With consistency.

thank you.

see, the human brain will, by habit, try to make sense of something that doesn’t fit a pattern. however, it has an inherent weakness in its otherwise very powerful pattern-matching engine: it automatically tries to search for a “magic bullet” solution to every problem. That is: for every problem, no matter how complex, the human brain always assumes there’s only one, single cause.

Now, normally, that’s true when the problem is a simple one. The principle of cause and effect generally means that cause A leads to effect B. However, in complex systems, cause A can lead to effects B and C, which lead to effects D-F, and so on… The problem then presents itself when some people can’t understand how some problems have more than one cause - or, especially, many, systemic causes, and, thusly, more than one solution, especially when a problem has to be solved with more than one solution at once and/or over time, repeatedly and even regularly.

The problem here is that, then, individuals and society at large, just kind of short circuit, and give up on even solving the problem at all. It’s very sad. A great example of this is the problem of homelessness. Another is our crazy problem with healthcare. Or gun violence or racism, or immigration. There are many other examples of deep-rooted systemic issues that don’t have any single solution, and because they don’t, the American people simply can’t wrap their heads around figuring out a solution because they involve multiple complex steps to address multiple complex issues.

Say you did a study that discovered that folks who actively run are statistically unlikely to have respiratory issues. How much of that is because being physically active acts as a kind of preventative maintenance vs how much of that is a kind of self culling, where folks with respiratory issues are unlikely to seek exercise.

The end result is ultimately the same, but the mechanics behind why are different.

Is the wolves’ natural cancer resistance just kicking into over drive, or is natural selection happening?

I guess it comes down to the transition point. If they've adapted in that they're resistant to cancer developing or spreading in general, that has implications on what can be done to make humans resistant. If instead they've adapted to be less likely to get cancer from radiation levels that high, it's less useful, since most people generally aren't exposed to those levels.