OK, I hope my question doesn’t get misunderstood, I can see how that could happen.
Just a product of overthinking.

Idea is that we can live fairly easily even with some diseases/disorders which could be-life threatening. Many of these are hereditary.
Since modern medicine increases our survival capabilities, the “weaker” individuals can also survive and have offsprings that could potentially inherit these weaknesses, and as this continues it could perhaps leave nearly all people suffering from such conditions further into future.

Does that sound like a realistic scenario? (Assuming we don’t destroy ourselves along with the environment first…)

  • someguy3
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    That wouldn’t be a threat to humanity.

    • BakerBagel@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      8 months ago

      It would be if we suddenly didn’t have access to modern medicine for some reason. Like say a city under seige with power cut iff to hospitals

      • someguy3
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        8 months ago

        A threat to a handful of women who happen to be pregnant. Not to humanity as a whole.

        • BakerBagel@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          A very cavalier take until it’s your wife/sister/friend that dies because she cant get to a maternity ward in time. As it stands, humanity will carry on if society were to collapse next week. But if we cant safely deliver babies without modern medicine, we are in aerious trouble.

          • Scipitie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            But that’s not what OP asked / wanted to dicuss? The person you’re attacking simply answered the original question:

            “would it be a danger to the whole of humanity or our evolutionary progress?”

            While I think the data alignes with your observation and your interpretation of the risks are on point it deviates from the point the person you answered to.

          • someguy3
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            8 months ago

            humanity /hyoo͞-măn′ĭ-tē/ noun

            Humans considered as a group; the human race.

            Humanity is not individuals. It’s humanity as a whole.

        • jet@hackertalks.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          8 months ago

          A threat to humans to live without access to medicine which makes humanity more fragile and less adaptable.

    • rammer@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      8 months ago

      It would be a threat to humanity’s continued existence in the case of societal collapse. You know, the one we are in the middle of. If one generation cannot for any reason give birth to the next one. It is over. We are facing that scenario right now.

      The fact that sperm count in men is alarmingly poor all over the world. Be it caused by pollutants or by medicine allowing those unable to procreate naturally to pass on their genes.

      The “gender revolution” has allowed people to be what ever they want to be. But this has led to them to be unwilling or unable to procreate without advanced medicine.

      Birth rates are falling off a cliff around the world. In some countries the population will be halved by the end of the century given current birth rates.

      This will cause a societal collapse. And those unable to procreate without advanced medicine will die without having children. The others will face an uphill battle to continue living. Their weakened immune systems inherited from ancestors saved by medicine. Battling superbugs created by medicine. Without access to it.

      In an effort to heal and help medicine has weakened us and left us vulnerable. And that is a threat to humanity’s continued existence.

      • DeanFogg@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 months ago

        Why do you think declining birthrates will cause collapse? If anything I’d think it would help. We got what 8 billion people? I think we’ll be able to continue the species just fine with that. Though infinite growth for the shareholders may not work out

        • rammer@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          8 months ago

          You fail to understand how deeply ingrained the need for infinite growth is coupled into our society. It’s not that some shareholders will not get their profits. Institutional investors (sovereign wealth funds, retirement funds, etc.) will fail to provide services billions of people rely upon.

          There won’t be enough people keep the wheels of society turning. Some institutions will stop functioning. Healthcare, industry, law enforcement, etc. will all be under enormous pressure. People will lose faith in society’s ability to provide basic necessities and this is when the collapse proper will begin.

          Importing more people from third world countries will not save us in the long run. They will run out at some point. And they will bring some of their problems with them. Causing instability.

          If we were to avoid it we would have to replace almost everything.