Monkeyluv: And Other Essays on Our Lives as Animals

Monkey Luv by Robert M. Sapolsky is a great book to pick up and read. In my opinion, the content of this book was easy to comprehend because you do not need to be a neuroscientist in order to understand it. Sapolsky is such a great writer that he makes reading about the brain and behavior easy. He explains how our wonderful minds work and the factors that really affect who we are. Sapolsky includes other publications and examples in his writing, so that anyone can understand what he is talking about. He posts notes and his sources at the end of each chapter for reference and further reading. Sapolsky writes that genes do not fully define who we are but that environment greatly shapes who we are. Genes produce proteins vital for the brain to function properly. They do not produce behavior but rather tendencies to respond to the environment in certain ways. He explains to us that there isn't a battle between nature and nurture, but that they both work together to make us unique.Sapolsky explains to us that particular genes will produce a particular protein in different environments. Cold temperatures can make animals activate a gene to produce proteins to act differently. It will make some animals such as bears hibernate when winter is upon them and others might fly south for the winter or react in different ways. The smallest thing in life can affect us a lot. "Antlers of Clay" is a short passage of Monkey Love where Sapolsky explains what animals look for in mates. He explains that women are more likely to look for a man who is economically established then struggling financial. Women want a bread winner. Sapolsky did not create this theory. David Buss of the University of Texas at Austin surveyed more than ten thousand people from thirty-seven different countries. In every society that Buss examined he noticed that women were interested particularly in men that could support them financially. When women are happy with their mates, they tend to have healthier offspring. Sapolsky states that looks can sometimes mean good genes but what makes the difference is the effort that a female puts into the well-being of her offspring. When women think that they found the perfect mate, their bodies synthesizes more growth hormones and will go the extra mile to take care of their offspring. Sapolsky throughout his book repeatedly emphasis that environment has a big influence on all living organisms. Environment consists of the surroundings or conditions an animal lives in. Culture is also a large part of our environment and how we live. It determines the type of medical attention we receive, the food we eat, how we earn our bread, and essentially who we are. Not everybody is affected by environment the same way. A person's socioeconomic status is determined by a person's income education and occupation. In our modern world it can determine if you live or die. The poor have the lowest socioeconomic status with very little income and education. Their health tends to be worse than people who are in a higher socioeconomic class. Having money does not make you immune to disease; this just means you have the ability to buy prevention and treatments for illness. The poor tend to have poor health because of their ignorance; people with very little education might not know the horrible effects of smoking. Sapolsky is really fascinated with the effect that parents have on their children's development. Parents can help their children grow, but when dose helping become a hindrance. Sapolsky feels that parents should have control over their children, but should also let them branch out into the world. There are parents who take there parental control to an extreme. There are parents that belong to cretin religions that reject the use of medicine for healing and use a prayer instead. Sapolsky also feels that the Amish indirectly hurt their children by not allowing them to go to high school with non-Amish classmates in fear that they might want change. Parents can no longer let a child die because they refuse medical care, but the Amish can leave their children unprepared and uneducated. What is the difference? According to Sapolsky Amish children are sheltered from the real world being forced into the same style of life as their parents. What a parent can and can't do with his child is a huge debate today in our country. Bugs in the brain is my favorite passage of Monkey Luv Sapolsky say that he attends neuroscience conventions from time to time and its quite easy for him to become overwhelmed. "There are thousands of exhibits and posters but, at the end of the day we still don't know much about the brain". Sapolsky tries to explain that viruses and bacteria's can alter our brain functions. Rabies for example is a type of virus that can get into the brain and make its host aggressive. Rabies can drive a subject to bite someone, passing the virus on threw saliva. Sapolsky also presented us with Toxoplasma which is secreted by cats. When rodents ingest it, their fear of cats disappears and they become attracted to cats. Toxoplasma only attracts a rodent too cats but doesn't affect anything else in their daily life. Toxoplasma blows Sapolsky mind and runs circles around neuroscientist. I really enjoyed Monkey Luv by Robert M. Sapolsky; his book was really fun to read. Sapolsky is such a witty character and the tone in which he tells the story simply captivates me. I personally like how he puts his and other researcher's thoughts together without confusing the reader. Sapolsky kept me hooked with all the small stories throughout the book. It felt like he knew that I have a short attention span. I thought his writing style was innovative. Sapolsky is a very intelligent man yet really down to earth, using words the average Joe can understand. Monkey luv is a must read, if you what to know how our minds works and changes every day.

A wild romp through a variety of behavioural characteristics of humanity and other animals. Includes an important reminder in the early chapters that genes and environment act together in promoting behaviours,

Monkeyluv is a poppy and sarcastic yet still thoughtful and scientific collection of essays on the interaction of biology and environment by the Stanford primatoligist and neurobiologist Robert Sapolsky, compiled from his articles in Discover, The Sciences, Natural History, Men's Health, Natural History, and The New Yorker. Part one, "Genes and Who We Are" opens by reframing the common nature versus nurture debate by playfully quoting from People Magazine's "50 Most Beautiful People" issue, pointing out that, while most people oversimplify and point to either genes or beauty regiments, diets, and workouts being exclusively responsible for outcomes, it is truly "a genetic influence on how one interacts with the environment" at play.In "A Gene For Nothing," Sapolsky uses the famous uproar over Dolly, the first cloned sheep, to assuage our fears about cloning. Relax, he implores. Cloning is not "playing God." The process does not create literal copies of Mom or Dad or Abraham Lincoln. Animals with matching genetic code-identical human twins, for example-have brains that are measurably physiologically different from one another. And their behavior isn't coded in genetics because genes do not directly produce behavior. Rather, they produce the potential of a certain range of responses to certain environments."Genetic Hyping" carries forth the notion that "genes don't cause behaviors...sometimes they influence them," and, more specifically, "genes influence behavior, environment influences behavior, and genes and environment interact." Sapolsky bemoans how with each new story that enters the mainstream media about some new "wonder gene" that is responsible for something or other dramatic like IQ, scientists rarely move on to test that hypothesis through replication. Even worse, when they do try to replicate the results that initially led to a "splashy publication," and they do not get the same results, they most often tend to try to figure out what was wrong with the new study instead of wondering what was wrong with their hypothesis.In "The Genetic War Between Men and Women," Sapolsky describes how potentially dangerous genes can change over time by discussing imprinted genes-those genes that only have input from one parent and drive growth. He exemplifies this by painting the battle that occurs in a woman's womb as paternally derived genes cause the placenta to take root and try to suck as many resources as possible from the mother, while maternal counterparts attempt to keep it at bay. At worst, an imbalance in this process can lead to strong cancers.These imprinted genes show up in other mammals-but polygamous ones. Fruit flies are his primary analogy, as he compares human imprinted genes and their ensuing conflicts to the toxic sperm of males and the ability (or lack thereof) of females to survive that sperm. Curiously, if fruit flies are forced to be monogamous, after 40 generations, sperm toxicity will disappear and the monogamous couples with outbreed their polygamous counterparts. Running with this analogy, he ponders the implications for humans. Even though on the surface we appear to be monogamous, there is much evidence that we are in truth polygamous. So then, if humans were forced to be truly monogamous for a long period of time, would imprinted genes eventually disappear? And would we be safer for it?"Of Mice and (Hu)Men Genes" gives three more examples of genetic-environmental interaction. First, the case of the genetically "relaxed" mice eggs implanted in genetically "timid" mothers who ended up "timid." This suggested two things: environmental influences may begin before birth and having genes that should make you relaxed don't necessarily make you relaxed. Next, the case of the mice who were given a gene that either helped or hindered a group of neurotransmitters related to intelligence. As expected, the "smart" mice showed signs of improved intelligence and the "dumb" mice showed signs of diminished intelligence. But when the "dumb" mice were placed in a stimulating environment rather than a no-frills laboratory enclosure, their intelligence corrected. Finally, Sapolsky cites a study of New Zealander children that found a correlation between one of two types of certain gene called 5-HTT and clinical depression. The study did not find that one type of the gene directly caused depression-of course Sapolsky wants us to know better than that by this point. Nor did the study determine that one type of 5-HTT caused an rise in risk for depression. What they did observe was that having one type of 5-HTT dramatically increased your risk for depression in certain environments, namely those of extreme stress or trauma. Sapolsky concludes with a social plea: let's be mindful of the environments we create. Let's make them ones that unfold harmoniously with genetic potentials.The final essay in part one of Monkeyluv, "Antlers of Clay," wonders whether or not attractive physical features indicate anything about a potential mate's genetic fitness. After raising some evidence supporting both sides of the argument, Sapolsky begins detailing some fascinating possibilities. Reproducing with an "attractive" mate may perpetuate the species because if, on some level, a female sees that other females find a certain feature attractive, even if she isn't attracted to it, it would be wise of her to mate with one of those males. Why? Because chances are her male offspring will have that trait, the next generation of females will be attracted to it, and he is quite likely to reproduce.Even more consciousness-bending, what if attractiveness is simply mere evolutionary trickery? Multiple studies have shown that females who have mated with the more attractive male of their species generally take better care of their offspring. So regardless of whether these children actually have "better" genes-and studies have shown varied outcomes-maybe genes in a sense don't matter at all. After all, if you mated with some ultimate cliché of human attractiveness-perhaps the rocket scientist who is a supermodel on the side-wouldn't you invest as much care as you could in raising your children to ensure that they grow up to realize all of the potential harnessed these perceived superbabies? And given what we've learned about genes as potential that is triggered by environment, wouldn't that level of parental care be one of the surest insurers of survival and reproduction?

I became a Sapolsky fan when I first found his series of Stanford lectures on YouTube. He's wonderfully easy to understand, and his unique combination of humor, rationality, & multi-disciplinary knowledge makes him the epitome of great teaching. I've learned things from his lectures that have made me think & occasionally outright blown my mind. The book is no different. If you have any interest in biology, &/or sociology, &/or psychology- get you some Sapolsky!

Like most people, I am inundated with new books and papers that need my attention.But I always make the time to read anything that Sapolsky writes. This book is a collection of essays that show once again, that we have an extraordinarily brilliant iconoclast in our midst. Time and again he demonstrates that he is not afraid to say when he does not know something, but that he also uncommonly good at coming up with new questions and new solutions.I suggest reading this at the rate of a chapter a day, and meditating on what you have learned: you will not regret it!The whole thing is witty, unconventional and brilliant!

I'm thrilled!

Sapolsky does a wonderful job of taking a complex subject and making it fun, challenging and thought provoking. And I really mean, THOUGHT PROVOKING. Yes, you will learn a lot about genes, but he covers far more than that in this book that creates more questions than there ever will be answers. It's a most enjoyable ride that is well worth the read!

The man changed my life. My personality. My priorities. Everything. I love this book. I read behave and primates memoirs too. He is philosophical, witty, funny, and scientific. What's there to complain?

a must read for all humanity

Great insights into our own Behavior. Very entertaining style of writing. In the essay anatomy of bad mood I got some insights into my own quarrels with my spouse.Dr Anil Yadav

Buen libro de divulgación científica. Útil para aquellos que no se sienten cómodos con el vocabulario técnico ni los academicismos.

I first came across him when I was watching his free lectures on youtube. Hes book is just as funny as his lectures, even though I dont study anything related to evolutionary biology, I find Im learning a lot from this book!