Earwax and the Book of Mormon

[Craig Speechly]

All humans have one of three types of earwax. 

 

01. Wet earwax 
This type is sticky and yellow-brown in color. It's common in people of African descent and most people of European descent. 

02. Dry earwax 
This type is pale, crumbly, and lacks the waxy substance cerumen. It's common in East Asia, but less frequent in southern Asia, the Pacific Islands, central Asia, and Asia Minor. It's very uncommon among Europeans and Africans. 

03. Flaky, light-colored earwax 
This type is common in Native Americans and those descending from East Asia. 

 

Humans inherit their earwax type from their parents. So it makes sense that Polynesian’s,  who migrated from southern Asia would share the same dry earwax trait as southern Asians.  Also it makes sense that Native Americans would share the same flaky earwax as their ancestors in East Asia. However what we should expect to find in the Native American population are some members of the pre-Columbian population who inherited the same dry earwax found in Middle Eastern & Polynesian populations but we don’t identified through the  ABCC11 gene. 

Europeans and Africans have wet earwax, and Asians (and thereby Native Americans, due to ANCIENT SIBERIAN BORDER CROSSING) have dry. South Asians are 50/50. This is determined by the switch of a single DNA unit in the gene known to geneticists as the ATP-binding cassette C11 gene.

 

When Lehi’s Middle Eastern party intermarried with the native population they would have passed on the gene variant ABCC11 for the waxy earwax, we should see evidence of this in pre Columbian populations. 

 

I’m not making any conclusions only asking if this could be evidence to support or undermine Book of Mormon claims. 

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ABCC11

[CV75]

5 minutes ago, Craig Speechly said:

All humans have one of three types of earwax. 

 

01. Wet earwax 
This type is sticky and yellow-brown in color. It's common in people of African descent and most people of European descent. 

02. Dry earwax 
This type is pale, crumbly, and lacks the waxy substance cerumen. It's common in East Asia, but less frequent in southern Asia, the Pacific Islands, central Asia, and Asia Minor. It's very uncommon among Europeans and Africans. 

03. Flaky, light-colored earwax 
This type is common in Native Americans and those descending from East Asia. 

 

Humans inherit their earwax type from their parents. So it makes sense that Polynesian’s,  who migrated from southern Asia would share the same dry earwax trait as southern Asians.  Also it makes sense that Native Americans would share the same flaky earwax as their ancestors in East Asia. However what we should expect to find in the Native American population are some members of the pre-Columbian population who inherited the same dry earwax found in Middle Eastern & Polynesian populations but we don’t identified through the  ABCC11 gene. 

Europeans and Africans have wet earwax, and Asians (and thereby Native Americans, due to ANCIENT SIBERIAN BORDER CROSSING) have dry. South Asians are 50/50. This is determined by the switch of a single DNA unit in the gene known to geneticists as the ATP-binding cassette C11 gene.

 

When Lehi’s Middle Eastern party intermarried with the native population they would have passed on the gene variant ABCC11 for the waxy earwax, we should see evidence of this in pre Columbian populations. 

 

I’m not making any conclusions only asking if this could be evidence to support or undermine Book of Mormon claims. 

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ABCC11

Funny, similar looking mucoid substances can come out of your nose, too!

How do you collect earwax from a pre-Columbian? Or did they comment on it in their codices, or pass it along in their oral (aural?) traditions?

[Craig Speechly]

4 hours ago, CV75 said:

Funny, similar looking mucoid substances can come out of your nose, too!

How do you collect earwax from a pre-Columbian? Or did they comment on it in their codices, or pass it along in their oral (aural?) traditions?

I know you’re being flippant but obviously you can’t but some of the descendent of Lehi would carry the gene variant ABCC11

Edited January 29, 2024 by Craig Speechly

[webbles]

30 minutes ago, Craig Speechly said:

All humans have one of three types of earwax. 

 

01. Wet earwax 
This type is sticky and yellow-brown in color. It's common in people of African descent and most people of European descent. 

02. Dry earwax 
This type is pale, crumbly, and lacks the waxy substance cerumen. It's common in East Asia, but less frequent in southern Asia, the Pacific Islands, central Asia, and Asia Minor. It's very uncommon among Europeans and Africans. 

03. Flaky, light-colored earwax 
This type is common in Native Americans and those descending from East Asia. 

 

Humans inherit their earwax type from their parents. So it makes sense that Polynesian’s,  who migrated from southern Asia would share the same dry earwax trait as southern Asians.  Also it makes sense that Native Americans would share the same flaky earwax as their ancestors in East Asia. However what we should expect to find in the Native American population are some members of the pre-Columbian population who inherited the same dry earwax found in Middle Eastern & Polynesian populations but we don’t identified through the  ABCC11 gene. 

Europeans and Africans have wet earwax, and Asians (and thereby Native Americans, due to ANCIENT SIBERIAN BORDER CROSSING) have dry. South Asians are 50/50. This is determined by the switch of a single DNA unit in the gene known to geneticists as the ATP-binding cassette C11 gene.

 

When Lehi’s Middle Eastern party intermarried with the native population they would have passed on the gene variant ABCC11 for the waxy earwax, we should see evidence of this in pre Columbian populations. 

 

I’m not making any conclusions only asking if this could be evidence to support or undermine Book of Mormon claims. 

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ABCC11

For a small group merging with a much larger group, it is extremely likely that the genes from the small group could become "lost".

The recent genetic testing that showed that Native Americans were genetically combined with Polynesians (as discussed earlier on this forum and https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2487-2) show that some interaction did occur.  Polynesians picked up the DNA from Native Americans but it can't be determined if it went the other way because of the different size of the groups.

It would be interesting if we had ancient DNA from areas that are purported to be Book of Mormon lands and if that DNA happened to show this gene.  But until we have the ancient DNA, probably not much can be made of this.

[Craig Speechly]

36 minutes ago, webbles said:

For a small group merging with a much larger group, it is extremely likely that the genes from the small group could become "lost".

The recent genetic testing that showed that Native Americans were genetically combined with Polynesians (as discussed earlier on this forum and https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2487-2) show that some interaction did occur.  Polynesians picked up the DNA from Native Americans but it can't be determined if it went the other way because of the different size of the groups.

It would be interesting if we had ancient DNA from areas that are purported to be Book of Mormon lands and if that DNA happened to show this gene.  But until we have the ancient DNA, probably not much can be made of this.

So a small population of Polynesians breeding with Native American populations is detectable but we shouldn’t expect nor detect the same from a Lehite migration? Ok, that makes perfect sense. 
 

If someone took on this project it could support BoM claims

Edited January 29, 2024 by Craig Speechly

[CV75]

1 hour ago, Craig Speechly said:

I know you’re being flippant but obviously you can’t but some of the descendent of Lehi would carry the gene variant AACC11

There is a rare version of the AACC11 gene that prevents stinky armpits. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/a-lucky-two-percent-of-people-have-a-gene-for-stink-free-armpits-2508106/#:~:text=According to a group of,from producing an offensive odor. 

"East Asian and Native American people were already known to have a form of the ABCC11 gene that causes the dry type of earwax and produces less underarm body order, compared with other ethnicities" https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/272626#-White-men-produce-more-odorous-earwax-than-East-Asian-men-

Given that rare versions do exist, and the argument genes don't get lost, who knows what Sariah (Lehi) passed on, and what had been passed on to them from possible % of East Asian ancestry?

 

[InCognitus]

Earwax, now that might explain how they were able to secure the sealed portion of the plates.  It had to be the sticky version.

[Stargazer]

Check out this video:

NOTE: There's a graphic in the video which I scraped. Here it shows who's got the least body odor:

 

[pogi]

1 hour ago, InCognitus said:

Earwax, now that might explain how they were able to secure the sealed portion of the plates.  It had to be the sticky version.

It also explains how the Jaredites made airtight vessels. 

[webbles]

2 hours ago, Craig Speechly said:

So a small population of Polynesians breeding with Native American populations is detectable but we shouldn’t expect nor detect the same from a Lehite migration? Ok, that makes perfect sense. 
 

If someone took on this project it could support BoM claims

You have it backwards.  A small group of Polynesians breeding with Native Americans is detectable in the Polynesian group.  A small group of Polynesians breeding with Native Americans is NOT easily detectable in the Native American group.  Same with the Lehites.  A small group of Lehites breeding with Native Americans would be detected in the Lehites.  But it would be hard to detect in the Native American population.

[Pyreaux]

The Clovis people likely arrived via the Bering land bridge that once linked Asia and Alaska, were Asians and are related to modern Native Americans, however they were not the first humans to set foot in the Americas . The Americas are not originally populated by a single migration of people from Asia

New radiocarbon dating of Clovis place them later and for a shorter period of time than previously believed. Archaeological evidence of human occupation in South America also dates to the same time as the Clovis materials. This suggests that people were already living in the Americas before the Clovis people arrived.

The evidence indicates pretty strongly that there were people living in both hemispheres at the same time. Academia is moving toward understanding that the peopling of the Americas was not a singular event like the Clovis model would have us believe. Rather a process with different people probably arriving at different times and taking different routes and potentially coming from different places. Academia is just now beginning to ask new kinds of research questions like the timing of the existing population and about migrations and movements to North versus South America.