Genetic Fact: People born in Africa are 100% Pure Human, the rest has some Neanderthal blood
PLEASE REPORT BROKEN LINKS:
YOUTUBE REMOVED THE VIDEO ABOVE SO WE’VE UPLOADED AGAIN. HENCE, WHY WE ARE BUILDING OUR OWN MULTIMEDIA NETWORK. THIS POST IS VERY CONTROVERSIAL. WE ARE MERELY REPORTING THE NEWS, WE DID NOT WRITE THIS ARTICLE. IT’S CITED BY SOURCES BELOW AND PRESENTED HERE SO SUBSCRIBERS CAN HAVE A CHOICE TO BELIEVE THE MAINSTREAM OR STUDY AND FIND THE TRUTH FOR THEM SELVES.
“New reports from Harvard researcher Dr. David Reich: ALL non-African people share Neanderthal DNA. The implications of these findings are ENORMOUS! This means Darwinian evolutionary theory ( ‘Origin of Species’) DOES NOT apply to black people. Africans are the ONLY homogeneous human species. Europeans and Asians, on the other hand, evolved from inter-breeding with Neanderthals that left Africa 600’000 years ago. Point being, indigenous Africans are the ONLY pure human race. Euro-Asian and Caucasian people LITERALLY came from cavemen.”
In two new studies, genetic researchers have shown that about 20 percent of the Neanderthal genome survives in modern humans of non-African ancestry and identified exactly which areas of the human genome retain segments of Neanderthal DNA.
About 30,000 years ago, Homo sapiens migrating out of Africa began encountering Neanderthals, a lineage that had diverged from modern humans hundreds of thousands of years before. Despite their differences, Homo sapiens and Neanderthals mingled, and over time, produced children with genes from both lineages.
Today, the biological remnants of that collision between two distinct populations remain alive in the genomes of Europeans and East Asians.
The first study, reported in the journal Nature, examines how Neanderthals influence the genetic composition of modern humans.
Study’s senior author Dr David Reich of Harvard Medical School said: “the goal was to understand the biological impact of the gene flow between Neanderthals and modern humans.”
“We reasoned that when these two groups met and mixed, some new traits would have been selected for and remained in the human genome, while some incompatibilities would have been selected against and removed.”
“As methods to analyze ancient DNA continue to improve, we are able to get at answers to ever more fine-grained questions about our evolutionary history,” added Dr Elizabeth Tran of the National Science Foundation, who was not involved in the studies.
Dr Reich and his colleagues analyzed genetic variants in 846 people of non-African heritage, 176 people from sub-Saharan Africa, and a 50,000-year-old Neanderthal.
They showed that nine previously identified human genetic variants known to be associated with specific traits likely came from Neanderthals. These variants affect lupus, biliary cirrhosis, Crohn’s disease, optic-disk size and type 2 diabetes and also some behaviors, such as the ability to stop smoking. The team expects that more variants will be found to have Neanderthal origins.
The team also measured how Neanderthal DNA present in human genomes today affects keratin production and disease risk.
“Neanderthal ancestry is increased in genes affecting keratin filaments. This fibrous protein lends toughness to skin, hair and nails and can be beneficial in colder environments by providing thicker insulation. It’s tempting to think that Neanderthals were already adapted to the non-African environment and provided this genetic benefit to humans,” Dr Reich said.
The scientists also found that some areas of the modern non-African human genome were rich in Neanderthal DNA, which may have been helpful for human survival, while other areas were more like ‘deserts’ with far less Neanderthal ancestry than average.
“The barren areas were the most exciting finding. It suggests the introduction of some of these Neanderthal mutations was harmful to the ancestors of non-Africans and that these mutations were later removed by the action of natural selection,” said lead author Dr Sriram Sankararaman from the Harvard and MIT’s Broad Institute and Harvard Medical School.
The team showed that the areas with reduced Neanderthal ancestry tend to cluster in two parts of our genomes: genes that are most active in the male germline and genes on the X chromosome. This pattern has been linked in many animals to a phenomenon known as hybrid infertility, where the offspring of a male from one subspecies and a female from another have low or no fertility.
Dr Reich explained: “this suggests that when ancient humans met and mixed with Neanderthals, the two species were at the edge of biological incompatibility.”
“Present-day human populations, which can be separated from one another by as much as 100,000 years, are fully compatible with no evidence of increased male infertility. In contrast, ancient human and Neanderthal populations apparently faced interbreeding challenges after 500,000 years of evolutionary separation.”
The second study, published online in the journal Science, tests an innovative, fossil-free method for sequencing archaic DNA.
Co-authors Dr Benjamin Vernot and Dr Joshua Akey, both from the University of Washington, analyzed whole-genome sequencing data from 379 Europeans and 286 East Asians to identify Neanderthal lineages that persist in the modern DNA.
“We found evidence that Neanderthal skin genes made Europeans and East Asians more evolutionarily fit, and that other Neanderthal genes were apparently incompatible with the rest of the modern human genome, and thus did not survive to present day human populations,” Dr Vernot said.
The scientists observed that certain chromosomes arms in humans are tellingly devoid of Neanderthal DNA sequences, perhaps due to mismatches between the two species along certain portions of their genetic materials. For example, they noticed a strong depletion of Neanderthal DNA in a region of human genomes that contains a gene for a factor thought to play an important role in human speech and language.
The results suggest that significant amounts of population-level DNA sequences might be obtained from extinct groups even in the absence of fossilized remains, because these ancient sequences might have been inherited by other individuals from whom scientists can gather genomic data. Therein lies the potential to discover and characterize previously unknown archaic humans that bred with early humans.
“The fossil free method of sequencing archaic genomes not only holds promise in revealing aspects of the evolution of now-extinct archaic humans and their characteristic population genetics, it also might provide insights into how interbreeding influenced current patterns of human diversity,” Dr Vernot said.
“In the future, I think scientists will be able to identify DNA from other extinct hominin, just by analyzing modern human genomes.”
“From our end, this was an entirely computational project. I think it’s really interesting how careful application of the correct statistical and computational tools can uncover important aspects of health, biology and human history. Of course, you need good data, too.”
Sriram Sankararaman et al. The genomic landscape of Neanderthal ancestry in present-day humans. Nature, published online January 29, 2014; doi: 10.1038/nature12961
Benjamin Vernot and Joshua M. Akey. Resurrecting Surviving Neandertal Lineages from Modern Human Genomes. Science, published online January 29, 2014; doi: 10.1126/science.1245938
Two sentences into the article and there’s already factual errors, I question its credibility.
Nothing about this negates Africans inclusion in the Darwinian process. All humans, homosapien or neanderthal, were “cavemen” during the stone age. Other hominids from the era bred with us too, it’s suggested they even migrated back into africa so the “100% human” (by which I assume you mean homospien sapien) part is also questionable.
Great article! I wonder if the Rasta community have considered these findings in regards to Bob Marley, one of the most famous. If he is part Neanderthal then he is not a true representation of those the article hope to empower. Interesting.
Thank this information .
Doesn’t this study ultimately mean that we are all african/ and whatever other name we want to use like American?
Africans being the only 100% human is not genetic fact. It is a genetic fact that all non-Africans have Neanderthal DNA but that means Neanderthals were also human. A species is defined as a group of organisms that can produce fertile offsprings together. If Neanderthals and migrants coming from Africa mated then Neanderthals are indeed humanand in fact we call Neanderthals Homo sapien neanderthalis. Homo sapien (human) is their species – their subspecies (for a lack of better term “race”) is neanderthalis. All modern humans are Homo sapien sapien (the second sapien denotes our sub species as modern humans). This is like dogs and wolves. Dogs and wolves are both the same species. Their species name is Canis lupus. Domesticated dogs have added to their species name familiaris because they are domesticated and different from wolves that are wild.
So non-Africans are also 100% human. It’s time the African community began educating itself more extensively in the fields of science and start their much needed lessons in the understanding of vocabulary. If you’re going to make such article, at least do your research about what you’re saying! This is why non-scientist should refrain from writing on science unless there is a scientist editor.
“The results suggest that significant amounts of population-level DNA sequences might be obtained from extinct groups even in the absence of fossilized remains, because these ancient sequences might have been inherited by other individuals from whom scientists can gather genomic data. Therein lies the potential to discover and characterize previously unknown archaic humans that bred with early humans.
“The fossil free method of sequencing archaic genomes not only holds promise in revealing aspects of the evolution of now-extinct archaic humans and their characteristic population genetics, it also might provide insights into how interbreeding influenced current patterns of human diversity,” Dr Vernot said.
“In the future, I think scientists will be able to identify DNA from other extinct hominin, just by analyzing modern human genomes.””
Really? So you’re going to arbitrarily identify other extinct “hominin” (hominid), without any physical evidence to corroborate your findings? In other words, people should take your conclusions at face value? Doesn’t look very scientific to me.
What a pity , they say “pure” it’s a shame. Not happy to read that. More racial problem on this planet
Your rushing to destruction cause you don’t have nothing left ! The mothership can’t save you so your ass is gonna get left……… denial in the Nile
Would really encourage ones to investigate (Sriram Sankararaman et al.) and their link to the entire “Ethiopian Lucy/’Dinknesh'” abomination. Of course, the human migration originated in “Africa”-so called. However, this article works more on emotion than sound intellectual reasoning. 500,000 years? Where did that calculation even come from?
This is not to say that the Neanderthal genome is not within the human gene pool, as the etymology of the word [Neanderthal] merely refers to inhabitants of the Neander Valley. Yes, humans do adapt to their environments according to various factors. But is the science of human biology actually applied here? Hybridization between species? Perhaps, in a laboratory. By the design of the The Creator there is a safeguard referred to as “pre-zygotic reproductive isolating mechanisms”. The science of melanin is an entire study in and of itself.
Furthermore, this article presumes that no historically interbreeding occurred during the interactions between Africa, Europe and Asia. This is simply not factual. Is it? Just some points to weigh and balance.
BTW….Dr “Reich” said???…LOL….for real? Was his father involved in Operation Paper Clip? Food for thought.
While the research is strong and solid, this article seems to support radicalism with an air of being pro- african; and there is nothing wrong with that as long as the intent of sharing the study is not to send an underlying message that Africans are better than others. Although this is considered reversed racism, it is still rasism. This organization should change its title from Rastafari.tv, to one that seems less of a cliche. True science does not identify its self with religious organizations, or ones that elevate ethnocentric pride. Removing such images can help people see the truth and less of you.
Science has already debunked the “out of Africa” theory. But anyway, I myself am RH-, I do not have the Rhesus Monkey gene, so does that make me non-human? Smh