Going deep into the subject of antibiotics, I began thinking: is the threat of a supervirus also usable as observable, tangible evidence of the theory of evolution that can become conclusive within a few decades? Here's how I thought of this: in evolution, mutations occur, and those rare beneficial mutations help the mutated individual survive and reproduce, passing on the mutation, right? Well, in this case, the mutation is immunity to the antibiotics. Those without the mutation die, and those with, live and reproduce. As a result, you have a modified specie of bacteria that replaces the old one as the old one is unfit to compete. It's evolution that's fast enough to observe within a lifetime! Am I right?
Has anyone else thought of this?
- Thread starter Jadebrain_Prime
- Start date
Antibiotics do not (directly) affect viral life cycles. When you use the term “supervirus” I’ll assume you are referring to multiple drug-resistant bacteria.
Yes. The evolution of drug resistance in bacteria already is a firmly established evidence for the theory of evolution.
Yes, you are right, but you’re at least a few decades late! Evolution textbooks have detailed the bacterial evolution of drug resistance for a long time.
Ah. That answers my question in the title of this thread. Thank you! And yes, I was referring to drug resistant bacteria.
Nope