Speculation on the "Evolutionary Impact of Alcohol"

The prolific Steve Sailer has these thoughts up of late on his website:

Quote:

---

Evolutionary impact of alcohol?

It's fairly obvious that when alcohol first hits a human population, whether Middle Easterners in the time of Noah and Lot or aboriginal populations in the New World, Pacific, and Australia in more recent times, it takes a terrible toll until gene frequencies and/or cultural traditions better suited for dealing with liquor emerge.

On the other hand, could the invention of alcohol allow for more far-reaching personality adaptations? By way of analogy, consider the theory proposed by both Jerry Pournelle and Temple Grandin: that the domestication of the dog allowed humans to offload to their canine companions much of the job of sophisticated smell cognition used in tracking game, thus freeing up valuable cubic centimeters of the brain for newer purposes.

Perhaps alcohol enables one individual to display a wider range of personalities than can be achieved through solely genetic means, thus allowing personalities to evolve farther in directions suitable for making a living, while still allowing people to display different traits in the evening.

What if the invention of alcohol allowed a single genome to exhibit different personalities at different times? Germans, say, could thus evolve personalities making them tend to be intense worrywarts, propelling their society into a model of technical competence. But who wants to be around other neurotics all the time? Yet, a couple of beers after work could allow the same Germans to turn into amiable, temporarily carefree companions, making social bonding more feasible.

Or the Japanese could evolve to be so intensely sensitive to the feelings of other Japanese that their culture becomes a byword for courtesy and politely vague conversations that don't hurt anybody's feelings or convey much explicit information. Yet, after a couple of shots of sake at one of their countless boys' nights out, the salaryman might suddenly feel free to tell his boss exactly how he's screwing up next year's sales forecast.

I presume this is just another evolutionary Just So story. But, it might be worth looking into through cross-cultural comparisons.

http://isteve.blogspot.com/2009/06/e...f-alcohol.html

---

Some of the best comments from that thread:

Quote:

---

Anonymous said...
It may depend on the type of alcohol consumed. The Stalin-biographer Alex DeJonge thought the pattern of European alcohol consumption was important: grain alcohols in the far north, beer in the middle latitudes and wine in the south, near the Mediterranean.

High-proof grains alcohols may have helped render northerners, who might possess the best average minds, relatively backward by European standards.

Lower-proof wines are light and tasty, so they can be consumed in large volumes over hot days. Southern Europeans tend to be quite competent, but never to get all that much done.

Beer tends to be the lowest in alcohol content per volume consumed. So beer drinkers generally limit their consumption of both liquid and alcohol. The beer drinkers in England, Germany and the lowlands seem to have generally led Europe in industrialization and science. Of course, their decent but not excessively easy climate may have played a larger role in this advantage.

---

I'd also add that the "Beer-Wine line" in Europe has been amazingly steady ever since the days of Vercingetorix and Arminius. After the tragic defeat and death of the former, the latinization of Gaul began in earnest [and with it came wine]; and after the victory of the latter, Beer was secured forever as the alcohol-of-choice in Germania. The 'Latin-Wine culture' has predominated west of the Rhine while Beer has remained "King" east of the Rhine ever since those fateful events 2,000 years ago.

It's amazing how long-term the implications of seemingly minor tribal victories and defeats have been.

Quote:

---

Bill Said...
Actually, I think it's pretty important. During the Zhou dynasty, according to reports, the Chinese had a very large problem with drunkenness. Today, about half of Chinese have a gene that makes them intolerant of alcohol.

I think this is a negative adaptation. Northern Europeans, on the other hand, seem to have taken the opposite path.

---

Quote:

---

Anonymous said...

Steve,
Japan is interesting. As many as 50% lack a gene that involves digestion of alcohol and their faces turn red shortly after drinking alcohol. OTOH, I know a lot of Japanese who drink heavily virtually every day, and these guys wake up the next day to work a full schedule. I think i read somewhere about another gene that protects japanese from becoming alcoholics.

---

Quote:

---

Anonymous said...

Quote:

---

As many as 50% [of Japanese] lack a gene that involves digestion of alcohol and their faces turn red shortly after drinking alcohol. OTOH, I know a lot of Japanese who drink heavily virtually every day, and these guys wake up the next day to work a full schedule. I think i read somewhere about another gene that protects japanese from becoming alcoholics

---

I read this too, but that the gene that turns the face red prevents digestion, so you can't drink a lot, e.g., 10-15 drinks at a sitting. To become a full-on alcoholic, you need to be drinking at that type of level, hence, few Japanese alcoholics.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lenny

I'd also add that the "Beer-Wine line" in Europe has been amazingly steady ever since the days of Vercingetorix and Arminius. After the tragic defeat and death of the former, the latinization of Gaul began in earnest [and with it came wine]; and after the victory of the latter, Beer was secured forever as the alcohol-of-choice in Germania. The 'Latin-Wine culture' has predominated west of the Rhine while Beer has remained "King" east of the Rhine ever since those fateful events 2,000 years ago.

It's amazing how long-term the implications of seemingly minor tribal victories and defeats have been.

---

According to other sources, the "Beer-Wine line" came about due to the 'little ice age' in Europe around 1300-1850 which made wine growing impossible in northern Europe, and so they had to make alcohol out of grain (beer and wine).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SwordoftheVistula

According to other sources, the "Beer-Wine line" came about due to the 'little ice age' in Europe around 1300-1850 which made wine growing impossible in northern Europe, and so they had to make alcohol out of grain (beer and wine).

---

That may have solidified it. But it is clear that the Mediterranean/Latin peoples drank wine even before Roman times, while the northern peoples drank mead/beer, with wine being favored less.

What is especially clear:
The pre-52BC Gauls (Celts) drank beer; their subjugation and subsequent latinization resulted in "the French", who are notorious wine lovers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lenny

Some of the best comments from that thread:


I'd also add that the "Beer-Wine line" in Europe has been amazingly steady ever since the days of Vercingetorix and Arminius. After the tragic defeat and death of the former, the latinization of Gaul began in earnest [and with it came wine]; and after the victory of the latter, Beer was secured forever as the alcohol-of-choice in Germania. The 'Latin-Wine culture' has predominated west of the Rhine while Beer has remained "King" east of the Rhine ever since those fateful events 2,000 years ago.

It's amazing how long-term the implications of seemingly minor tribal victories and defeats have been.

---

Great thread Lenny!
I have also heard this same argument made using psychoactive mushrooms instead of alchohol in ancient pastoral man!
Having said this, myself being a brewmeister and a retired amateur mycologist. I am of the opinion that:

The grape and the cereal grains were probably both domesticated in Mesopotamia.
My Germanic European ancestors inherited, "due to climatic circumstances", the cultivation of wheat and other cereal grains to feed themselves and to feed their animals.The Southern Europeans also used wheat as food stuff but were limited on its use to produce alcohol. This being due to the yeasts available to them.

Red wine yeasts thrive in temperatures of:Temperature Range: 55-90°F, 13-32°C
While most ale yeasts prefer:Temperature Range: 64-75F, 18-24C

When the Romans or Gallo-Romans introduced the domesticated grape to Germany, they had problems vinting their traditional musts.
They had to produce wines of local color, white wine.:D

On the same note the French and their affiliates in Belgium have produced many a unique ale based on the uses of wine yeasts and their close relatives.
Being almost, "to warm for beer production", and coming from a wine culture.

I feel that the most important contribution to the alcohol scene on the evolution of the aforementioned. The spark that led man to domesticate grains and grapes, commeth not from the hands of man but from the tiny yet mighty, industrious honey bee.

Mead is as old as primitive man himself.

Quote:

---

Mead Names from Around the World
Name Explanation
aguamiel Spanish mead
ayahuasca Amazonian mind liberating liquid
balche Mayan state altering mead made with balche bark
chouchen Breton (France) mead
hidromel Portugese mead
hydromel French mead
idromele Italian mead
iQhilika South African mead
madhu Indian Sanskrit word for mead
mézbor Hungarian honey wine
med Ukranian mead
meddeglyn or myddyglyn Welsh spiced mead
mede Dutch mead
medica Slovenian mead
medovina Bulgarian, Czech and Slovak mead
medovukha Russian mead
medu German mead (historical name)
meis Eritrean mead
meodu Olde English mead
met German mead
midus Lithuanian mead
miòd Polish mead
mjød Danish and Norwegian mead
mjöd Swedish mead
mõdu Estonian honey beer
nabidh Arabic mead
sima Finnish mead
tej Ethiopian mead
ydromeli Greek mead
yeyin dvash Hebrew mead

---