evolutionary fitness is about a population's ability to survive in perpetuity, not an individual. its a different context of the word "fittest". fitness here means odds of sexual reproduction, and so since a necklace with ionizing radiation will not prevent a wearer with low cognitive abilities and gullibility from creating viable offspring with the same genes before the cancer breaks through, it therefore has nothing to do with evolutionary fitness.
it is more likely that we select for these traits because we can't stand being around mates that are grounded in reality (or that those mates won't reproduce due other factors like ensuring not to)
The chain of reasoning: people are trying to protect themselves from the purported 5G irradiation -> they start wearing pendants that emit the ionising radiation -> when worn 24x7, the amount of the radiation absorbed from the pendant is sufficient to induce harm to the human cellular DNA -> sarcastic conclusion.
The involved in the confabulation perhaps ought to have read the article before expressing their quick judgement.
evolutionary fitness is about a population's ability to survive in perpetuity, not an individual. its a different context of the word "fittest". fitness here means odds of sexual reproduction, and so since a necklace with ionizing radiation will not prevent a wearer with low cognitive abilities and gullibility from creating viable offspring with the same genes before the cancer breaks through, it therefore has nothing to do with evolutionary fitness.
it is more likely that we select for these traits because we can't stand being around mates that are grounded in reality (or that those mates won't reproduce due other factors like ensuring not to)