In order for the frequency of lefties to be classified as an evolved trait due to natural

selection, the following must be true: there is variation among the population, the gene for

handedness is inheritable, and certain variants must survive as well as reproduce at a higher rate than

others.

Given  the design, construction, and wear patterns present on tools dated between 300,000 and

400,000 years ago, it can be inferred that handedness varies (DS 1). The variation itself can be

explained, in part, through genetic terms. Monozygotic twins were more likely to share handedness

over dizygotic twins; since monozygotic twins share identical strands of DNA and were collectively

identified as either lefties or righties, genes could have been a factor in determining handedness (DS

2). One cannot make the claim that natural selection is the answer to the variation of handedness with

just this piece of evidence as there are two other components (survival and reproductive rates) to

consider, but it does fall in line with this theory nonetheless.

According to Darwinian theory, traits are passed along due to the ability of variants to

survive and pass along genes to offspring, which further implies that the strongest traits are more

likely to be preserved due to higher reproductive rates. For instance, by maximizing the potential to

reproduce, Europeans were able to increase the frequency of the lactase persistence allele. Therefore,

reproductive success is directly tied to the survivability of traits, including handedness. According to

Ellis’ study, left-handers were more likely to die sooner than right-handers (DS 3-A). However,

Basso’s data identified no difference in the mortality rates between monozygotic twins in which one

was left-handed while the other was right-handed (DS 3-B). Both of these studies are imperfect. The

results of Ellis’ study could have been a result of the stigma against left-handedness in the social

world. Basso’s study included a sample of individuals who were long past the prime age range for

reproducing, so there are no means to determine whether handedness influenced the participants’

ability to pass along genes. In a sample of 3,000 cricket players, left-handed players died at higher
rates during their prime reproductive years, which contributes towards evidence that handedness and

life expectancy may have a causal relationship (DS 3C).

Taking all of this data into account, it is reasonable to expect fewer lefties in modern

societies. In stone age cultures, however, communities with a higher frequency of left-handers also

had a high risk for homicides (DS 4). Populations may differ in the proportion of handedness due to

the competitive advantages of one over the other; for example, in cultures that emphasize hand-to-

hand combat, lefties may be more likely to survive and reproduce. In my opinion, the frequency of

lefties is reflected by a culture-gene coevolution (a term derived from Joseph Henrich’s novel The

Secret of Our Success) rather than natural selection. I am not convinced that left-handedness may

result in a shorter lifespan. The answer may lie in culture as it carries more weight in influencing

which hand is relied upon for ordinary tasks, but individuals may be more inclined towards one due

to genes.

As a result of the common habit of consuming coffee or energy drinks daily, it may be

possible that humans could develop higher caffeine tolerance. The frequency of this trait could be

evolving because certain individuals are genetically predisposed to metabolize caffeine more quickly

in the body and require greater levels of caffeine to stay stimulated for as long as others who feel

energized longer. This may correlate with higher levels of productivity, which could further influence

how these individuals progress in life. Wealth and social reception are key attributes in a potential

mate, so individuals with the ability to achieve more in less time could serve as valuable partners for

reproductive purposes. Caffeine metabolism can be explained by natural selection given that it varies

among humans and it can be traced to genes according to recent studies. In order to support this

claim further, there needs to be evidence that a higher tolerance increases the likelihood of survival.

Further studies should also be conducted to support the connection between caffeine tolerance and

the ability to reproduce at a greater rate among variants.