In the book The History and Geography of Human Genes, by Cavalli-Sforza, Menozzi and Piazza, it is mentioned that humans in some (previously) malaria-infected regions developed a resistance to malaria through a genetic change. Unfortunately this genetic change caused a hereditary disease known as thalassemia, a form a blood anemia causing weakness, fatigue and lower activity levels (hence the appellation "lazy gene").
This disease is virtually absent from people of northern European ancestry, but prevalent in most other parts of the world, in varying proportions. There are different kinds of thallasemias : alpha, beta, delta, as well as the so-called sickle-cell disease.
The above-mentioned book has maps with the prevalence of each disease.
Alpha-thalassemia is mostly limited to the Arabic peninsula (Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Oman), Iran, and South-East Asia. In these regions over 20%, and sometimes over 40% of the population is affected. In a southern region of Nepal, 80% of the people suffer from ??-thalassemia, the highest percentage in the world ever observed.
In Europe, ??-thalassemia is almost only present in Greece and Southern Italy, with the highest percentage in Sardinia (over 8%) and Cyprus (4 to 6%). The highest prevalence world-wide are found in the Maghreb, West Africa, Ethiopia, Central Asia, and to a lower extent Southern India and Thailand, where it is comprised between 5 and 10% of the population.
I wonder how comes that this disease is not better known of the general population, e.g. through the media and education system. I had personally never heard of it before reading this book. Yet it explains a lot why people from hot countries have a tendency to be more lazy, even after migrating to colder climates. In Northern Europe, we are noticing higher unemployment rates among people of sub-saharan-African, Magreban and Southern Italian origins. Yet it is not true for people of (North) Indian or Chinese origin. One may think it is due to cultural differences, but why would "laziness" be a cultural trait ? I had long thought that it would be more likely an ethnic characteristic, linked to the genes, and this data on thalassemia has confirmed it in part. This also explains why Southern Italy has always lagged behind Northern Italy, despite all the efforts of the central government (itself more in the South) to erradicate such differences.
I would like to know more about the difference of effect between each type of thalassemia. I think that clues can be obtained by comparing the behaviour of people in the worst affected areas of a country or region, and compare them to much less affected regions of the same language and culture (like for Italy). This could also be done on an individual scale. Differences in behaviour between the Arabic-speaking Maghrebans and the Arabic-speaking Saudi or Yemeni are fairly obvious to ethnico-cultural observers. Given that the first group has a high prevalence of beta-thalassemia and the latter of alpha-thalassemia, it would be interesting to see how much of these behavioural differences are due to each type of thalassemia.
Black Africans suffer much more from sickle-cell disease than actual thalassemia. Could sickle-cell disease have stronger effects than thalassemia, so as to explain the extremely high inactivity level of Black Africans* ?
This is certainly worth researching, because if a correlation is found between thalassemia (or sickle-cell disease) and unemployment, governments could help sufferers of thalassemia with special health benefits. Treatments exist against anemia, like vitamins and minerals intake or blood transfusions. I suppose that in countries where thalassemia is almost inexistent, a worker with thalassemia would be fired more easily for its lower productivity. Again, special treatment could be given on grounds of medical condition (e.g. different timetable, different type of work, pay by task rather than per hour, etc.).
*most sub-saharan countries have unemployment rates over 30%, if not 50%
This disease is virtually absent from people of northern European ancestry, but prevalent in most other parts of the world, in varying proportions. There are different kinds of thallasemias : alpha, beta, delta, as well as the so-called sickle-cell disease.
Wikipedia said:he estimated prevalence is 16% in people from Cyprus, 3-14 % in Thailand, and 3-8 % in populations from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and China. A lower prevalence has been reported from black people in Africa (0.9%) and northern Europe (0.1%).
...
Sickle-cell disease occurs more commonly in people (or their descendants) from parts of the world, such as sub-Saharan Africa, where malaria is or was common.
The above-mentioned book has maps with the prevalence of each disease.
Alpha-thalassemia is mostly limited to the Arabic peninsula (Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Oman), Iran, and South-East Asia. In these regions over 20%, and sometimes over 40% of the population is affected. In a southern region of Nepal, 80% of the people suffer from ??-thalassemia, the highest percentage in the world ever observed.
In Europe, ??-thalassemia is almost only present in Greece and Southern Italy, with the highest percentage in Sardinia (over 8%) and Cyprus (4 to 6%). The highest prevalence world-wide are found in the Maghreb, West Africa, Ethiopia, Central Asia, and to a lower extent Southern India and Thailand, where it is comprised between 5 and 10% of the population.
I wonder how comes that this disease is not better known of the general population, e.g. through the media and education system. I had personally never heard of it before reading this book. Yet it explains a lot why people from hot countries have a tendency to be more lazy, even after migrating to colder climates. In Northern Europe, we are noticing higher unemployment rates among people of sub-saharan-African, Magreban and Southern Italian origins. Yet it is not true for people of (North) Indian or Chinese origin. One may think it is due to cultural differences, but why would "laziness" be a cultural trait ? I had long thought that it would be more likely an ethnic characteristic, linked to the genes, and this data on thalassemia has confirmed it in part. This also explains why Southern Italy has always lagged behind Northern Italy, despite all the efforts of the central government (itself more in the South) to erradicate such differences.
I would like to know more about the difference of effect between each type of thalassemia. I think that clues can be obtained by comparing the behaviour of people in the worst affected areas of a country or region, and compare them to much less affected regions of the same language and culture (like for Italy). This could also be done on an individual scale. Differences in behaviour between the Arabic-speaking Maghrebans and the Arabic-speaking Saudi or Yemeni are fairly obvious to ethnico-cultural observers. Given that the first group has a high prevalence of beta-thalassemia and the latter of alpha-thalassemia, it would be interesting to see how much of these behavioural differences are due to each type of thalassemia.
Black Africans suffer much more from sickle-cell disease than actual thalassemia. Could sickle-cell disease have stronger effects than thalassemia, so as to explain the extremely high inactivity level of Black Africans* ?
This is certainly worth researching, because if a correlation is found between thalassemia (or sickle-cell disease) and unemployment, governments could help sufferers of thalassemia with special health benefits. Treatments exist against anemia, like vitamins and minerals intake or blood transfusions. I suppose that in countries where thalassemia is almost inexistent, a worker with thalassemia would be fired more easily for its lower productivity. Again, special treatment could be given on grounds of medical condition (e.g. different timetable, different type of work, pay by task rather than per hour, etc.).
*most sub-saharan countries have unemployment rates over 30%, if not 50%