How do the ill-informed people who disagree with evolution explain bacterial resistance to medications?

Question

It's evolution occurring right in front of you.

Answer 1

It is NOT evolution. Here, let me explain it to you.

In every organism species, there is variation. For example, in human beings certain populations were exposed to a particular disease. Let's say that an isolated population group is exposed to Yellow Fever. Most of the population is wiped out. Those who survived Yellow Fever did so because they had an immunity to some degree. They may well have gotten ill, but their bodies had enough resistance to defeat the disease.

Those survivors now pass on this immunity to their descendents. So, in effect, virtually that entire group is immune to Yellow Fever. It's as simple as that.

They did not "evolve" an immunity. If they hadn't had the immunity, they would have died. The immunity was already there.

It is the same with bacterial cultures. Certain bacteria are resistant to a medication. When the bacteria without this natural resistance are killed, the only bacteria left to multiply are the resistant variety.

It is the opposite of evolution that has human beings, and other organisms, to be subject to many of these diseases. Genetic mutation has not caused us to evolve, it has caused us to devolve. Out immune systems are weakened. We become subject to more diseases. Otherwise, wouldn't we have "evolved" a cure for cancer by now? The truth is, we are suffering more cases of cancer now than in the past. Genetic mutation results in defects, not beneficial changes that promote survival.

Survival of the fittest is true. That explains how the resistant strain of bacteria become dominant, but there is no evolution. The resistance has always existed.

Answer 2

That actually does not have much to do with evolution, it is generational resistance, See I have the same problem with insect resistance when I spray pesticides, Faster and faster they become resistant to my pesticide,
That by any group of University professors is labeled as Chemical resistance, not evolution,
See the bugs, do not change or evolve, they are down to the core D.N.A. the same damn Bugs I chased years ago.
With ever pesticide application, a few escape death for what ever ever reason, and their children become just a little more resistant to the pesticide that killed off the rest of the clan.

That is natural selection as apposed to evolution,
SEE the D.N.A. has not changed even a little, SO no evolution.

But the resistance factor to pesticides, has changed.
Like humans learning to survive in all world climates.
Yet our D.N.A. is the same.

So I being in the genetic field, though at the fringes!!!!
can see the difference between resistance and adaptation and EVOLUTION

Answer 3

I think a lot of people are just ignorant, not ill-informed. I'm a Muslim, but I still believe in some of the aspects of evolution that have been scientifically proven. As I just said on a previous question, it is possible to be religious without being ignorant to science. It's just that many religious people don't choose to take this route.

Answer 4

I'm going to keep an eye on this question, see the BS answers they come up with...

Kenyai: I think the term you are looking for is horizontal transfer. But the critical addition to that is they survive and grow, passing the resistant gene onto the offspring... That's almost the definition of evolution...

Bugsie: Look up plasmids.

Iraqisax: Wow... You're getting so twisted up trying to disprove evolution you are tripping over yourself. Think about this... Now those people who survived will grow and reproduce. Their children will also be immune to Yellow Fever, and same with their children and so on. Eventually the majority of people will be immune. So you have an adaptation, which is selected for by an external factor. This is called natural selection, and it is the basis of evolution...

Answer 5

Actually, I think that's not so much evolution as the exchange of certain structures which allow them to resist the substance. I forget what they're called.

Answer 6

Well, there was no evidence for "macroevolution" as argued by alot of people, so now what? Go in the other direction and say that because bacteria resist medications that this proves evolution??? Are you sure this is science??? You're not just pulling people's chains,are you?

Answer 7

Well if you are serious about wanting an answer to your question and you are not just trying to stir then read the article in the link below. It should give you some answers. But then again what would I know. I'm ill-informed aren't I.
Seriously please read it with an open mind. It's important that we all keep our minds open.

Answer 8

You should have been at the Scopes Monkey Trial.
I gather this stuff is still a big issue with atheists & evangelicals.

The rest of the world left it behind long ago.

Answer 9

Didn't god do that?? It must be part of his master plan.

It doesn't matter how much information to support evolution you give them. It threatens their faith so It can't be true. They seem to think we must produce the missing link to "prove" it. I would like them to provide proof of god.
If you can't explain it it must be supernatural, have we learned anything since the dark ages, for some people NO.

Answer 10

I am a Christian and I do not dispute that u r rite. And to believe that the bacteria would one day evolve into a man is as silly as believing a grease stain on your garage floor will one day evolve into a car.