Reply #8: You misunderstood

[txlibdem]

I posted that the inactive gene had no chance to confer any evolutionary advantage so it renders itself moot. Worse, the gene when active causes scabbing, prevents infection, and gives a short-term benefit for those that survive. Those who would most be helped by an inactive gene, those who lost a limb or had a serious injury, would die before the limb grew back or they were otherwise back to full health: the inactive gene could not pass itself along to offspring and would be selected out of our gene pool.

Once society developed, the injured could have been protected and fed by other members of their family or extended group while their limb grew back, yes, but our genes were pretty much set in stone by that time.