In a massive study on genetic variation among humans, researchers found that most changes have occurred in the last 200 generations, too fast for natural selection to catch up.
This statement appears to reflect a misunderstanding of how evolution plays out in practice.
The way evolution is often taught is that the small genetic changes in each generation make a difference to the evolutionary fitness (relative to his/her peers) of the individual right away, but that the changes are so small that it takes very many generations to see divergence of sub-populations of the species and hence noticeable evolutionary change.
The reality of evolution - "puntuated equilibrium" - is different from this simplistic teaching model. What really happens is that genetic changes accumulate over very many generations but don't have much if any immediate effect on evolutionary fitness since in practice these small, incremental, personal changes are often not what drives evolution. What really drives evolution (per the inference of the fossil record) is when the *environment* (weather, food supply, disease, competitors, etc, etc) changes, often very quickly, causing accumulated genetic change to suddenly become relevant... what had previously been a benign genetic change (disease resistance or susceptibility, etc, etc) no suddenly becomes a huge change in evolutionary fitness in the new environment, and and the fate of different genetic subpopulations becomes very differnt (we see visible divergence).
This is "punctuated equlibrium" - long spans of no visible evolutionary change (equilibrium) are puntuated by brief spans of rapid visible change as accumulated genetic drift suddenly becomes relevant due to environmental change.
So... the notion of 200 generations being too quick for "natural selection to keep up" is bogus. Natural selection mosltly doesn't happen every generation - it only happens when those infrequent major environmental changes occur.