Proven concept of limited adaptation

Biological systems are capable of “automorphic” and “exomorphic” changes, i.e. operating either on their own biological traits or on their environment, in an attempt to adapt to new conditions. However, the extent and content of the changes that are possible to them remain precisely circumscribed.

Example: a species can adapt to a warming atmosphere of a few degrees. Individuals will use various strategies, such as sweating. In the longer term, the species can adapt by changing its genetic characteristics: elephants have developed the surface of their ears to better refrigerate their blood in contact with the air. However, possible strategies remain limited, none of the existing species could survive temperatures destroying carbon-hydrogen bonds. Most would even succumb to a warming climate of a few dozen degrees. The same applies in all areas of the relationship between living beings and the environment: food, oxygenation, pollution, predation, etc. Life holds only one thread, and this thread is sifting…

It is therefore necessary to be aware that all past or present human behaviour has adverse consequences for the environment or human health as soon as it exceeds the adaptability limits of the various organisms concerned. This rule, of annoid appearance, today has as a challenge the survival of the planet and our own species.

Its corollary is that we must ask ourselves, about every human fireworks that may exceed these limits, what is its raison d’être, especially if the psychic arrangements that make it felt as indispensable emerge from a real need, or from a psychic dysfunction that we still have to understand the causes.

Gluten and behaviour

For example, changes in the diet introduced into the neolithic system necessitated the systematic cultivation of cereals. Environmental constraints have continued to date to reach a level that puts global equilibrium at risk. The question arises as to whether or not the cereal diet is suitable for human de-la-genetique (which presupposes pathogenic effects, e.g. gluten allergies) and for biocenosis genetic data (which explains the need for fertilizers and pesticides with their environmental abuse such as biodiversity and humus degradation). It is also necessary to wonder to what extent the regular consumption of gluten, some of which , did not induce behavioural changes, including dependence on wheat consumption, or other behaviours directly harmful to the environment.

The same kind of question arises about all the artifacts that make up our civilization: consumption of meat, dairy products, chemical industry, use of pesticides, pharmaceutical industry, modes of transport, methods of heating, nuclear industry, renewable energy, consumption in general, as well as at the level of culture: patterns of behaviour, laws, morals, philosophy of life, religion…

Behind these questions, under the limited adaptability of different species, we discover all kinds of interactions and vicious circles. Further knowledge of these mechanisms will help to address the environmental problem on a much more fundamental basis.