Homo evolutis

[Anomalocaris]

How could natural selection not function in the developed world?

http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/c.../1499/1939

The claims are made for improving stone technologies co-related with evolutionary changes in brain structure. Why not with modern technologies ?

It could, provided brain structure better suited to modern technology is both heritable, and has a positive impact on the bearer's reproductive success.

But in a extensively interbreeding population, such changes don't lead to speciation. It merely leads to changes in the overall gene pool over time.

[Whateverist]

There isn't any selection happening by way of vaccination.  Everyone gets vaccinated, accept the conspiracy theorists.  Furthermore there is no breeding advantage involved for either the vaccinated or the unvaccinated.  Presently those who breed the most tend to be those living in under-developed countries with the highest infant mortality.  Education is negatively associated with family size in developed countries.  It is hard to see how natural selection can function in the current population in the developed world, though if some especially deadly virus broke out of something like ebola we might discover pockets of immunity.  That would be evolution in progress.

How could natural selection not function in the developed world?

Well in terms of gene mutations resulting in resistance to disease, of course it does.  But in terms any mutation which would putatively provide a physical or mental advantage, I see no link between increased physical strength, intelligence or wealth which positively correlates with increased progeny.

[paulpablo]

How could natural selection not function in the developed world?

Well in terms of gene mutations resulting in resistance to disease, of course it does.  But in terms any mutation which would putatively provide a physical or mental advantage, I see no link between increased physical strength, intelligence or wealth which positively correlates with increased progeny.

True but that just means those traits aren't being selected. In fact what min said about idiocracy has some truth in it. There's a negative correlation between iq and birthrate to some extent and a positive correlation between iq and suicide. At least according to some statistics. So maybe there's some survival advantages to not having high iq above a certain level.
Natural selection will always function, people will always select mates for certain traits and some people will always breed more than others and survive better more than others.
Just because it isn't easy to see and predict which traits are being selected or the traits being selected seem non advantageous doesn't mean natural selection isn't at work.