Why is it that bacterial resistance to antibiotics is not an example of evolution?

Answer 1

micro evolution isn't evolution

Answer 2

It's not an example of evolution.

Evolution is the changing of the genome, or genetic matierial of an organism, it does not occur at the individual level, but is part of the overall genetic heritage of the species itself. This a good working definition of what evolution is...

This, the acquiring of immunity, is not an evolutionary change in the species. There has been no change in the species itself, just in the genetic trait distribution of the population. The genes for the immunity exists in a percentage of the population of the bacterium, it's allready part of the genome of the species, the anti-biotic kills off the bacteria who don't have the immunity, thereby allowing the ones with the immunity to reproduce, increasing their incidence among the population.

The genetics of the species hasn't changed, just the incidence of that trait amongst the population. To use an example. Eye colour amongst humans is a gentic trait...If all people found to have blue eyes were killed, then those who didn't have blue eyes would reproduce, and there would be more instances of different eye colors than blue...However, we haven't performed an evolutionary change in the species, the genes for blue eyes will still exist in the gene pool, and blue eyed children will still be born. The actual genetics of the species hasn't changed, just the instances of some forms of genetic traits in individuals. It would be an evolutionary change if a NEW color were to appear, or if there was a NEW shape that the eye could take.

Answer 3

Certainly sounds like evolution to me!

Some people (especially religious types, and even atheists) tend to believe that evolution is either 100% right or 100% wrong. It took man how many years to come to the conclusion of evolution? It's certainly not guaranteed to be a flawless theory, and the further we advance in technology and in studying evolution, the more we realize that though Darwin may not have been 100% right, he was still on to something. As you said, bacterial resistance is a small example of evolution, and though we may or may not have evolved from apes, we have evolved in ways that neither Christians, Atheists, nor any others can deny.

Answer 4

Variation and adaptation have always been observed-not a problem. If that bacteria, after exposure to penicillin, morphed into a cat or a hippopotamus, then you could say that evolution is true. This is the problem with evolution. People see variation or adaptation (erroneously called "micro"-evolution), and cite it as proof for evolution when they really mean "macro"-evolution. "Micro"-evolution means a variation within a specie. We see this every day. "Macro"-evolution means change from one specie to another completely different specie, that is, from a T-Rex to a mocking bird-this has never happened. When you say evolution this is what you mean, but you use an adaptation within a specie as an example. In your question if you add the word "micro" to the front of the word evolution, then the answer would be "it is an example". When people say "evolution", we must make sure we understand exactly what they mean.

Answer 5

If you have a packet of jelly babies and eat all but the red ones, does that mean that jelly babies evolve into reds? No. In the same way, if a population of bacteria is subjected to a variety of anti-bacterial agents, it is obvious that those that survive are those that are resistant to those agents. They do not evolve, they survive. That is not evolution, that is selection. They always existed, they did not suddenly appear.

Answer 6

It is an example of evolution. It is evidence for the idea that began the theory of evolution... natural selection. If a virus' genes are able to change to make it resistant to antibiotics it is much easier for that virus to reproduce and spread it's genes than it is for one who is not resistant. This would kill off the non resistant strain while preserving the resistant strain. If that isn't irrefutable evidence of natural selection I'd really like to know what is.

Answer 7

Of course it is. Wake up and realise that Darwin was right.

The reasons why some bacteria have developed resistance, is because antibiotics have been improperly used. Blame all these doctors who have been handing them out like smarties to people who don't know how to use them for the last seventy years.

This perfectly explains how an organism can become resistant to a predator that is not effective enough to eradicate a food source completely.

Darwin wins again.

Answer 8

Of course it's evolution. Believe what you want to believe; believe in pixies living at the bottom of your garden who make green cheese, believe that the universe actually rotates around the moon, if that makes you happy. But don't try to twist reality to fit your fantasist ideas. And to all of you fundamentalist jesus worshippers: it doesn't matter how you try to twist and mangle the language: evolution IS adaptation. Why do you think evolution exists? Take my word for it - it does happen everywhere - otherwise there would be no balance and harmony in nature or the universe. It's nature's way, in everything but your brains, it would seem.

I wonder how long it'll be before someone reports me for dismissing their beliefs as idiotic claptrap!

Answer 9

It is an example of evolution. The bacteria that can survive them do, those that cannot survive antibiotics don't. This makes the bacteria that can survive the antibiotics more populous, making the antibiotics pretty much worthless.

Answer 10

Because most people don't have any idea how genetics actually play in evolution and why that model is exactly applicable to humans.

Answer 11

In fact it is. Evolution is only defined as genetic change in any given species over time. Why is it that creationists are intent on misrepresenting facts? How can you people lie continuously with such ease-I would be embarassed if I told as many lies as creationists.