Sickle cell, Evolution?

Question

Popular view is sickle cell is a wonderful case for evolution, as the sickle cell in comparison to a regular blood cell is not affected by the parasite-plasmodium falciparum
THe sickle cell mutation, reduces the shape and volume of a regular blood cell. Resulting in a diminished cell with a cresecent moon type appearance. This cell is therefore capable of transporting less oxygen to respiring tissue, resulting in the disease sickle cell anaemia.
As well as a diminshed capacity for oxygen carrying, also these cells, have a harder time navigating their way through capillaries and other smaller blood vessels, causing bottlenecks, result= internal discomfort.
The crescent shape means that the malarial parasite cant lock its enzymes onto the blood protein, resulting in immunisation,
but this is at the cost of low oxyghen transport and pain.
It's a mutation that removes information for a healthy blood cell.
Evolution is gaining information. This is a mutation that takes
info away

Answer 1

Ah.

Sickle-cell anemia is a *recessive* condition, so you need both copies of the mutated gene (ie - be homozygous recessive) to suffer the effects.
However - being heterozygous for the trait does not give severe effects, but *does* provide resistance to malaria.

*That* is why it has stayed around. The heterozygous condition is selected for.

And I don't know what you mean by "Evolution is gaining information"...
Evolution is a *change* in a population's genotype (and therefore phenotype).

Answer 2

Where did you get the wrong idea that evolution is gaining information? This is absolutely false and has nothing to do with evolution.

Sickle cells allow some people to survive long enough to produce and raise offspring that also have sickle cells. Those without will more often die of malaria before producing any offspring. That's what evolution is about: surviving and producing more offspring. There is no purpose or direction except in the direction of producing more surviving offspring than competitors.

Answer 3

Evolution in many situations unearths a jury-rigged suggestions to a situation. the answer isn't appropriate, in spite of the undeniable fact that that's in many situations extra constructive than not something. Sickle cellular is an occasion. Cystic fibrosis is yet another. They the two are constructive in a heterozygote. For a basically recessive trait, there's no assure that's going to ever be eradicated.

Answer 4

Evolution is not necessarily due to 'gaining information'. Any change in allele frequency will result in evolution of the population.

Mammals have hundreds of times LESS DNA than amphibians do, as their method of developing inside the mother animal means that they don't need different instruction sets for a wide variety of different developmental habitats.

The Creationist argument that evolution can't occur because evolution requires an increase in information is false in several ways.

Answer 5

simple answer;

There is absolutely NO INFORMATION in DNA. The information is only on the thing that decodes DNA.
I can have a blank record and randomly scratch it to create sound that might be close to music. That record does not contain information. It is the record player that interpret it in one way. No matter what happens to the DNA, it is simply CHANGED, not ADD information and not Decrease information.