is equivilent to selective breeding

It wasn't equivelant to selective breeding, it was selective breeding. They treated human beings like cattle. Disgraceful.

deadlybuzzman

briankeating wrote: »

It wasn't equivelant to selective breeding, it was selective breeding. They treated human beings like cattle. Disgraceful.

It was selective breeding of the survivors, it was estimated 50% of those kidnapped died on the journey to the slave ships from the interior and about another 50% died on the ships.
Thats 3 out of every 4 dead before they ever got to the americas. Horriffic

nice_guy80

deadlybuzzman wrote: »

It was selective breeding of the survivors, it was estimated 50% of those kidnapped died on the journey to the slave ships from the interior and about another 50% died on the ships.
Thats 3 out of every 4 dead before they ever got to the americas. Horriffic

that is simply not true.
the slavers actually wanted to get their captives to the new world to sell them and make a profit
anyway, thats a debate for a different forum

deadlybuzzman

nice_guy80 wrote: »

that is simply not true.
the slavers actually wanted to get their captives to the new world to sell them and make a profit
anyway, thats a debate for a different forum

Well going by the programme they said different

Inspector Coptoor

An argument could also be made here re: the athletic prowess of Australians.
Descended from white Caucasians, many sent to Oz on ships, loads died in the way meaning those who survived confirmed to "survival of the fittest".

deadlybuzzman

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

An argument could also be made here re: the athletic prowess of Australians.
Descended from white Caucasians, many sent to Oz on ships, loads died in the way meaning those who survived confirmed to "survival of the fittest".

A similar point could be made about any population that has a high mortality rate due to poverty, successive generations of the weakest not making it. On its own it wouldnt guarantee better athletes but it would prime the general population it to have more potential

Kev M

I read something about this idea years ago, and watched the program last night. Good watch but nothing really new in it, just MJ repeatedly referring to himself as an elite athlete .

My take is that the people of West Africa are for the most part genetically superior - bigger, stronger, faster. They always were and still are, and this came from living conditions aswell as the original high level of diversity in the population. It is then just possible/or maybe probable that the whole weak ones being weeded out on ships and strong ones being bred further contributed to physical characteristics, but also (maybe due to lack of diversity) caused the emergence of specific diseases (diabetes in particular as mentioned on the program).

I wonder did anyone ever research if we (Irish people) are physically superior post the potato famine? Going by the survival of the fittest and all, if more than a million of us died then surely that was mainly the physically and I suppose to some extent mentally inferior... and didn't lots of Irish also die while travelling on the ships to America at this time? So where are our sprinters? Barry McGuigan and Sonia O'Sullivan should make a program

Antisocialiser

Interesting rebuttal here.