People keep calling it a mutation. Why is that? I am thinking the concept of recessive genes may be a mitigating factor here, coupled with previous rarity of the gene.
IOW, this article is opinion.
"They're trying to find themselves an audience. Their deductions need applause." - Genesis: The Lamb Lies Down on Broadway.
Lactose tolerance is the mutation.
Lactose intolerance is the normal biological system.
"However, certain human populations have undergone a mutation on chromosome 2 which results in a bypass of the common shutdown in lactase production, allowing members of these populations to continue consumption of fresh milk and other milk products throughout their lives."
http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Lactose_intolerance
Lactose tolerance is just a normal 'loss-of-function' mutation. Nothing supporting evolution here.
Because it's a mutation that we can observe in the genetic record. Looking at random mutations over time to that mutation, we can get an approximate date for it's first appearance. Which is exactly what the researchers did in this study.
IOW, this article is opinion.
Nonsense. Out of curiosity, what are your qualifications? Have you read the actual study?