Evolution In Action

[mercurial]

Evolution In Action: Our Antibodies Take 'Evolutionary Leaps' To Fight Microbes

ScienceDaily (Jan. 8, 2009) — With cold and flu season in full swing, the fact that viruses and bacteria rapidly evolve is apparent with every sneeze, sniffle, and cough. A new report explains for the first time how humans keep up with microbes by rearranging the genes that make antibodies to foreign invaders. This research fills a significant gap in our understanding of how the immune system helps us survive.

"We've known for a long time that our antibody-forming system adapts itself to every microbe we encounter," said Gerald Weissmann, M.D., Editor-in-Chief of The FASEB Journal, "but what we didn't understand fully is exactly how this happens. Now that we know, we can begin to find ways to manipulate this process so illnesses can be prevented or made significantly less dangerous."

When the body encounters a foreign invader, like a virus or bacterium, it immediately begins to find a way to neutralize it by means of cellular or antibody-mediated defenses. Part of the process involves tailoring the genes that code for antibodies to specific viruses or bacteria. Researchers have known that this involves two types of genetic manipulation. One type changes a single gene at a time, and the other type changes multiple genes at the same time. In the report, scientists from Wayne State University in Detroit describe how multiple genes can be modified simultaneously to make the "evolutionary leap" necessary to stave off infection.

The basic setup of the experiment treated DNA responsible for making antibody molecules with an enzyme, called activation-induced deaminase, while the DNA was being copied by RNA polymerase. Like a scanner, RNA polymerase moves across the DNA to copy it. When this scanning process moved smoothly, there were either single mutations or no mutations. When the researchers made the RNA polymerase stall along the DNA (under certain conditions), it caused several mutations at once (cluster mutations) in the DNA, adapting our antibodies for a rapid and effective response to a new microbial invader.

"As the planet warms, infectious diseases may be one the biggest threats to human survival," Weissmann added. "Nowadays, mosquitoes, parasites and viruses cause diseases in the United States that were once isolated to warmer parts of the world. They evolve, and - a la Darwin - so does our immune system each time we meet a new microbial invader.

Link

 

[Phronesis]

Already discussed here. For the process, click here.

This thread might as well have been titled "Teleological Evolution In Action".

Why teleological evolution?
Well, the immune system purposefully manipulates information by using the optimality of the genetic code, random variation and selection as a means to an end… antibody diversification. (See how)

Teleological evolution is not limited to the immune system.
Somatic evolution of malignancy also seem to have a teleological streak in it…
Adaptive landscapes and emergent phenotypes: why do cancers have high glycolysis?

Investigating the causes of increased aerobic glycolysis in tumors (Warburg Effect) has gone in and out of fashion many times since it was first described almost a century ago. The field is currently in ascendance due to two factors. Over a million FDG-PET studies have unequivocally identified increased glucose uptake as a hallmark of metastatic cancer in humans. These observations, combined with new molecular insights with HIF-1alpha and c-myc, have rekindled an interest in this important phenotype. A preponderance of work has been focused on the molecular mechanisms underlying this effect, with the expectation that a mechanistic understanding may lead to novel therapeutic approaches. There is also an implicit assumption that a mechanistic understanding, although fundamentally reductionist, will nonetheless lead to a more profound teleological understanding of the need for altered metabolism in invasive cancers. In this communication, we describe an alternative approach that begins with teleology; i.e. adaptive landscapes and selection pressures that promote emergence of aerobic glycolysis during the somatic evolution of invasive cancer. Mathematical models and empirical observations are used to define the adaptive advantage of aerobic glycolysis that would explain its remarkable prevalence in human cancers. These studies have led to the hypothesis that increased consumption of glucose in metastatic lesions is not used for substantial energy production via Embden-Meyerhoff glycolysis, but rather for production of acid, which gives the cancer cells a competitive advantage for invasion. Alternative hypotheses, wherein the glucose is used for generation of reducing equivalents (NADPH) or anabolic precursors (ribose) are also discussed.

Somatic evolution of malignancy:
The purposeful manipulating of information by using the optimality of the genetic code, random variation and selection as a means to an end… adaptation to hypoxic and acidic fitness landscapes.


Viewing cells as computers that make other computers and information as an irreducible property of nature makes this view tenable.

 

[w1z4rd]

I read the first post! thanks merc! Great post!!!!!

I completely ignored the second post because it left the realm of science and leaped deeply into the realm of pseudoscience.

Just so any new members are confused.. Phrony is a pseudoscience pusher. He has a religious agenda and he is trying to pass Teleology off as science. Its not.

"Teleology is not science, but science may provide evidence for teleological interpretations of aspects of the universe. Science is methodologically naturalistic, not absolutely naturalistic

The rejection of teleology on a methodological basis was necessary in the early days of modern science in order to separate the findings of science from the influence of Christian dogma."

 

[Phronesis]

Hehe w1zzy, you said it.

Teleology is not science, but science may provide evidence for teleological interpretations of aspects of the universe

Too bad you missed the opportunity to discuss the evidence. Moaning won't get you anywhere.
Besides, science by its very nature is teleological as scientists plan and execute experiments in order to gain an understanding of the universe and life with the assumption and faith that we will be able to understand it. A purposeful endeavour as a means to an end... truth.

So to remove teleology from science is unscientific. And in this case (read above), science provided evidence for teleological interpretations (heck I even gave you some peer-reviewed literature to read) of evolution. You are just fundamentally opposed in discussing science it seems.

 

[w1z4rd]

Hehe w1zzy, you said it.

Too bad you missed the opportunity to discuss the evidence. Moaning won't get you anywhere.
Besides, science by its very nature is teleological as scientists plan and execute experiments in order to gain an understanding of the universe and life with the assumption and faith that we will be able to understand it. A purposeful endeavour as a means to an end... truth.

So to remove teleology from science is unscientific. And in this case (read above), science provided evidence for teleological interpretations (heck I even gave you some peer-reviewed literature to read) of evolution. You are just fundamentally opposed in discussing science it seems.

I will happily discuss the evidence when I want to .. in the correct section. Pseudoscience belongs in the PD section... but you have being polluting the NATURAL sciences section with it.

To add teleology to science is corrupt. as teleology does not comply with the scientific method.. which is why is falls out of science and into philosophy.

Scientists take teleology as seriously in science as they do alien anal probes (and its also unscientific not to research those!!!)

 

[Phronesis]

I will happily discuss the evidence when I want to ..

No you won't. Or are you going to discuss the immune system and the nature of antibody diversification? Thought not.

 

[w1z4rd]

No you won't. Or are you going to discuss the immune system and the nature of antibody diversification? Thought not.

"I will happily discuss the evidence when I want to"


Teleology is not science


So please stop spamming the NATURAL sciences section with pseudoscience. kthnxbi.

 

[Phronesis]

"I will happily discuss the evidence when I want to"

Which seems to be never... Make an effort to show you are actually interested. You seem to want to drag this and other threads down into a mudslinging feast. Here, I will give you an opportunity to discuss science.

Since the OP is discussing the immune system, how does the immune system purposefully induce mutations and how does the system control the error-repair pathway and the subsequent recruitment of various low vs high-fidelity polymerases being employed after induction of the mutation?

Would you agree that the immune system actively searches for a solution? The problem being antibody diversification.

 

[w1z4rd]

Which seems to be never... Make an effort to show you are actually interested. You seem to want to drag this and other threads down into a mudslinging feast. Here, I will give you an opportunity to discuss science.

Since the OP is discussing the immune system, how does the immune system purposefully induce mutations and how does the system control the error-repair pathway and the subsequent recruitment of various low vs high-fidelity polymerases being employed after induction of the mutation?

Would you agree that the immune system actively searches for a solution? The problem being antibody diversification.

Ive already responded with what I wanted to the the Op. and what I wanted to respond to in the second post... If you hadnt pushed your religious agenda in here then I would not have had to respond to you. Your post is as much a part of this thread as the OP.

Teleology is not science, its pseudoscience.

 

[alloytoo]

Which seems to be never... Make an effort to show you are actually interested. You seem to want to drag this and other threads down into a mudslinging feast. Here, I will give you an opportunity to discuss science.

Since the OP is discussing the immune system, how does the immune system purposefully induce mutations and how does the system control the error-repair pathway and the subsequent recruitment of various low vs high-fidelity polymerases being employed after induction of the mutation?

Would you agree that the immune system actively searches for a solution? The problem being antibody diversification.

Now now, lets not confuse purposefully with conciously.

 

[Phronesis]

Wow, so you actually don't want to discuss science and keep on moaning. You are accusing me of pushing a religious agenda. Is teleology a religious concept all of a sudden? So if science by its very nature is teleological, is that a religion too?

You see, the second post discusses the nature and workings of the immune system as well. You completely dismiss it. I also provided peer-reviewed scientific literature mentioning the teleological nature somatic evolution of malignancy. You ignored it. That teleology has no place in science is a myth as the very nature of science is teleological.

That you do not want to discuss any science is telling. Wait, here is another opportunity for you not to moan:
How does the immune system purposefully induce mutations and how does the system control the error-repair pathway and the subsequent recruitment of various low vs high-fidelity polymerases being employed after induction of the mutation?

Would you agree that the immune system actively searches for a solution? The problem being antibody diversification.

Now now, lets not confuse purposefully with conciously.

Yes, wouldn't want you to confuse yourself again now do we.

 

[alloytoo]

Yes, wouldn't want you to confuse yourself again now do we.

Nope, we wish to disperse your smoke and expose your mirrors

 

[Phronesis]

Nope, we wish to disperse your smoke and expose your mirrors

Really, and in the process choke in your own smoke of confusion. Better have a good look at yourself .
Since you are always so pretentious to know a lot about how science works, why not stay on topic here and discuss your knowledge that is relevant to the thread.

How does the immune system purposefully induce mutations and how does the system control the error-repair pathway and the subsequent recruitment of various low vs high-fidelity polymerases being employed after induction of the mutation?

Are you going to actually contribute or give your understanding of immune function or at least make the effort to learn about it? Of course not, that is your pretentious nature alloytubes... More smoke to come from you? I think I am not the only one that is getting irritated by your, cyggiepop and w1zzy's shenani gans. Always so quick to espouse the virtues of science but rarely (if ever) show that you actually have any understanding.

 

[Peder]

Mud Slinging match... NICE!!!

I can however agree we do evolve... I just can't agree that we evolved from Apes...

And uhm this is kinda not new to me, i read this in my biology text book last year... or am i reading wrong?

 

[Claymore]

Here's something that confuses me: I consider myself reasonably well-read in the sciences, and I have a fair library. However, I have never encountered the term "teleology" in any of these science books, or on any of the dozens of scientific websites or blogs I follow on a daily basis. Why is that?

 

[cyghost]

oh no, phrony tries again. claymore I'd say that is because it simply isn't science and phrony once again tried to slip one past. It reeks of dishonesty.

nice work w1z4rd!!

peder, we evolved from a common ancestor, not from apes. Or in other words, we are apes.

 

[Peder]

oh no, phrony tries again. claymore I'd say that is because it simply isn't science and phrony once again tried to slip one past. It reeks of dishonesty.

nice work w1z4rd!!

peder, we evolved from a common ancestor, not from apes. Or in other words, we are apes.

If we ARE apes then why are there still apes around?

There are soo many unanswered questions...

/leaves debate...

 

[Phronesis]

Here's something that confuses me: I consider myself reasonably well-read in the sciences, and I have a fair library. However, I have never encountered the term "teleology" in any of these science books, or on any of the dozens of scientific websites or blogs I follow on a daily basis. Why is that?

Perhaps you should extend your library and science website? Maybe include pubmed in your "online library"?

oh no, phrony tries again. claymore I'd say that is because it simply isn't science and phrony once again tried to slip one past. It reeks of dishonesty.

Wait, you did not read anything related to immune function now did you? Are you going to discuss that? No way, not in your nature. Your nature seems to be to pretend to know what science is, but never discuss any.

nice work w1z4rd!!

Great minds think alike?
Fools never differ?

 

[cyghost]

Wait, you did not read anything related to immune function now did you? Are you going to discuss that? No way, not in your nature. Your nature seems to be to pretend to know what science is, but never discuss any.

If you kept it on real science I may or may not have. I read quite a bit on science and owes several real sciency books. I don't necessarily discuss it all. I read for interest sake mostly.

But when you pollute it like this, there isn't really anything to discuss except to ask you not to do it. But we all know you are incapable of that. And that you will do it again.

Unfortunately for you, some here are on to, how did you call it? sheningans.

 

[w1z4rd]

Here's something that confuses me: I consider myself reasonably well-read in the sciences, and I have a fair library. However, I have never encountered the term "teleology" in any of these science books, or on any of the dozens of scientific websites or blogs I follow on a daily basis. Why is that?

It was dropped when modern science began to mature.