Deaths, births, ovulations, and mutations (by the numbers)

This diary puts words to some thoughts I've been toying with for a while. In this you will find some back-of-the-envelope calculations about the death rate, the birth rate, the ovulation rate, and the mutation rate for Homo sapiens.

There are approximately 6.5 billion people in this
world. Assuming an average age of 30 and a lifespan
of 60 it means that in the next 30 years approximately half of the world's people will die.

3 billion deaths in 30 years.
1 billion deaths per ten years,
100 million deaths per year,
8 million deaths per month,
240 thousand deaths per day,
10 thousand deaths per hour,
160 deaths per minute,
2 deaths per second.

There are approximately 6.5 billion people in this
world. Assuming an approximate growth rate of 1% that
gives us 65 million new people above and beyond the
approximate 100 million deaths per year. So let us
calculate the number of births:

165 million births per year,
13 million births per month,
3 million births per week,
450 thousand births per day,
18 thousand births per hour,
300 pirths per minute,
5 births per second.

Roughly half the people of Earth are female, 3
billion. One third of those could be considered
fertile, let's say between the ages 20 to 40. Let's
consider the number of ovulations, assuming one
ovulation per month:

1 billion ovulations per month,
33 million ovulations per day,
1.4 million ovulations per hour,
23 thousand ovulations per minute,
385 ovulations per second.

So if we have 5 births per second, and 385 ovulations
per second, then just over 1% of ovulations lead to a
live birth. If we restrict ourselves to ovulation
from age 20 to 40 that is 20 times 12 or 240
ovulations per woman. One percent of that is 2.4
births, which tracks well with a 1% per annum growth
rate.

The human genome consists of 23 chromosomes,
consisting of 3 billion base pairs. We have two
genomes, one from a father and one from a mother,
making 6 billion base pairs per zygote. The novel
mutation rate for humans is approximately 1 per 100
million base pairs.  Thus, an average person carries
60 novel mutations.

Their are six billion people on this rock which gives
a grand total of 360 billion novel mutations. That
means 12 mutations per locus in the genome. There are
four bases (A, T, G, C). Twelve chances will yeild the
three alternatives most of the time. That suggests
that if a locus can sustain a mutation, then the
mutation exists in the population today. This
explosion of genetic diversity has profound
implications for medicine.

I offer this partially for entertainment, but also as food for thought. The events that are profound to the individual are insignificant in the grand scheme of things. This threatens a double alienation, one of the individual from a society that doesn't give a crap about him or her; and also of the architects of social cohesion from the needs and the concerns of the individual. Against that backdrop, the very existence of our liberal democray is a miracle, like finding an ice cube in a desert.

I hope everyone has an opportunity to view Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth. I found the science sound, though familiar, but I was most impressed with the personal element of the film. This was Gore free of the "handlers", and he was commendable. Another advantage of the film are the visuals: you can see the fate of the glaciers as the temperatures rise. I mention this to juxtapose my metaphor of liberal democracy as an ice cube in a desert, because, born in a different political and demographic climate, liberal democracy has been forced to beat back challengers time and time again. For our purposes, American fascism is the current threat, a threat more imminent and dangerous than Islamic fundamentalism, both of which are acting midwife to the other. If we can get a handle on the dehumanizing forces of poverty and population growth, liberal democracy will gain the "force -multipliers" it will need to not simply defeat, but trounce totalitarianism.

•  60 to 80% of fertizlied eggs

  spontaneously abort.  That may cut down on the number of mutations that survive in a live birth.

  by JPete on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 12:08:22 PM PDT

  •  Yes

    but it is also significant which mutations do not appear in the gene pool. Those tell you by their absence which loci are important to reach live birth.

    by Paul Goodman on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 12:14:25 PM PDT

•  Gore's movie pointed directly to population

  but, out of simple self-preservation, what public figure could dare to go there?  It's too radioactive.  

  Remember "Zero Population Growth"?  Go to ZPG and see what you get now.

  Yes, I am aware that developed nations tend to have low or negative growth rates, yet far far out-consume "developing" nations with fast-growing populations.  And yet, more people is more people, and that's more resources needed, more resources consumed, and more toxins accumulated.  

  by lgmcp on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 12:15:53 PM PDT

  •  Or, as I coined in a debate with friends

    Oil may be the elephant in the room ...

    But population growth is the room.  

    by lgmcp on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 12:19:26 PM PDT

  •  I would also add

    that the nations who are consuming less are not doing so voluntarily; if they could consume more they would. Also, there is/was a kind of globalsocial contract after WWII that sugegsted to third world countries that if they "keep their noses clean" and pay their dues they will be able to gradually and peacefully catch up to the West. No one of a progressive mind wanted/wants to see a slugfest between the white haves and the brown have-nots. Many countries are pursuing a strategy of "peaceful rising". Their internal social contract that call for deprivation and hard work in the present promises increasing comfort and ease in the future. If that promise isn't fulfilled those countries will become bellicose.

    by Paul Goodman on Wed Sep 27, 2006 at 12:38:36 PM PDT